My position throughout all of this, long before the Consortium was formed and subsequently, has been one that approaches everything with an open mind, willing to listen to whatever anyone has to say. People may deem my visit to the CG today as worthless and a waste of time.
Bob Holt, Martyn Starnes and Ben Lambert took nearly four hours out of their day to talk to me today, without exception they were open and happy to answer any question I had. The gesture was greatly appreciated and please bear in mind that I am essentially nobody. I have no agenda, no ulterior motives and nothing to gain. I’m nothing but a layabout student with a passion for STFC – if you approach the club, I’m sure they will be equally willing to accommodate you and talk with you at length. Contrary to popular belief, Bob Holt
does exist
Unfortunately my notes don’t make much sense to me, so a lot of this is from memory. None of what I say is a direct quote made by anyone – unless otherwise specified – and please do not take this as gospel truth.
The main topic of discussion, unsurprisingly, was the takeover. It’s unanimously agreed that the Consortium exists – Bob is adamant that he never denied it’s existence – and that a declaration of intent has been made by Mike Wilkes on behalf of the Fan’s Consortium. However, the stumbling block has been to the lack of a concrete offer for the club, the board want to see an offer presented in the proper format – i.e. we will pay X for the club, without prejudice, subject to due diligence and this is the proof that we have the funds to take the club forwards. As of yet, this has not been forthcoming. As has been stated in press releases, if the board are satisfied with this offer then talks will proceed and the takeover may become reality.
However, there are some issues left to be contended with, some of which are concerns raised by Holt and Starnes and some are my own:
- Who are the Consortium? The club would like details of those involved.
- Why has Power changed his mind about investing after pulling out previously?
- Why does Bill believe the £1.2m investment was a loan and not shares? If a loan, he could demand his money back immediately. If shares then he would stand in a better position for negotiation with the board.
- Why do the Consortium want to do due diligence prior to making an offer, shouldn’t Bill know the financial state of the club a year ago and be able to make a rough offer on that basis? Any offer would not be legally binding as such and they could withdraw it if necessary.
- If Bill wants to buy the club then why has the offer been fronted by Mike Wilkes?
Personally, my answers to these questions are fairly speculative and there’s certainly room for debate. I must admit that whilst I’ve gleefully accepted much of what has been said by the Consortium as gospel truth, I’ve treated words from the boardroom with disdain and disbelief – despite not knowing for certain what is happening.
Perhaps the most important one for me though is the demands for due diligence prior to making an offer, despite the board’s refusal to do so. Whilst I appreciate that it’s difficult to ‘bid blind’ it’s not as though any such bid would be anything more than a tentative offer which could be adjusted subsequent to due diligence. Furthermore, the club have nothing to lose in opening the books as any information will be confidential under an NDA.
My hope now is that the Consortium compromise and an offer is forthcoming and talks can progress. If the board refuse this, there will no doubt be a backlash and perhaps they will eventually have no other option. Alternatively, they might accept it, sell up and move on with some dignity left intact.
A lot of history regarding the past since the current board took control was discussed, personally I feel we do owe the current board some gratitude for keeping this club alive – we’d have gone down the shitter in 2001 if it wasn’t for their consortium – and whilst they’ve only drip-fed us to keep the club alive, without them we’d have been gone. I accept that few will agree with me on that front but overall I believe that the majority of individuals at this football club want the same as the rest of us: success. Accusations that the board want us to fail are, in my opinion, utterly absurd.
Unfortunately my notes pretty much finished after here but there are a few other things worth mentioning. Most notable has been the treatment of board members by protesters.
Last week, Mike Bowden received a fair bit of abuse whilst escorting a child to meet his parents. I fail to see what he’s done to justify this abuse or how it helps our cause. It’s obvious that the man is a little loopy and rather eccentric in his methods - not to mention there’s a distinct lack of progress in terms of a ground redevelopment – but nevertheless, hurling abusive comments in his direction will achieve nothing. Likewise, the same applies to Holt, Starnes, Gray, Lambert, James Wills and even Mike Diamandis.
As much as I may sound petty for jumping on my high horse, we mustn’t let emotions and personal feeling cloud our judgment. My reasons for wanting a successful takeover is not because I dislike Holt’s dress sense, Gray’s accent or Starnes’ glasses. It’s because I want what is best for STFC – something that I’m sure we all agree with.
As numbers grow at the protests, individuals need to take control of the group before things get out of control. Ideally we need one individual to effectively take responsibility for what happens and as a collective we need to police ourselves – if somebody steps out of line, tell them to shut the fuck up. If things get out of hand and somebody loses control then it’s going to bring a load of bad press our way and we’ll lose all credibility.
I asked Holt why he felt the need to gesture after the game on Saturday and he apologised if it was misconstrued as he was, apparently, giving his approval of us. Whether that was the way we’ve conducted ourselves, our organisational skills or my excellent singing voice I’m not sure. With regards to the comment of not caring what the fans have to say, I must take responsibility for that. I was furious after being told that by the security guard and Holt is more than happy to talk to a small group of us after the game as he feels that standing outside in front of a hundred people is not constructive as it degenerates into a slanging match. In fairness, he has a point – only Millom and myself really got a word in edgeways after the last game.
If anyone would like to put themselves forward to informally represent us rabble after the next home game, let me know and I’ll sort it out. Perhaps people have no interest in hearing what he has to say, that’s your prerogative and I’m simply passing on the sentiment.
Finally, I apologise that I’ve not gone into as much depth as you may have hoped. A lot of what was discussed was going over the same old ground for clarification’s sakes as much as anything. I found Bob, Martyn and Ben to be thoroughly nice people and Bob’s got a better repertoire of swearwords than Paul Davis does.
I may well remember more when I’ve slept on it, so don’t be surprised if I keep adding bits and bobs as time progresses.
