WorcesterRed
 Offline
Posts: 186
|
 |
« Reply #105 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:26:06 » |
|
They could of told us all the names and people would still be on here moaning like fuck No, they could BE HONEST AND UPFRONT WITH THE FANS FOR ONCE and not gloss over everything with spin. yes because every club in football operate in a fully honest way dont they.If your not happy protest again and do it properly this time round i wont be protesting i have had enough of hearing a 100 different versions of what is going on.Im going to watch the football and get pissed and let the people who "Know" what is happening carry on and sort out the problem that we dont actually know anything about Sorry 'protest again' - not sure what you mean here because I have never once protested. And if you are happy to just watch the football and ignore the policitics but don't disrespect others that do have an opinion on the matter, like I don't disrespect your position. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
red macca
|
|
« Reply #106 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:26:30 » |
|
Macca...what Is a proper protest?
Seems to me that nowt us lot do has any bearing on things. I did the back of the Arkells thing and that got us where?
Legit question like, and not a dig. More than 70 people fucking around behind the back of a stand |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WorcesterRed
Offline
Posts: 186
|
|
« Reply #107 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:27:53 » |
|
Just had a thought
While Jim Little won't say who is behind the investment co, at the next Trust meeting, can someone not ask him directly :
'We understand that you cannot let us know the identities of the investors Jim Bob but can you answer Yes or No whether or not any Board member/Mike Diamandis has involvement with Best Holdings?'
....then no doubt we'll see him squirm.
:shock: Yes - that's a thought "I know you said you're not going to tell us, but will you please tell us ?" - I doubt he'll see through that one. Please re-read the post so that you understand it. Question One - can you please tell me who is behind Best Holdings? Answer One - No I can't Question Two - can you please tell me if Board Member One/Board Member Two/Board Member Three are involved in Best Holdings? Two different questions. Worcester, Little was clearly briefed not to reveal any names (rather like I've just been reading Patrick Murrin wouldn't reveal who was behind Swan Management in the Leeds debacle). So whether you ask him for a list or specifically about Holt, Diamandis etc he would still refuse. I think this totally stinks but is fairly common practice and only a change in the Football League rules to force transparency of ownership will solve it. At the moment I'm struggling to see where the great financial gains for the "new" board will come but that's probably for another thread Agreed - I didn't think that he'd answer but would be interested in his reaction to such a question!....hence the comment about squirming. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
herthab
TEF Travel
Offline
Posts: 12020
|
|
« Reply #108 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:29:19 » |
|
Behave herthab....sams making his point like the next man, and has to rely
on rumour and conjecture just like us all. It wasn't aimed at Sam, it was aimed at Worcs. It just amazes me that hardly anyone will believe something that is possibly good for the club, yet be actually eager to believe something that may be bad. Good rumour= Bollocks/don't believe it/ spin. Bad rumours= Must be true! Do you see what I'm getting at? I see what you are getting at Herta - but I can also see the other side... On the face of it - Big investment, Debts paid and money to spend on strengthening the squad all equal GREAT news... On the bad news side you may also be able to see No information (secrecy), old board members who have shown a complete distain for the supporters being asked to stay on, and the (current) refusal to say who is involved with the takeover.... There are two sides to this - and clearly nothing is black and white.... Good point, well made. On that note, I'm going to refrain from posting on this subject as I don't know the facts and I feel that it is too early to praise or condemn the new owners. It may well be shit and we're back to square one, or it could be the best thing to happen to the club. At the moment I want to believe the latter and until some facts come out to prove otherwise, that's what I'll do. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It's All Good..............
|
|
|
|
dell boy
|
|
« Reply #109 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:30:26 » |
|
I'm not surprised Diamandis is still at Swindon Town, and gives the real reason why they never considered or wanted to consider the Trust takeover as a serious option.
I am more than worried that the CVA will not be paid at all now this has all come to light, it was stated by JL it would be paid within 20 days, that takes us iwell into September.
The football side is going well at present and just as we may go into a challenging position for the play-offs, here comes the possibility of -10 points.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
wheretherealredsare
Change me
Offline
Posts: 3136
|
|
« Reply #110 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:34:41 » |
|
And if somebody wanted to invest in STFC which company takes their investment and what do they get in return? Shares, bonds, ... passbook?
Would a certain level of investment give the opportunity to join the board?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
red macca
|
|
« Reply #111 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:34:59 » |
|
They could of told us all the names and people would still be on here moaning like fuck No, they could BE HONEST AND UPFRONT WITH THE FANS FOR ONCE and not gloss over everything with spin. yes because every club in football operate in a fully honest way dont they.If your not happy protest again and do it properly this time round i wont be protesting i have had enough of hearing a 100 different versions of what is going on.Im going to watch the football and get pissed and let the people who "Know" what is happening carry on and sort out the problem that we dont actually know anything about Sorry 'protest again' - not sure what you mean here because I have never once protested. And if you are happy to just watch the football and ignore the policitics but don't disrespect others that do have an opinion on the matter, like I don't disrespect your position. What spin though? this thread is about existing board members likely to be on the new board.Little has confirmed that so i dont see what the spin is.As for disrespecting peoples opinions i was actually at the protests myself and at the time was all for it but the amount of far fetched conspiracy theories flying around it has put me off the whole thing |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
janaage
People's Front of Alba
Offline
Posts: 14825
|
|
« Reply #112 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:39:16 » |
|
Sheepshagger wrote
"There are two sides to this - and clearly nothing is black and white...."
Charlie Chaplin films are black and white, as is a famous brand of hair wax.
I too, whilst admitting to being disappointed at reading today's article, will stop myself from getting to anti until more facts are known.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Phil_S
Offline
Posts: 1534
Who changed my Avatar ?!
|
|
« Reply #113 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:43:16 » |
|
Millom, the Arkells protest thing was half hearted, as we were lead to believe that the board might still talk to the fans consortium. I was not absolutely sure if it was right then. I would be right behind it now, because there is no way on earth anything will change at the CG unless their is a change in the way that things are run. That is not very likely with the old personell still on the board. Holt will still use his Maxwell school charm, Bowden will still fill his head with mythical plans, Gray will forget the VAT, & Diadamdis will still do his "financial engineering".
As little has said that their are no plans for redeveloping the stadium, & the old gang will still be in their castle, how suddenly is the club going to stop the hemoraging of cash every year. Suddenly make a profit by buying & selling players? We made over £3 million last year, in unbugetted income, but they still couldn't pay the £100k installment of the CVA on time, let alone the £900k.
Sorry, for those who want us all to celebrate, but so far all I can see is that we are even worse off than we were before. At least before I knew, the club wouldn't go under, the Fans consortium could always step in. In the future when the Sh1t hits the fan, we won't have that as a fall back option.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
From the Dark Side
|
|
|
|
neville w
|
|
« Reply #114 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:45:32 » |
|
I agree that it sounds bad at the moment with the old brigade still in place (and elevated in MD's case.) However I'm completely in agreement with Samdy's posting. It's not unusual in takeovers for the previous Board to be retained to start with.
I agree with this to a certain extent - however, you pick and choose from the best. What you don't do is simply put bums on seats to fill board positions. Surely with a little research/due diligence, they would have noticed the VAT cockup. If i recall correctly there were two VAT errors. The first, in not budgeting for VAT is an internal issue and would not affect the financial results - just the adherence to financial budgets. I would not expect this to have come to light during DD. The second, which was action by HMRC (again, from memory) as a result of non-payment, should have been disclosed. However as the takeover would have been based on the financial situation now the decision was probably taken that things were up to date Surely with a little research/due diligence, they would have noticed the walking PR disaster that goes by the name of Bob Holt/Mike Bowden. If they looked at anything it would have been at a cv/known fact level, I doubt they would base a business decision on such criticism as could be found on supporters' fora, or at a local Press level. Perversely they could have looked at Bowden's appointment as a positive in terms of moving things forward. They would have undoubtedly met with all these individuals before deciding to proceedSurely with a little research/due diligence, they would have noticed the issues surrounding Mike Diamandis. If history was not disclosed I'm sure there will be a correction quite quickly, but I can't believe that it would be a surprise. I'd see this, and the FD's tenure to be the shortest.....but no, let's ignore all of those issues for 'continuity' sake. I don't think so somehow. I've added some comments above, based on my limited exposure to due diligence procedures in past experiences. If this is an Investment along private equity lines, they'll need very strong Financial controls and high calibre finance staff, so that position will be key. Similarly, that type of organisation has strong codes of behaviour, which have to be demonstrated to keep banks onside, so cannot afford to have anything less than lilywhite going on. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
wheretherealredsare
Change me
Offline
Posts: 3136
|
|
« Reply #115 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:47:42 » |
|
" ... It may well be shit and we're back to square one, or it could be the best thing to happen to the club."
At least we now have a choice ... shit or no shit.
Previously life was shit and that was it.
Maybe it's great, or another crap deal
But ... thank fuck shit doesn't run uphill
... It just gets deeper.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
red macca
|
|
« Reply #116 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:49:02 » |
|
Thats the problem people are just reading the bits that they want to.Little has said that they MIGHT keep them on board but they will be working for the new owners.They will not be making the decisions and to be honest i will be amazed if they are here in 6 months.The takeover is not complete yet so little is very unlikely to come out and say "right he is going" he is a useless cunt etc.
Let the takeover be completed THEN see what happens
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
neville w
|
|
« Reply #117 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:52:05 » |
|
Thats the problem people are just reading the bits that they want to.Little has said that they MIGHT keep them on board but they will be working for the new owners.They will not be making the decisions and to be honest i will be amazed if they are here in 6 months.The takeover is not complete yet so little is very unlikely to come out and say "right he is going" he is a useless cunt etc.
Let the takeover be completed THEN see what happens Nice one. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Phil_S
Offline
Posts: 1534
Who changed my Avatar ?!
|
|
« Reply #118 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:52:24 » |
|
Thats the problem people are just reading the bits that they want to.Little has said that they MIGHT keep them on board but they will be working for the new owners.They will not be making the decisions and to be honest i will be amazed if they are here in 6 months.The takeover is not complete yet so little is very unlikely to come out and say "right he is going" he is a useless cunt etc.
Let the takeover be completed THEN see what happens I'd rather not wait, because they may not keep them on the board. They have said they are likely too, so I'd rather let them know, why this is not a good idea, sooner rather than later. If i saw a bus heading towards my kids, I wouldn't wait to see if it hit them or not. I'd act sooner rather than later. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
From the Dark Side
|
|
|
|
red macca
|
|
« Reply #119 on: Tuesday, August 21, 2007, 11:56:13 » |
|
As is i said earlier do it then,Why dont the trust organise for ALL members(well the ones that want to) to turn out for the next game.
Im not pro board by any means but cant see what the fans can do to influence the decision on this unless it is done in big numbers
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
