Trust look to buy the CG

[pauld]

Consider a very modern club.... Chelsea.  Stamford Bridge is owned by Chelsea Pitch Owners plc....

http://www.chelseafc.com/fans/chelsea-pitch-owners.html

Mr Abramovich might own the club, but he doesn't own the ground, and an attempt to purchase it was voted down by the fans who hold shares in CPO

But clearly having fans owning the pitch has held the club back massively and prevented anyone from wanting to invest in it .....

[horlock07]

Which becomes a whole lot more likely once you take the ground into private ownership. Look down the road at Kassam's triangle

Serious question, so what would you plan to do? Continue with the Trust and their mysterious backers who are so cloak and dagger no one can speak their name? Frankly to be rather blunt about things they need to piss or get off the pot, fucking hell Powers PR has been better than there on this issue which says it all sadly.

[Reg Smeeton]

But clearly having fans owning the pitch has held the club back massively and prevented anyone from wanting to invest in it .....

Yes. In much the same way that MCC owning the City of Manchester Stadium prevented.... Sheikh Mansour investing.

[theakston2k]

But clearly having fans owning the pitch has held the club back massively and prevented anyone from wanting to invest in it .....

Well the fact their owner is a billionaire and paid for pretty much everything himself has single handedly led to their success. Unless we have our own billionaire owner lined up it’s not really a proper comparison is it as they have never really needed to raise external finance.

[Reg Smeeton]

Well the fact their owner is a billionaire and paid for pretty much everything himself has single handedly led to their success. Unless we have our own billionaire owner lined up it’s not really a proper comparison is it as they have never really needed to raise external finance.

Much like a Flitters Div 4 team set up, it's about %'s. What are the % chances that Power would sell to a benevolent billionaire, as opposed to a propeerty development company?

[Batch]

The truth is, if you are asking fans to raise £1m, they need to be kept in the loop of the goings on to keep themselves interested. This is where the Trust has failed and fans are losing interest because of this.
You can’t expect fans to pay a monthly subscription, but only give them a 6 monthly update.

Agree with this. I think they shot their load too early for whatever reason (perhaps for reasons that could not be foreseen at the time) and now the inevitable lack of enthusiasm and more damagingly a diminished trust on their ability to execute has set in.

Think after nearly a year I'm stopping putting in my lowly monthly sum.

Serious question, so what would you plan to do? Continue with the Trust and their mysterious backers who are so cloak and dagger no one can speak their name?

Same for Power right now. Certainly regarding the source of money (presumably developers), who will own the ground (is it cast iron ring fenced as a club asset that can't be split) and ROI expected.

I don't think there is enough information to base any informed decision whatsoever. If the council said choose, I'd go blindly with the Trust based on intent rather than ability.

[horlock07]

I don't think there is enough information to base any informed decision whatsoever. If the council said choose, I'd go blindly with the Trust based on intent rather than ability.

I would probably do the same to be honest, but with little confidence of success.

Its been 12 months plus this has been going on and the lack of progress or communication is shocking, the difference between Power and the Trust is that Power is not looking for the fan base to provide a few mill to cover the project so he doesn't really need to say owt, the Trust are supposed to be enthusing the fan base, get and then keep them on board but it seems to have petered to nothing, apart from I have got what has turned out to be a very expensive pin badge - although not as pricey as those polo shirts are looking.

Its all very well making noises about due diligence and all that, but as Bob Holt would say and actually be not far of the mark, its actually not hugely different to buying a house, be intrigued to know where £30k has been spunked up the wall on it already?

Yours thoroughly disillusioned with the whole charade...

[Batch]

Not disagreeing with the lack of engagement. Always feel bad criticism because I couldn't do better.

[Private Fraser]

Although it wasn't actually confirmed at the AGM in as many words, it seemed quite clear that Power is in no hurry to engage with the Trust (although Phipps said he had met with Clem Morfuni - and got on well with him.

Picking up on Theakston2k's point above, someone raised the question last night of what might happen IF the Trust became owners of the ground and Power subsequently decided to throw his toys out of the pram and move the Club elsewhere, leaving the Trust owning a ground without a Club to play in it.  The Trust's answer was that they thought the Council wouldn't make it easy to relocate elsewhere in Swindon and believed the Football League's rules (post-Wimbledon/Franchise) meant it would be most unlikely he would be allowed to move the Club further afield.  This is what the relevant rules state:

"13.6 Each Club shall register its ground with The League and no Club shall remove to another ground (whether on a temporary or a permanent basis) without first obtaining the written consent of the Board, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld and the Board shall be entitled, if granting consent, to impose such conditions as it deems appropriate in all the circumstances.

13.7 In considering whether to give any consent to a permanent relocation, the Board shall have regard to all the circumstances of the case (including, but not limited to the factors set out in this Regulation 13.7) and shall not grant consent unless it is reasonably satisfied that such consent:

13.7.1 would be consistent with the objects of The League as set out in the Memorandum of Association;

13.7.2 would be appropriate having in mind the relationship (if any) between the locality with which by its name or otherwise the applicant Club is traditionally associated and that in which such Club proposes to establish its ground;

13.7.3 would not to any material extent adversely affect such Club’s Officials, players, supporters, shareholders, sponsors and others having an interest in its activities;

13.7.4 would not have a material adverse effect on visiting Clubs;

13.7.5 would not to any material extent adversely affect Clubs having their registered grounds in the immediate vicinity of the proposed location; and

13.7.6 would enhance the reputation of The League and promote the game of association football generally.

13.8 The Club must disclose, as soon as practicable, plans and details of any proposed future move to a new stadium.

13.9 Subject to any dispensations granted by the Board, a Club shall either own its ground or have a legally enforceable agreement with its ground's owner for its use by the Club, expiring not earlier than the end of the current Season.

13.10 Each Club shall, provide The League with full copies of such documentation as The League may reasonably require to demonstrate the Club's ability to play fixtures at its ground. By way of example, and without limitation, this may include copies of HM Land Registry entries, copy leases, any licence to occupy and any sub-leases or licence relating thereto. The League shall maintain a register of Clubs and the basis upon which that Club occupies its ground. 13.11 Without prejudice to the provisions of Regulation 13.6, a Club shall forthwith notify The League of any proposed change in its circumstances relating to the occupation of its ground. By way of example, and without limitation, a proposed change may include a sale of any freehold interest (with or without subsequent leaseback) or any surrender or variation of a lease or licence."

[Power to people]

Agree with this. I think they shot their load too early for whatever reason (perhaps for reasons that could not be foreseen at the time) and now the inevitable lack of enthusiasm and more damagingly a diminished trust on their ability to execute has set in.

Think after nearly a year I'm stopping putting in my lowly monthly sum.

Same for Power right now. Certainly regarding the source of money (presumably developers), who will own the ground (is it cast iron ring fenced as a club asset that can't be split) and ROI expected.

I don't think there is enough information to base any informed decision whatsoever. If the council said choose, I'd go blindly with the Trust based on intent rather than ability.

After going last night I found it interesting that the Trust are being proactive, they have spoken to Goddard estate and it sounds like they recognise what a sporting covenant is and what it means to the people if swindon, it sounded like they would not be prepared to accept sums of money to buy this out, they have also spoken to the Eady trust and have had positive noises.

They have spoken to a developer that would be interested in doing things to the ground who would like to use stfc as a showcase stadium to get other ground redevelopment work of the back of it

NDA in place with investor(s) who would be prepared to put in substantial sums

Due diligence has been done on the stadium and an independent valuation, gentleman's agreement in place not to announce publicly the price for the CG

As has been said though these things take time and the council have to decide between 2 proposals and ensure they do what is right for the future of the football club and for the surrounding area as well as if they get this wrong that is huge for them.

I'd actually prefer the Trust to have the ground, I would be concerned that Lee Power would own the football club and retain the lease to the ground himself or have no interest in any redevelopment, whereas the trust do want what is best for stfc and the ground.

I cant see why Power would not pay rent as he does now and of course they would have to deal with it if it happened just like the council.

They would appoint a stadium manager with experience to deal with stadium.

Power refuses the speak to the Trust, they have suggested a partnership agreement but he refuses to meet with them or talk to them (rather childish if you ask me)

All in all quite a positive evening, but its just a waiting game to see when the council decide to officially announce they are selling the ground and to whom.

[horlock07]

Although it wasn't actually confirmed at the AGM in as many words, it seemed quite clear that Power is in no hurry to engage with the Trust (although Phipps said he had met with Clem Morfuni - and got on well with him.

I suppose why should Power bother, if the Trust buy the ground they need the club to commit so they need him probably more than he needs them at the moment as if he buys he doesn't need the Trust. BTW my lack of local knowledge again, but who is Phipps, his name keeps coming up and he is obviously acting on behalf of the Trust but I can find nothing on their website to give a clue of who he is or whats his role, in fact there is very little since last summer on there?

Picking up on Theakston2k's point above, someone raised the question last night of what might happen IF the Trust became owners of the ground and Power subsequently decided to throw his toys out of the pram and move the Club elsewhere, leaving the Trust owning a ground without a Club to play in it.  The Trust's answer was that they thought the Council wouldn't make it easy to relocate elsewhere in Swindon and believed the Football League's rules (post-Wimbledon/Franchise) meant it would be most unlikely he would be allowed to move the Club further afield.  

There are a lot of ifs and buts in there though, I cannot see anyone putting decent cash up based upon a vague hope that the Council may help (how far does one have to go outside the town to be outside Swindon Borough?) and 'believe' the FL rules again its all a wing and a prayer and basic stuff that should have been bottomed 12 months ago.

Not disagreeing with the lack of engagement. Always feel bad criticism because I couldn't do better.

I agree I feel a bit of a wanker criticising as they are doing a hell of a lot more than I am, but it doesn't remove the fact that even a fucking email once a month would be huge step forward.

I am involved with a few railway heritage charities entirely volunteer ran and each manage a weekly or fortnightly email to all supporters, even just a few lines reassures that something is happening and keeps lines of dialogue open. It was noticeable this year that I didn't get the loads of reminder emails regarding the AGM that were received in previous years, plus if something was handed out at the meeting it could have been emailed to members either yesterday evening or today after the meeting, or even just a link on social media.

[horlock07]

Power refuses the speak to the Trust, they have suggested a partnership agreement but he refuses to meet with them or talk to them (rather childish if you ask me)

All in all quite a positive evening, but its just a waiting game to see when the council decide to officially announce they are selling the ground and to whom.

All good stuff, but stuff which could have been drip fed to keep people on board and show progress....

Playing devils advocate for a minute, what would the Trust be bringing to this 'Partnership', if he has the cash to buy the place why complicate things by getting the Trust involved??

Not sure if you have local elections in Swindon in May, but if so don't hold your breath it would be back end of the year I imagine before they would be out of purdah and organised enough to make such a big decision.

[pauld]

Serious question, so what would you plan to do? Continue with the Trust and their mysterious backers who are so cloak and dagger no one can speak their name? Frankly to be rather blunt about things they need to piss or get off the pot, fucking hell Powers PR has been better than there on this issue which says it all sadly.

Agree Trust have not handled things well, but would still rather keep the ground in some form of collective/public ownership. Once it goes into private hands we are wide open and vulnerable to the very many asset strippers hanging round English football. Sorry but I just don't trust most club owners, no matter how good their PR.

[RobertT]

For horlok07, on Phipps - a good guy.  Knew him when younger and his family.  He built up a local telecoms company and has done well personally as a result.  Lifelong Town fan.

To be honest, if it is him and his money behind it then I am confused why they don't want to disclose it.

They've done a shocking job of managing this, but this is the problem when you rely on people with day jobs.  I don't doubt they have been working their nadgers off, but it helps cement the idea of part time fans with a lack of knowledge.  I think they should have appointed and paid for a Consultant to run this.  Could have been one of the group if needed and they had the experience, pay for them on a two year contract to get them to give their day job up or get an external professional.

[Reg Smeeton]

  The Trust's answer was that they thought the Council wouldn't make it easy to relocate elsewhere in Swindon and believed the Football League's rules (post-Wimbledon/Franchise) meant it would be most unlikely he would be allowed to move the Club further afield.  

SBC don't make it easy for anybody to do anything....unless large multi-national.

Power is well on the way to circumventing FL rules.  What do the National League have to say?