| Stadium deal agreed 10:01 - Feb 17 with 64647 views | Dr_Winston |
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |  |
| Stadium deal agreed on 08:28 - Feb 20 with 2915 views | Bobby_Fischer |
I'd hazard a guess that hte correlation between the demographics of the trust and its members is almost mirror like. |  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 08:56 - Feb 20 with 2874 views | Uxbridge |
| Stadium deal agreed on 21:17 - Feb 19 by TheResurrection |
I tried to network with him the other week in the Mens bog's in the Liberty. He doffed his hat and moved on pretty sharpish ;-) |
The clue may be in the venue there, but whatever floats your boat  |  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 09:17 - Feb 20 with 2839 views | MoscowJack |
I'm still angry this morning that one of the biggest deals the club has signed off in years has passed without comment from the Trust.
It truly is unacceptable.
Anyone who's ever seen a lease agreement will know, just like a mortgage, there are often lots of catches later in the life of the contract which can strangle the club to death. It's probably not even going to make a tiny difference if we stay in the PL for the next 50 years, but if we go down and down again (and we do have a bit of a history of doing that!) this lease could be like a noose around our necks.
The Yanks won't care about that, although I would hope that they wouldn't sign an agreement that any potential future buyers would question. That's the one thing that keeps me from reacting even more than I am.
The Trust CAN NOT ignore such serious events, which could have such a huge impact on the mid and long term future of the club.
They have a duty to demand, as the 2nd largest shareholder (regardless of voting rights) all the details of the deal.
We, as Trust Members, have a duty to demand all the key details of the deal too.
I am getting increasingly frustrated with the perceived incompetence of the Trust and the absolute lack of communication suggests that the Trust Board have more than a hint of disregard for the fan base too, or at least some of it/us!
So, I would like to ask:
1. Who, within the Trust Board, knows the full details of the agreement?
2. Who decided that this information should not be shared with the full Trust Board?
3. Will the Trust share the full details of the agreement with the fans, or at least the findings of a specialist within this area of real estate law?
Is this too much to ask? How can we get these answers?????
I genuinely hope that I am worrying over nothing, but I'd rather hope for the best and prepare for the worst than bury my head in the sand and pretend nothing's wrong.
It begs the question (that's been suggested many times on here) - has the Trust got something to hide?? |  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 09:33 - Feb 20 with 2807 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 09:17 - Feb 20 by MoscowJack |
I'm still angry this morning that one of the biggest deals the club has signed off in years has passed without comment from the Trust.
It truly is unacceptable.
Anyone who's ever seen a lease agreement will know, just like a mortgage, there are often lots of catches later in the life of the contract which can strangle the club to death. It's probably not even going to make a tiny difference if we stay in the PL for the next 50 years, but if we go down and down again (and we do have a bit of a history of doing that!) this lease could be like a noose around our necks.
The Yanks won't care about that, although I would hope that they wouldn't sign an agreement that any potential future buyers would question. That's the one thing that keeps me from reacting even more than I am.
The Trust CAN NOT ignore such serious events, which could have such a huge impact on the mid and long term future of the club.
They have a duty to demand, as the 2nd largest shareholder (regardless of voting rights) all the details of the deal.
We, as Trust Members, have a duty to demand all the key details of the deal too.
I am getting increasingly frustrated with the perceived incompetence of the Trust and the absolute lack of communication suggests that the Trust Board have more than a hint of disregard for the fan base too, or at least some of it/us!
So, I would like to ask:
1. Who, within the Trust Board, knows the full details of the agreement?
2. Who decided that this information should not be shared with the full Trust Board?
3. Will the Trust share the full details of the agreement with the fans, or at least the findings of a specialist within this area of real estate law?
Is this too much to ask? How can we get these answers?????
I genuinely hope that I am worrying over nothing, but I'd rather hope for the best and prepare for the worst than bury my head in the sand and pretend nothing's wrong.
It begs the question (that's been suggested many times on here) - has the Trust got something to hide?? |
I am not so concerned about the long term as this deal is with our very own Council, and they would've been party to the terms and conditions, so I doubt they would allow their football club to suffer permanent damage.
.
The Trust does need to get its act together though but there are little signs of that happening. I wanted the new Board members to get in amongst it all and make some splashes. Lisa and Andrew have been active and honest on here but there's still no tangible difference to their perceived lack of importance, the Trust I mean, not the two mentioned. As for the other two, well I've no idea what they're up to, their views or even if they're still involved.
I'm afraid to say the Trust seems to be a pretty benign and useless supporters group who are constantly missing opportunities to exert itself and backing away from any sort of true responsibility and courage. The fact some of them endorse the other protest groups says it all for me, they're happy with someone else doing their hard and dirty work for them. Facking infuriates me, that does.
Alan Lewis mailed me yesterday to say he would mail back in full later, I've had nothing.
The whole bloody thing, not good enough, not by a long chalk. |  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 09:42 - Feb 20 with 2788 views | perchrockjack |
Nick
Simple question.
In your opinion, how many are really privy to exactly what is going on our and what intentions they are .
Your post looks very concerning to the reader not versed in business machinations | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 10:58 - Feb 20 with 2728 views | Shaky |
| Stadium deal agreed on 09:33 - Feb 20 by TheResurrection |
I am not so concerned about the long term as this deal is with our very own Council, and they would've been party to the terms and conditions, so I doubt they would allow their football club to suffer permanent damage.
.
The Trust does need to get its act together though but there are little signs of that happening. I wanted the new Board members to get in amongst it all and make some splashes. Lisa and Andrew have been active and honest on here but there's still no tangible difference to their perceived lack of importance, the Trust I mean, not the two mentioned. As for the other two, well I've no idea what they're up to, their views or even if they're still involved.
I'm afraid to say the Trust seems to be a pretty benign and useless supporters group who are constantly missing opportunities to exert itself and backing away from any sort of true responsibility and courage. The fact some of them endorse the other protest groups says it all for me, they're happy with someone else doing their hard and dirty work for them. Facking infuriates me, that does.
Alan Lewis mailed me yesterday to say he would mail back in full later, I've had nothing.
The whole bloody thing, not good enough, not by a long chalk. |
The same Alan Lewis you were trying to get a bandwagon going to have sacked a few pages ago, along with the SD? He's a better man than me, I would have told you to fcuk off.
BTW, speaking of conspiracy theories, having the Chairman and the SD sacked as you were agitating for would have not only left the Trust leaderless but would have also rendered it incapable of acting since it would not have the requisite number of directors according to the model rules.
You would have paralysed the Trust. With 2, maybe 3 Trust board meetings outsetanding prior to the end of the season, after which I belive the chances are at least 50% the Kaplan will try to sell. And them trying to get the process of legal action underway
Is that a coincidence with you sustaining your spectacular run of consistently bad judgement? Or something else? [Post edited 20 Feb 2018 11:10]
|  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 11:08 - Feb 20 with 2721 views | MoscowJack |
| Stadium deal agreed on 09:42 - Feb 20 by perchrockjack |
Nick
Simple question.
In your opinion, how many are really privy to exactly what is going on our and what intentions they are .
Your post looks very concerning to the reader not versed in business machinations |
Perchie - I have no idea. Everything is guesswork at the moment.
There's a good chance that the deal is perfectly normal and a wonderful achievement for the Yanks, but we have absolutely no idea, which is completely insane considering we have a representative on the Board and own 21% of the club.
There's also a reasonable chance that this is a deal that mainly benefits the Yanks' ability to market the club and has little or no worries about the longer-term financial health of the club.
The fact we have no indication of this is incredible, but the fact that the Trust might not even have got expertise advice on this is even more worrying. If it's true, it's negligent and a certain dereliction of duty. | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 11:26 - Feb 20 with 2688 views | QJumpingJack |
With the TV deal announced last week, the Americans are already laughing to the bank (on the assumption we stay in the top flight). Not bad for 18 months work.
Does Rob Stewart attend the boardroom on a regular basis?
Does the Trust have a relationship with him?
The Council should thought to include the Trust in talks.
Perhaps the Trust should have Rob as a guest in the boardoom for next Tuesday vs Sheff Wed to build a stronger relationship with the council. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Stadium deal agreed on 12:15 - Feb 20 with 2622 views | Jinxy |
These are my personal views...
The Americans seem to be preparing the club for a sale in either the distant or not too distant future. The stadium lease, transfer window "profits", and also the suppression of the Trust to a state of passive submission (by ignoring of them despite all the promises of more involvement and maybe even making them look ridiculous in the eyes of the fans). They're not stupid. All this maybe makes the club more attractive and saleable for prospective purchasers. This is what we need to be strategically preparing for, not trying to undo their actions incident-by-incident. As someone said, they are doing this because they can. We need to understand why.
Personally, I'd rather see the club sold in the future to REAL investors (success on the pitch = profit right?) who would be in it for the long(er) haul, than have people at the helm that clearly have far less respect for the club itself (and yes I include the previous shareholders in that) than their bank accounts. But, that is a risk - better the devil you know? I'm not sure - not for me anyway. It would be nice to have a strong, respected Trust involved in any future sale, but it seems the Americans will not let us anywhere near that particular table.
I'm amazed the Americans deferred the share purchase etc. - they had us (the Trust) where they wanted us but maybe got nervous thinking relegation was looming and capital for share purchase would not be as available. This presents a golden opportunity for us now though to have another vote (because clearly from Phil's feedback there is enough to suggest that the "deal" has changed, or was ambiguous).
What I am clumsily saying here is that's the issue for me - the American's intentions and where that likely leaves us as a club and Trust - and that's what we need to consider when voting. I voted for legal action last time and will again given the chance, even more so now that they have proved to be what I feared.
I would respectfully ask our Trust board members on here to please lobby a re-vote ASAP, and to outline, factually, instances where the Trust have been overlooked regarding key decisions at the club. Also, think hard how we get the vote turnout up - by better communication maybe?! |  | | |
| Stadium deal agreed on 12:30 - Feb 20 with 2584 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Stadium deal agreed on 22:45 - Feb 19 by ZZoric |
....and yet still all so passive, weak and utterly pointless
stop hiding behind endless paragraphs of defensive diatribe - time to p#ss or get the f#ck off - the last thing we need is hangers-on hanging around. hang ur heads in shame new appointees
finance affiliate ? - back-office at best - get on the front foot and drive |
Ah zzoric, it's been a while since you accused me of being back office or a failed cost and works accountant. This time, at least you refrained from also calling me a c*** at the same time.
What is your exact interest in wanting people like me gone I wonder...
Snigger. | | | |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:01 - Feb 20 with 2441 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 10:58 - Feb 20 by Shaky |
The same Alan Lewis you were trying to get a bandwagon going to have sacked a few pages ago, along with the SD? He's a better man than me, I would have told you to fcuk off.
BTW, speaking of conspiracy theories, having the Chairman and the SD sacked as you were agitating for would have not only left the Trust leaderless but would have also rendered it incapable of acting since it would not have the requisite number of directors according to the model rules.
You would have paralysed the Trust. With 2, maybe 3 Trust board meetings outsetanding prior to the end of the season, after which I belive the chances are at least 50% the Kaplan will try to sell. And them trying to get the process of legal action underway
Is that a coincidence with you sustaining your spectacular run of consistently bad judgement? Or something else? [Post edited 20 Feb 2018 11:10]
|
Oh go away little man from Denmark. I genuinely can't be bothered by you and your paranoia
HE'S BEHIND YOU........ | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:08 - Feb 20 with 2421 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 11:26 - Feb 20 by QJumpingJack |
With the TV deal announced last week, the Americans are already laughing to the bank (on the assumption we stay in the top flight). Not bad for 18 months work.
Does Rob Stewart attend the boardroom on a regular basis?
Does the Trust have a relationship with him?
The Council should thought to include the Trust in talks.
Perhaps the Trust should have Rob as a guest in the boardoom for next Tuesday vs Sheff Wed to build a stronger relationship with the council. |
Why? The TV deal is a lot less.or at least is expected to be than last time.
We'll see what happens in the months and years ahead but at least for now it's topped out. | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:12 - Feb 20 with 2412 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 12:15 - Feb 20 by Jinxy |
These are my personal views...
The Americans seem to be preparing the club for a sale in either the distant or not too distant future. The stadium lease, transfer window "profits", and also the suppression of the Trust to a state of passive submission (by ignoring of them despite all the promises of more involvement and maybe even making them look ridiculous in the eyes of the fans). They're not stupid. All this maybe makes the club more attractive and saleable for prospective purchasers. This is what we need to be strategically preparing for, not trying to undo their actions incident-by-incident. As someone said, they are doing this because they can. We need to understand why.
Personally, I'd rather see the club sold in the future to REAL investors (success on the pitch = profit right?) who would be in it for the long(er) haul, than have people at the helm that clearly have far less respect for the club itself (and yes I include the previous shareholders in that) than their bank accounts. But, that is a risk - better the devil you know? I'm not sure - not for me anyway. It would be nice to have a strong, respected Trust involved in any future sale, but it seems the Americans will not let us anywhere near that particular table.
I'm amazed the Americans deferred the share purchase etc. - they had us (the Trust) where they wanted us but maybe got nervous thinking relegation was looming and capital for share purchase would not be as available. This presents a golden opportunity for us now though to have another vote (because clearly from Phil's feedback there is enough to suggest that the "deal" has changed, or was ambiguous).
What I am clumsily saying here is that's the issue for me - the American's intentions and where that likely leaves us as a club and Trust - and that's what we need to consider when voting. I voted for legal action last time and will again given the chance, even more so now that they have proved to be what I feared.
I would respectfully ask our Trust board members on here to please lobby a re-vote ASAP, and to outline, factually, instances where the Trust have been overlooked regarding key decisions at the club. Also, think hard how we get the vote turnout up - by better communication maybe?! |
Transfer window profits? I don't think there are any when you boil all things down.
And reason for not proceeding with the share sale? Well maybe they are thinking of selling and maybe who they are selling too will buy the Trust out at a better price than before?! | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:21 - Feb 20 with 2400 views | Shaky |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:12 - Feb 20 by TheResurrection |
Transfer window profits? I don't think there are any when you boil all things down.
And reason for not proceeding with the share sale? Well maybe they are thinking of selling and maybe who they are selling too will buy the Trust out at a better price than before?! |
IF there is a buyer on the horizon #and# IF they want to buy the Trust's stake (there are no tag-along rights currently in place) there is nothing to prevent the Trust from abandoning legal proceedings - that will take many months to come to court anyway - and cash in IF the price is right.
Keep it up though, you're on a roll of epic proportion here. [Post edited 20 Feb 2018 14:30]
| |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:22 - Feb 20 with 2399 views | Shaky |
| Stadium deal agreed on 12:15 - Feb 20 by Jinxy |
These are my personal views...
The Americans seem to be preparing the club for a sale in either the distant or not too distant future. The stadium lease, transfer window "profits", and also the suppression of the Trust to a state of passive submission (by ignoring of them despite all the promises of more involvement and maybe even making them look ridiculous in the eyes of the fans). They're not stupid. All this maybe makes the club more attractive and saleable for prospective purchasers. This is what we need to be strategically preparing for, not trying to undo their actions incident-by-incident. As someone said, they are doing this because they can. We need to understand why.
Personally, I'd rather see the club sold in the future to REAL investors (success on the pitch = profit right?) who would be in it for the long(er) haul, than have people at the helm that clearly have far less respect for the club itself (and yes I include the previous shareholders in that) than their bank accounts. But, that is a risk - better the devil you know? I'm not sure - not for me anyway. It would be nice to have a strong, respected Trust involved in any future sale, but it seems the Americans will not let us anywhere near that particular table.
I'm amazed the Americans deferred the share purchase etc. - they had us (the Trust) where they wanted us but maybe got nervous thinking relegation was looming and capital for share purchase would not be as available. This presents a golden opportunity for us now though to have another vote (because clearly from Phil's feedback there is enough to suggest that the "deal" has changed, or was ambiguous).
What I am clumsily saying here is that's the issue for me - the American's intentions and where that likely leaves us as a club and Trust - and that's what we need to consider when voting. I voted for legal action last time and will again given the chance, even more so now that they have proved to be what I feared.
I would respectfully ask our Trust board members on here to please lobby a re-vote ASAP, and to outline, factually, instances where the Trust have been overlooked regarding key decisions at the club. Also, think hard how we get the vote turnout up - by better communication maybe?! |
Good post, jinxy.
Nice to see some genuine strategic perspective for a change. | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:38 - Feb 20 with 2372 views | Batterseajack |
| Stadium deal agreed on 18:24 - Feb 19 by Garyjack |
That's a great post! You're a really funny guy!  |
There's a bit more truth in my post than you might think | | | |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:09 - Feb 20 with 2280 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:21 - Feb 20 by Shaky |
IF there is a buyer on the horizon #and# IF they want to buy the Trust's stake (there are no tag-along rights currently in place) there is nothing to prevent the Trust from abandoning legal proceedings - that will take many months to come to court anyway - and cash in IF the price is right.
Keep it up though, you're on a roll of epic proportion here. [Post edited 20 Feb 2018 14:30]
|
I think all the capital letters and asterisk's are playing havoc with your nervous system Denmark. Have a lie down boy and chill.
And I'm not against legal action right now. I'd be all for it, just as long as you're well away from any of the "strategy" and coffers. | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:21 - Feb 20 with 2252 views | perchrockjack |
Amen to that jink
My view is that the sooner the club is sold the better ,BUT it's all about to whom.
If the lease makes it easier and more n great . It's the best option .
What we need is a consortium with real money to invest . It's all abOut whom and that is what worries me ;the people who decide to whom the club is sold | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:45 - Feb 20 with 2218 views | Darran |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:21 - Feb 20 by perchrockjack |
Amen to that jink
My view is that the sooner the club is sold the better ,BUT it's all about to whom.
If the lease makes it easier and more n great . It's the best option .
What we need is a consortium with real money to invest . It's all abOut whom and that is what worries me ;the people who decide to whom the club is sold |
You couldn’t wait for it to be sold to the Americans you dull cùnt. |  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:48 - Feb 20 with 2215 views | Shaky |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:09 - Feb 20 by TheResurrection |
I think all the capital letters and asterisk's are playing havoc with your nervous system Denmark. Have a lie down boy and chill.
And I'm not against legal action right now. I'd be all for it, just as long as you're well away from any of the "strategy" and coffers. |
You mean like you are?
I think it's clear to pretty much everybody that the difference is I add significant value. | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 18:22 - Feb 20 with 2108 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:48 - Feb 20 by Shaky |
You mean like you are?
I think it's clear to pretty much everybody that the difference is I add significant value. |
You care what people think. You accuse "everybody" of being the same person. You used to call them all Psychoboy 😂😂😂
I couldn't give a monkeys what people think.
You add Tesco Value little Dane. | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 19:06 - Feb 20 with 2040 views | E20Jack |
| Stadium deal agreed on 16:09 - Feb 20 by TheResurrection |
I think all the capital letters and asterisk's are playing havoc with your nervous system Denmark. Have a lie down boy and chill.
And I'm not against legal action right now. I'd be all for it, just as long as you're well away from any of the "strategy" and coffers. |
But but but... who would then provide the poorly put together spreadsheets based on nothingness?
Maybe with all the fivers we have been bunged by the club board members we can pool them together and employ someone to do it instead?
I think that sounds like a plan pinky ...... mwahahaha (evil laugh as a stroke my cat and swivel in my evil oversized chair in my evil cavern). |  |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 19:42 - Feb 20 with 1989 views | TheResurrection |
| Stadium deal agreed on 19:06 - Feb 20 by E20Jack |
But but but... who would then provide the poorly put together spreadsheets based on nothingness?
Maybe with all the fivers we have been bunged by the club board members we can pool them together and employ someone to do it instead?
I think that sounds like a plan pinky ...... mwahahaha (evil laugh as a stroke my cat and swivel in my evil oversized chair in my evil cavern). |
That spreadsheet...  | |
| |
| Stadium deal agreed on 19:51 - Feb 20 with 1978 views | Garyjack |
| Stadium deal agreed on 14:38 - Feb 20 by Batterseajack |
There's a bit more truth in my post than you might think |
I seriously doubt that, but if there is, then i truly fvckin despair mate, |  | | |
| Stadium deal agreed on 20:02 - Feb 20 with 1957 views | QJumpingJack |
Sorry to ask the same question again - will the Trust be issuing a statement anytime in the future or is the website not updating due to technical difficulties. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
