Torquay was to all intents and purposes owned by a fan and then by a group of fans. The key point is that with limited financial support from their owners (and to be fair some pretty bad management) they simply couldn't survive financially in the conference and add to take the last resort of borrowing from the only white knight despite him being known to be an asset stripper.
for me if I could be certain that the current model could provide reasonable certainty of remaining in the League, I would choose to stick with it. If there was a strong probability of slipping out of the league with that model, I am open to considering change.
I absolutely agree that as far as possible we should only consider sale when we understand the aims and motivations and history of any prospective buyer. Sadly rogues don't necessarily wear a label on their forehead shouting "rogue" however. Sadly there are no guarantees under any ownership model - we just have to choose the one that believe gives us the best chance.
@eric_plant said:
Why would anyone possibly want to buy Wycombe Wanderers?
I can't think of any motivation on the part of the buyer that would make me think it's a good idea
But we'll have to wait a few weeks and listen to what is said at the meeting. Should be an interesting one
If I was a very wealthy man (well over £100m say), as a Wycombe supporter I would want to buy the club. At my age it would probably be more sensible spending my ill gotten gains on football, rather than wine, women and song!
The key to all this is, who are these people and what is their long term plan. What plans would there be to re-introduce an academy? Exeter do very well simply because they bring on young talent and then sell them. 75% of the trust members/legacy members (think I am correct there) would have to agree to this and given the fact we have been in private ownership previously and it was a disaster then I personally feel this will be a very hard sell by the directors to convince everyone it was in the long term interest of the football club to sell unless the academy was key to all this. If that was re-introduced then I could see the benefits without that I cannot.
@eric_plant said:
Why would anyone possibly want to buy Wycombe Wanderers?
I can't think of any motivation on the part of the buyer that would make me think it's a good idea
But we'll have to wait a few weeks and listen to what is said at the meeting. Should be an interesting one
If I was a very wealthy man (well over £100m say), as a Wycombe supporter I would want to buy the club. At my age it would probably be more sensible spending my ill gotten gains on football, rather than wine, women and song!
Such a fan would have come forward years ago, surely?
@DevC How do you define "reasonable certainty" in a sport where pretty much everything is uncertain? What guarantees could the trust give you?
I agree with your comment in your first post that a lot of our success as a supporter-owned club has been down to the GA/AH combination and without them I would fear for us longer-term. However, we could lose them both and bring in a more successful management team - who knows?
@eric_plant said:
Why would anyone possibly want to buy Wycombe Wanderers?
I can't think of any motivation on the part of the buyer that would make me think it's a good idea
But we'll have to wait a few weeks and listen to what is said at the meeting. Should be an interesting one
If I was a very wealthy man (well over £100m say), as a Wycombe supporter I would want to buy the club. At my age it would probably be more sensible spending my ill gotten gains on football, rather than wine, women and song!
Such a fan would have come forward years ago, surely?
People's financial situations can change very quickly nowadays. Sale of valuable business, inheritance, Euro lottery win etc. However, I agree unlikely to happen to a Chairboy.
It can only be down to individuals judgement of the opportunities and risks of each option, @Last_Quarter. Time will tell what information we are given to form those judgements on. I wouldn't rely on always having as successful a management team as we currently do however.
No need to launch in again on what counts as control or investment but the WHY questions are very important before any sale or change of policy that may lead eventually to a sale with lower scrutiny.
1) What does the club have to gain?
Will the investment be a long term positive for the club or just allow it to be less tight and open us up to bigger problems down the line with higher wage bills and staff costs that aren't sustainable?
Will there still be the goodwill that sees existing volunteers, sponsors and donations?
2) What does the individual or group stand to gain?
If they are just "donating" out of a love for the club why do they need more control than say Mr Howard and Mr Stroud have?
If they are expecting a return on their investment are they batshit crazy and what happens if they don't get any?
Are they pledging long term financial support and what plans are in place should they not be able to do so due to changing circumstances?
Football is absolutely littered with investments gone bad so full caution should be applied.
Who knows what will be proposed but ****if**** the Trust are looking to sell (more likely, give away) the Club there are a few obvious questions I'd start with:
1) Will the stadium be included in the sale (dressed up like - 'it needs significant investment to repair the roofs / screens and that is only possible if the new owner also owns the stadium')
2) what actual powers would the Trust continue to have over the Club, what level of scrutiny would there be post-sale, how many members of the Club's board would be elected by the Trust etc
3) What guarantees will be put in place - if indeed any could be - that whoever buys the club won't just be able to sell it on to someone perhaps less suitable and more asset strippery down the road (or even immediately)
4) Will there actually be any true scrutiny and transparency to this sale process or will we have to rely on the people who have been negotiating this and trust they have done /are doing an effective job
You may remember in the summer I questioned whether having the same man chair both the Club board and the Trust board was sensible. I will delicately say now that an example of where separation of powers and true scrutiny might be kinda useful is when it comes to any proposal to sell the Club.....
Unless your personal wealth runs into the hundreds of millions and you just want a hobby, you’d have more fun setting fire to your money than buying a club like ours.
I would go along with any recommendations that Andrew Howard suggests. I believe he is genuine in his love for the club. You only have to look at the position the club was in when he came in compared to where it is now to appreciate what he has done for the club.
Reading very loosely between the lines of Marlowchairs earlier post. "That,the bid or bidder haven't been involved with WWFC in recent years"
I wonder if that's the Harman brothers ? Owners of Annodata ?
They were rumoured to have been interested a few years ago ?
Any prospective investor should really start as AH did by buying a hundred thousand shares as a show of good faith. It is returnable after three years and is the perfect way to begin a relationship with WWFC, as AH did some time ago.
The idea of sponsorship (eg. of a youth team training setup) is a good one and the commercial team has done a good job IMO of getting sponsors this season. It will be very interesting to be shown the true financial situation of the club in order to make an informed decision about the future ownership model but for this @AlanCecil@DJWYC14 it will need to be streamed live.
Reason #859 to love Wycombe Wanderers: So much to discuss...
Come to think of it, It would be a potentially lucrative investment to sponsor a youth team for a percentage of sell on fees. A gamble for all concerned but the closest to a win-win situation I have come up with. Throw into the mix our(?) training ground and there could be interest shown without putting the very foundation of fan-ownership at risk. Thoughts?
Any prospective owner who wants to come in will need to do so with a headline-grabbing offer to win fan goodwill. If I were advising any consortium I would suggest pledging to reopen the youth academy next summer. I would also make sure the consortium included a frontman who the fans identified with and would want to trust. A Keith Scott, perhaps, or how about @BallroomBill?
And if I were advising a group opposed to the sale I would suggest they not get distracted by the Hollywood theatrics and make sure they read every word of the small print. And not to trust what anyone says, no matter how friendly they seem.
This thread needs a healthy injection of @glasshalffull, I would say. You'll be in the loop on this. Penny for your thoughts?
I genuinely know nothing about this rumoured potential investment so I’m as intrigued as anyone to hear more about it.
I love the idea of fan ownership, but it can only get you so far. We’ve done incredibly well to get where we are with such limited resources, but without greater investment it’s almost impossible to achieve stability and make progress.
I agree that the club needs to be extremely cautious about finding new investors, but I have great faith in the Trust board to do what’s right for the club.
@mooneyman said:
After the fiasco of Sharky's reign, I can't see that any proposal to sell the club, however attractive on paper, will succeed in getting the necessary majority of votes. If I recall correctly this is 75%.
If we are going to sustain our league status long term it's vital that we get some investment from somewhere, otherwise it's only a matter of time before we face another Torquay experience.
Going to be an interesting meeting for sure.
My thoughts are that we need the club to be run under the current model with better leadership , visit control and experience before we can possibly know if we can survive under this model in the leagues.
It’s as simple as that. Our club is running currently with no member of the executive team with any league 1 experience or higher. The chairman has no sports executive experience nor does the financial director or any other football director other than Mr beeks who is an appointed honorary president. The sporting director has no experience at this level but had racing car team experience in a pro am competition designed for rich men to self fund a drive for themselves.
None of this is to be personally critical , rather to demonstrate the genuine lack of experience and demonstrable skill set and results we have been operating under .
We haven’t given supporter ownership a good go yet until we have qualified and experienced management in place to run it should sustainably.
Hayes experience was loaning money to people that he then called in and they had to pay back at exorbitant rates of interest so you cannot say his experience was exactly usefu....oh hold on.
@Blue_since_1990 said:
Iain McNay - Cherry Red Records would be my guess regarding a potential buyer. The guy loves football and has money, so may not be a bad bed partner.
Interesting picture painted by Marlowchair regarding the esteemed club directors.
This all seems so familiar regarding the potential lack of choice and a proposal based on failing financial models and maybe leading to only one way forward in reality.
Haven’t we been here before?
Iain is a wonderful choice but is a “don” through and through and neither he or his partner Adam ( great person also ) are the ones the proposal is from . The proposal is from a group who already hold significant shareholding’s in another EFL club which isn’t related closely to our club in any form, geographically or through any personnel or cultural links. They are not in league 1
@Wendoverman said:
So @marlowchair i get the feeling that you dont like the secret plans or management of the club or the identity if those planning to take over. What is your favoured course of action moving forwards?
Fair take out from my posts here wendover but only because I’ve been disappointed and concerned at the amount of time this has been known and mooted at director level even before trust board were informed let alone rank and file members . That doesn’t sit well with me.
Coupled with what I understand to be a lack of good commercial management and poor cost control in other areas , my main concern is that any choice or decision put to members will be subjective due to a worse financial position than we could be in had we been run more prudently in recent years. Amazing performance and results from GA and team have papered over the lack of progress off pitch in the office.
My preferred option going forward is objective choice for members voted on in a climate of open mindedness
although, @marlowchair , if we take things at face value, and not to be naive obviously, but surely the chaps trying to run the club the current way, are exactly the best ones to tell us that it isn't working this way!
On another note, (and whether I understand it's necessary or not) it is interesting just from this thread, that some people are already talking about selling out/taking an investor on as a good idea.
Just a few handful of years on from such a situation almost ruining us!
@Chickenhead said:
I would go along with any recommendations that Andrew Howard suggests. I believe he is genuine in his love for the club. You only have to look at the position the club was in when he came in compared to where it is now to appreciate what he has done for the club.
He had stated many times he has love for Leeds United and isn’t a fan of our club , this is offered as a positive which I agree with as he operates on a business basis not passion.
Yes a good point but I would counter that by saying that is akin to Tony Adams standing in front of our trust members saying 442 is not a formation that works for our club and you saying he is the best placed to advise us of that as he is in situ....
Comments
Torquay was to all intents and purposes owned by a fan and then by a group of fans. The key point is that with limited financial support from their owners (and to be fair some pretty bad management) they simply couldn't survive financially in the conference and add to take the last resort of borrowing from the only white knight despite him being known to be an asset stripper.
for me if I could be certain that the current model could provide reasonable certainty of remaining in the League, I would choose to stick with it. If there was a strong probability of slipping out of the league with that model, I am open to considering change.
I absolutely agree that as far as possible we should only consider sale when we understand the aims and motivations and history of any prospective buyer. Sadly rogues don't necessarily wear a label on their forehead shouting "rogue" however. Sadly there are no guarantees under any ownership model - we just have to choose the one that believe gives us the best chance.
If I was a very wealthy man (well over £100m say), as a Wycombe supporter I would want to buy the club. At my age it would probably be more sensible spending my ill gotten gains on football, rather than wine, women and song!
The key to all this is, who are these people and what is their long term plan. What plans would there be to re-introduce an academy? Exeter do very well simply because they bring on young talent and then sell them. 75% of the trust members/legacy members (think I am correct there) would have to agree to this and given the fact we have been in private ownership previously and it was a disaster then I personally feel this will be a very hard sell by the directors to convince everyone it was in the long term interest of the football club to sell unless the academy was key to all this. If that was re-introduced then I could see the benefits without that I cannot.
Such a fan would have come forward years ago, surely?
@DevC How do you define "reasonable certainty" in a sport where pretty much everything is uncertain? What guarantees could the trust give you?
I agree with your comment in your first post that a lot of our success as a supporter-owned club has been down to the GA/AH combination and without them I would fear for us longer-term. However, we could lose them both and bring in a more successful management team - who knows?
People's financial situations can change very quickly nowadays. Sale of valuable business, inheritance, Euro lottery win etc. However, I agree unlikely to happen to a Chairboy.
It can only be down to individuals judgement of the opportunities and risks of each option, @Last_Quarter. Time will tell what information we are given to form those judgements on. I wouldn't rely on always having as successful a management team as we currently do however.
No need to launch in again on what counts as control or investment but the WHY questions are very important before any sale or change of policy that may lead eventually to a sale with lower scrutiny.
1) What does the club have to gain?
Will the investment be a long term positive for the club or just allow it to be less tight and open us up to bigger problems down the line with higher wage bills and staff costs that aren't sustainable?
Will there still be the goodwill that sees existing volunteers, sponsors and donations?
2) What does the individual or group stand to gain?
If they are just "donating" out of a love for the club why do they need more control than say Mr Howard and Mr Stroud have?
If they are expecting a return on their investment are they batshit crazy and what happens if they don't get any?
Are they pledging long term financial support and what plans are in place should they not be able to do so due to changing circumstances?
Football is absolutely littered with investments gone bad so full caution should be applied.
Who knows what will be proposed but ****if**** the Trust are looking to sell (more likely, give away) the Club there are a few obvious questions I'd start with:
1) Will the stadium be included in the sale (dressed up like - 'it needs significant investment to repair the roofs / screens and that is only possible if the new owner also owns the stadium')
2) what actual powers would the Trust continue to have over the Club, what level of scrutiny would there be post-sale, how many members of the Club's board would be elected by the Trust etc
3) What guarantees will be put in place - if indeed any could be - that whoever buys the club won't just be able to sell it on to someone perhaps less suitable and more asset strippery down the road (or even immediately)
4) Will there actually be any true scrutiny and transparency to this sale process or will we have to rely on the people who have been negotiating this and trust they have done /are doing an effective job
You may remember in the summer I questioned whether having the same man chair both the Club board and the Trust board was sensible. I will delicately say now that an example of where separation of powers and true scrutiny might be kinda useful is when it comes to any proposal to sell the Club.....
I’ve heard that Derek Richardson has been buzzing around....
Indeed, Dev. They are exactly right for this club.
Unless your personal wealth runs into the hundreds of millions and you just want a hobby, you’d have more fun setting fire to your money than buying a club like ours.
I would go along with any recommendations that Andrew Howard suggests. I believe he is genuine in his love for the club. You only have to look at the position the club was in when he came in compared to where it is now to appreciate what he has done for the club.
Reading very loosely between the lines of Marlowchairs earlier post. "That,the bid or bidder haven't been involved with WWFC in recent years"
I wonder if that's the Harman brothers ? Owners of Annodata ?
They were rumoured to have been interested a few years ago ?
@marlowchair I'm assuming you're not happy with the potential buyers?
Any prospective investor should really start as AH did by buying a hundred thousand shares as a show of good faith. It is returnable after three years and is the perfect way to begin a relationship with WWFC, as AH did some time ago.
The idea of sponsorship (eg. of a youth team training setup) is a good one and the commercial team has done a good job IMO of getting sponsors this season. It will be very interesting to be shown the true financial situation of the club in order to make an informed decision about the future ownership model but for this @AlanCecil @DJWYC14 it will need to be streamed live.
Reason #859 to love Wycombe Wanderers: So much to discuss...
Come to think of it, It would be a potentially lucrative investment to sponsor a youth team for a percentage of sell on fees. A gamble for all concerned but the closest to a win-win situation I have come up with. Throw into the mix our(?) training ground and there could be interest shown without putting the very foundation of fan-ownership at risk. Thoughts?
Any prospective owner who wants to come in will need to do so with a headline-grabbing offer to win fan goodwill. If I were advising any consortium I would suggest pledging to reopen the youth academy next summer. I would also make sure the consortium included a frontman who the fans identified with and would want to trust. A Keith Scott, perhaps, or how about @BallroomBill?
And if I were advising a group opposed to the sale I would suggest they not get distracted by the Hollywood theatrics and make sure they read every word of the small print. And not to trust what anyone says, no matter how friendly they seem.
This thread needs a healthy injection of @glasshalffull, I would say. You'll be in the loop on this. Penny for your thoughts?
@NorQuarters Think that gets dangerously close to 3rd party ownership
I genuinely know nothing about this rumoured potential investment so I’m as intrigued as anyone to hear more about it.
I love the idea of fan ownership, but it can only get you so far. We’ve done incredibly well to get where we are with such limited resources, but without greater investment it’s almost impossible to achieve stability and make progress.
I agree that the club needs to be extremely cautious about finding new investors, but I have great faith in the Trust board to do what’s right for the club.
My thoughts are that we need the club to be run under the current model with better leadership , visit control and experience before we can possibly know if we can survive under this model in the leagues.
It’s as simple as that. Our club is running currently with no member of the executive team with any league 1 experience or higher. The chairman has no sports executive experience nor does the financial director or any other football director other than Mr beeks who is an appointed honorary president. The sporting director has no experience at this level but had racing car team experience in a pro am competition designed for rich men to self fund a drive for themselves.
None of this is to be personally critical , rather to demonstrate the genuine lack of experience and demonstrable skill set and results we have been operating under .
We haven’t given supporter ownership a good go yet until we have qualified and experienced management in place to run it should sustainably.
Are any football league clubs run sustainably? The vast majority are not. The problem isn't with Wycombe, it's with football finances as a whole.
Hayes experience was loaning money to people that he then called in and they had to pay back at exorbitant rates of interest so you cannot say his experience was exactly usefu....oh hold on.
Iain is a wonderful choice but is a “don” through and through and neither he or his partner Adam ( great person also ) are the ones the proposal is from . The proposal is from a group who already hold significant shareholding’s in another EFL club which isn’t related closely to our club in any form, geographically or through any personnel or cultural links. They are not in league 1
@micra, son, son son.
The guy using infer instead of imply, really isn't the big issue on discussion here!
Fair take out from my posts here wendover but only because I’ve been disappointed and concerned at the amount of time this has been known and mooted at director level even before trust board were informed let alone rank and file members . That doesn’t sit well with me.
Coupled with what I understand to be a lack of good commercial management and poor cost control in other areas , my main concern is that any choice or decision put to members will be subjective due to a worse financial position than we could be in had we been run more prudently in recent years. Amazing performance and results from GA and team have papered over the lack of progress off pitch in the office.
My preferred option going forward is objective choice for members voted on in a climate of open mindedness
although, @marlowchair , if we take things at face value, and not to be naive obviously, but surely the chaps trying to run the club the current way, are exactly the best ones to tell us that it isn't working this way!
On another note, (and whether I understand it's necessary or not) it is interesting just from this thread, that some people are already talking about selling out/taking an investor on as a good idea.
Just a few handful of years on from such a situation almost ruining us!
What do they say about history repeating itself?
By the way, I understand only legacy trust members can vote, not the great unwashed Johnny-come-lately entry level trust members such as myself.
He had stated many times he has love for Leeds United and isn’t a fan of our club , this is offered as a positive which I agree with as he operates on a business basis not passion.
Yes a good point but I would counter that by saying that is akin to Tony Adams standing in front of our trust members saying 442 is not a formation that works for our club and you saying he is the best placed to advise us of that as he is in situ....