If the interested party is an American hedge fund, how appropriate was it that our last League game was at Coventry - owned by a hedge fund. At a ground supposedly for Coventry City and yet now “adorned” with huge banners of Wasps.
The Ricoh Arena was built for CCFC & is now on the point of being sold to those parasitic Wasps - with no guarantee Coventry City will be able to play there after the end of this season.
How quickly the fortunes of a club can go into free fall following a bad decision. I’m not pre-empting what may happen with WW but everyone should surround themselves with a wall of scepticism.
@micra said:
Can’t say fairer than that @Wendoverman.
My barber asked me this afternoon if it was true that “that ice cream man” was one of the bidders. One of his “clients” this morning apparently said he’d heard he was. News to me and wholly unlikely, I’d have thought.
Maybe he meant that fella from the Mr Whippy van down the Rye.
I have a love hate relationship with gasroom. I hate the way some posters are negative about our team and manager. who would have thought that at 3 pm on the 3rd of may 2014 that we would playing league 1 football with the same manager. But I love the way that a serious thread regarding the future of our club can be derailed to discussing the ice cream van on the Rye. ? I haven’t been there for many years. Is the open air swimming pool still there?
for someone who denies so vehemently leaking confidential information earlier in this thread, Mr Sumner and his "mate" do seem to spend to take extraordinary delight in leaking confidential information.
Seaport Capital's Bill Luby describes his time at Derby thus, " From an investment perspective, a disaster." Seaport Capital are activist investors and will flood the FC board with their own people. It will be interesting to see how they make money from WWFC not that they'll tell us up front before they wrangle 75% control. It'll be the Trust board not needing approval in order to give them 25% and then a game of Russian roulette to get another 50%. along the If you don't do what we want we will put you into liquidation etc, straight out of the Beeks and the gang playbook. We've been here many, many times before. Ask Coventry fans what impact SISU have had on their club. A fish always rots from the head.
What's the buzz with the Saudis? It might be the perfect cultural fit as WWFC is to corporate governance what Saudi Arabia is to human rights. I wouldn't welcome anything to do with the Saudis who must have their hands full murdering Yemeni women and children and the anti-MBS journalist, Kashoggi.
Appreciate the Trust board have taken their customary vow of silence preferring to tell people how furious they are outside of the meetings while remaining mute in them. But they were elected to represent the members. Too many of them are solely motivated by the desire to be re-elected hence they don't want to be seen as rocking the boat.
Given the weasels are trying so hard to out Marlow Chair I hope the moderators will protect and preserve his, or her, anonymity. Freedom of speech is what sets us apart from places like say, Saudi Arabia. It shouldn't be sold like a pack of dried fruit and nuts.
Mr Burrell said on several occasions that "cash is predictable" on the Glorious Twelfth, he also stated cash got tight "Late November to end of January", I hope both the Chairman of the Trust board and the Chairman of the Football Club board gets the General Manager to begin to look after our sponsors many of whom are not overwhelmed by the service they are receiving. These mistakes are costing us money, money we can ill afford.
I hope four fresh faces are elected in November motivated by the desire to safeguard our heritage and not to monetise their connections.
Trust board directors should be limited to a maximum of two terms to avoid the omnishambles that we have currently.
How quickly the fortunes of a club can go into free fall following a bad decision. I’m not pre-empting what may happen with WW but everyone should surround themselves with a wall of scepticism.
Trust board directors should be limited to a maximum of two terms to avoid the omnishambles that we have currently.
Safeguard our heritage. Please. Today. Please.
.
.
After visiting the excellent Ricoh stadium on Saturday, the overwhelming feeling (despite all the seats being Coventry sky blue) that it is very much a wasps nest.
Give me Adams park and a fan owned club (with its limited resources) over that any day.
As Mr Carrots said, Please safeguard our heritage, its so easily lost, forever...
Well once we know who the bidders are we'll be better placed to assess the situation. I'm also I'm not interested in backing 'saudi' investment for reasons given above. Any company will have to prove past success or again what's the point? We might as well get the ones in who appointed Sven and sol Campbell at county otherwise! Involvement in 1000 companies is only a good thing if they are all successful. Pity that none of the rich businessmen and celebs in bucks fancy wasting some of their tax dodge money for the fun.
One thing we must all agree is that this longest thread ever is certainly bringing a number of differing views to the table. Both @marlowchair and @NiceCarrots have presented a view that certainly gives food for thought. I am undecided right now as to the way forward. Like a lot of Gasroomers I want the best for our club and I am very sceptical regarding anyone coming in and taking over our club.
We have had plenty of discussion so now maybe the time to take a poll of Gasroomers. Not sure how to add a poll so maybe one of you can assist there. A poll would probably give us a pretty accurate view of how the actual vote is likely to go. I sense there are less than 75% of the Gasroomers who would currently vote yes to the investor strategy. I do obviously understand that with more information some of us may vote for the investment but a poll may be a good indicator to see where we are right now, it may also provide good feedback to Mr Cecil who can then carry that view back to the other interested parties. Anyone up for it?
Apologies to Oxford Blue and to others if I sound hysterical but we are reaching (have reached?) a critical time in our club's history given the cash flow. It was cash flow that cost us the training ground sold to Beeks and the gang at £350,000 and with planning is estimated to be worth £6,000,000 - £7,000,000.
Moneymen do love a distressed seller.
We launched the share issue to provide working capital but much of that has been squandered on stuff like player trading - the complete opposite of what the money was raised for hence the mess we are in and the share issue's lack of credibility/success.
It would be interesting to know whether the cash raised is held in a separate account.
You don't want to be down on your luck looking for cash when you have a SISU type outfit circling overhead.
Not least of all because the last time we were delighted to be signing Heads of Terms was with a Mr Harry Kerr who is on the run from the police.
Mr Peart - I think it is four new candidates because of the sudden departure of Mr Burrell. If you know anyone who is suitable please, please get them to stand.
@NiceCarrots said:
Apologies to Oxford Blue and to others if I sound hysterical but we are reaching (have reached?) a critical time in our club's history given the cash flow. It was cash flow that cost us the training ground sold to Beeks and the gang at £350,000 and with planning is estimated to be worth £6,000,000 - £7,000,000.
Moneymen do love a distressed seller.
We launched the share issue to provide working capital but much of that has been squandered on stuff like player trading - the complete opposite of what the money was raised for hence the mess we are in and the share issue's lack of credibility/success.
It would be interesting to know whether the cash raised is held in a separate account.
You don't want to be down on your luck looking for cash when you have a SISU type outfit circling overhead.
Not least of all because the last time we were delighted to be signing Heads of Terms was with a Mr Harry Kerr who is on the run from the police.
Mr Peart - I think it is four new candidates because of the sudden departure of Mr Burrell. If you know anyone who is suitable please, please get them to stand.
Off to the Doctor's now for a new prescription.
Just to be clear, I'm a big proponent of Trust ownership, wouldn't really want Saudis running the club either, and I'm very sceptical of anyone who wants to buy or invest in a League One club in the current climate.
I just think you need to be more reasonable with your language.
1) @Blue_since_1990 , I would say ALL not just a lot of gasroomers want the best for the club. They may just disagree on what that best is.
2) On principle I object to racism and I am afraid we have seen that here. I agree the Saudi Government is appalling and we should long ago as a country have behaved differently to the government. However that does not mean that any individual Saudi national is a better or worse candidate for ownership (if we want to go down that road) than say an American. Perfectly valid of course to object to the principle of overseas ownership or indeed ownership at all.
3) @Blue_since_1990 I have read most of Marlow and Carrots posts and once you strip out the grudges and innuendo, I struggle to see the substance. it may be there but I cant grasp it.
I get the argument that some owners are bad so there are risks to going down that route - that is undoubtedly true although most owners are decent.
Is there some other substantial argument I have missed. If so, could you calmly and clearly explain what they are.
4) Ultimately the vote if it transpires will come down to a choice. Accept the outside investor or continue down the current road. Surely to make a rational choice we have to judge what the implications of status quo are. If we can expect to stay as a football league club under fan ownership, I suspect the majority would choose this option. if not however, that option is less attractive. I thought the trust board were saying that in their opinion that would not be possible. Have I misunderstood?
1) @Blue_since_1990 , I would say ALL not just a lot of gasroomers want the best for the club. They may just disagree on what that best is.
2) On principle I object to racism and I am afraid we have seen that here. I agree the Saudi Government is appalling and we should long ago as a country have behaved differently to the government. However that does not mean that any individual Saudi national is a better or worse candidate for ownership (if we want to go down that road) than say an American. Perfectly valid of course to object to the principle of overseas ownership or indeed ownership at all.
3) @Blue_since_1990 I have read most of Marlow and Carrots posts and once you strip out the grudges and innuendo, I struggle to see the substance. it may be there but I cant grasp it.
I get the argument that some owners are bad so there are risks to going down that route - that is undoubtedly true although most owners are decent.
Is there some other substantial argument I have missed. If so, could you calmly and clearly explain what they are.
4) Ultimately the vote if it transpires will come down to a choice. Accept the outside investor or continue down the current road. Surely to make a rational choice we have to judge what the implications of status quo are. If we can expect to stay as a football league club under fan ownership, I suspect the majority would choose this option. if not however, that option is less attractive. I thought the trust board were saying that in their opinion that would not be possible. Have I misunderstood?
If we object to the actions of the Saudi government, should we allow people who represent the House of Saud to invest in British football clubs?
Anyone with serious money from Saudi Arabia is part of the House of Saud.
I say we shouldn't. I don't feel that makes me a racist, although I accept its a delicate line of reasoning.
I too think that the Training Ground deal stinks to high heavens, and colours my view on those running the club. However, I would still be very sceptical of “turnaround specialists” being introduced, whether from USA or anywhere else, who want to take on ownership of our club, not long after we have finally paid off massive debts from the Beeks/Hayes era. These guys are after a return on their investment and have no problem bragging about that on their websites. Who will pay for that profit? It will be the fans of WWFC and the wider people of High Wycombe in my view. We should demand clarity and speed of accounts information from the Trust Board and not think that they “know best”. I haven,t seen anything that shows that we can’t run the club on a sound footing and stay in the EFL.
I am a member of the Share Scheme and a previous Finance Director of the Trust.
The fact that the same people who did the so called 'due dilligence' on Harry Kerr and his dodge pots, are those one's casting eyes over new investment is a major concern to me.
@wandering_jock "I haven,t seen anything that shows that we can’t run the club on a sound footing and stay in the EFL."
It is a matter of fact that the club has been losing substantial money for years (excluding one offs). Presumably therefore if you believe we are able to stay in the EFL with the current structure, you believe we are able to either substantially increase revenue and/or substantially reduce costs, while maintaining onfield performance. Could you explain which and why you believe that.
Understanding whether that is reality would be a major (possibly the major) consideration for me (if I had a vote).
Comments
If the interested party is an American hedge fund, how appropriate was it that our last League game was at Coventry - owned by a hedge fund. At a ground supposedly for Coventry City and yet now “adorned” with huge banners of Wasps.
The Ricoh Arena was built for CCFC & is now on the point of being sold to those parasitic Wasps - with no guarantee Coventry City will be able to play there after the end of this season.
How quickly the fortunes of a club can go into free fall following a bad decision. I’m not pre-empting what may happen with WW but everyone should surround themselves with a wall of scepticism.
Maybe he meant that fella from the Mr Whippy van down the Rye.
It's a she down the Rye !!
So a Mrs Whippy then.
Try Signora Whippy.
I admit to having not been down the Rye in some 30 odd years.
Their is no longer a putting green with a little train going around the outside Mr @drcongo .
micra probably remembers the time when the Rye was used as pasture for cows!
There was an ice cream van world record set today
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-45883271
What seaports are also a capital?
Chance’d be a fine thing.
I have a love hate relationship with gasroom. I hate the way some posters are negative about our team and manager. who would have thought that at 3 pm on the 3rd of may 2014 that we would playing league 1 football with the same manager. But I love the way that a serious thread regarding the future of our club can be derailed to discussing the ice cream van on the Rye. ? I haven’t been there for many years. Is the open air swimming pool still there?
Founded in 1997, Seaport Capital is a leading private equity firm specialising in the lower/middle market of its targeted industries.
Omshterdom is a seaport capital. (I heard a Dutchman saying so on the wireless.)
for someone who denies so vehemently leaking confidential information earlier in this thread, Mr Sumner and his "mate" do seem to spend to take extraordinary delight in leaking confidential information.
Seaport Capital's Bill Luby describes his time at Derby thus, " From an investment perspective, a disaster." Seaport Capital are activist investors and will flood the FC board with their own people. It will be interesting to see how they make money from WWFC not that they'll tell us up front before they wrangle 75% control. It'll be the Trust board not needing approval in order to give them 25% and then a game of Russian roulette to get another 50%. along the If you don't do what we want we will put you into liquidation etc, straight out of the Beeks and the gang playbook. We've been here many, many times before. Ask Coventry fans what impact SISU have had on their club. A fish always rots from the head.
What's the buzz with the Saudis? It might be the perfect cultural fit as WWFC is to corporate governance what Saudi Arabia is to human rights. I wouldn't welcome anything to do with the Saudis who must have their hands full murdering Yemeni women and children and the anti-MBS journalist, Kashoggi.
Appreciate the Trust board have taken their customary vow of silence preferring to tell people how furious they are outside of the meetings while remaining mute in them. But they were elected to represent the members. Too many of them are solely motivated by the desire to be re-elected hence they don't want to be seen as rocking the boat.
Given the weasels are trying so hard to out Marlow Chair I hope the moderators will protect and preserve his, or her, anonymity. Freedom of speech is what sets us apart from places like say, Saudi Arabia. It shouldn't be sold like a pack of dried fruit and nuts.
Mr Burrell said on several occasions that "cash is predictable" on the Glorious Twelfth, he also stated cash got tight "Late November to end of January", I hope both the Chairman of the Trust board and the Chairman of the Football Club board gets the General Manager to begin to look after our sponsors many of whom are not overwhelmed by the service they are receiving. These mistakes are costing us money, money we can ill afford.
I hope four fresh faces are elected in November motivated by the desire to safeguard our heritage and not to monetise their connections.
Trust board directors should be limited to a maximum of two terms to avoid the omnishambles that we have currently.
Safeguard our heritage. Please. Today. Please.
You've become hysterical. Perhaps your doctor can prescribe you something.
@NiceCarrots, why four fresh faces, I thought three were standing for re-election?
@A_Worboys said:
How quickly the fortunes of a club can go into free fall following a bad decision. I’m not pre-empting what may happen with WW but everyone should surround themselves with a wall of scepticism.
@NiceCarrots said:
Trust board directors should be limited to a maximum of two terms to avoid the omnishambles that we have currently.
Safeguard our heritage. Please. Today. Please.
.
.
After visiting the excellent Ricoh stadium on Saturday, the overwhelming feeling (despite all the seats being Coventry sky blue) that it is very much a wasps nest.
Give me Adams park and a fan owned club (with its limited resources) over that any day.
As Mr Carrots said, Please safeguard our heritage, its so easily lost, forever...
Well once we know who the bidders are we'll be better placed to assess the situation. I'm also I'm not interested in backing 'saudi' investment for reasons given above. Any company will have to prove past success or again what's the point? We might as well get the ones in who appointed Sven and sol Campbell at county otherwise! Involvement in 1000 companies is only a good thing if they are all successful. Pity that none of the rich businessmen and celebs in bucks fancy wasting some of their tax dodge money for the fun.
One thing we must all agree is that this longest thread ever is certainly bringing a number of differing views to the table. Both @marlowchair and @NiceCarrots have presented a view that certainly gives food for thought. I am undecided right now as to the way forward. Like a lot of Gasroomers I want the best for our club and I am very sceptical regarding anyone coming in and taking over our club.
We have had plenty of discussion so now maybe the time to take a poll of Gasroomers. Not sure how to add a poll so maybe one of you can assist there. A poll would probably give us a pretty accurate view of how the actual vote is likely to go. I sense there are less than 75% of the Gasroomers who would currently vote yes to the investor strategy. I do obviously understand that with more information some of us may vote for the investment but a poll may be a good indicator to see where we are right now, it may also provide good feedback to Mr Cecil who can then carry that view back to the other interested parties. Anyone up for it?
Apologies to Oxford Blue and to others if I sound hysterical but we are reaching (have reached?) a critical time in our club's history given the cash flow. It was cash flow that cost us the training ground sold to Beeks and the gang at £350,000 and with planning is estimated to be worth £6,000,000 - £7,000,000.
Moneymen do love a distressed seller.
We launched the share issue to provide working capital but much of that has been squandered on stuff like player trading - the complete opposite of what the money was raised for hence the mess we are in and the share issue's lack of credibility/success.
It would be interesting to know whether the cash raised is held in a separate account.
You don't want to be down on your luck looking for cash when you have a SISU type outfit circling overhead.
Not least of all because the last time we were delighted to be signing Heads of Terms was with a Mr Harry Kerr who is on the run from the police.
Mr Peart - I think it is four new candidates because of the sudden departure of Mr Burrell. If you know anyone who is suitable please, please get them to stand.
Off to the Doctor's now for a new prescription.
Just to be clear, I'm a big proponent of Trust ownership, wouldn't really want Saudis running the club either, and I'm very sceptical of anyone who wants to buy or invest in a League One club in the current climate.
I just think you need to be more reasonable with your language.
A couple of points if I may.
1) @Blue_since_1990 , I would say ALL not just a lot of gasroomers want the best for the club. They may just disagree on what that best is.
2) On principle I object to racism and I am afraid we have seen that here. I agree the Saudi Government is appalling and we should long ago as a country have behaved differently to the government. However that does not mean that any individual Saudi national is a better or worse candidate for ownership (if we want to go down that road) than say an American. Perfectly valid of course to object to the principle of overseas ownership or indeed ownership at all.
3) @Blue_since_1990 I have read most of Marlow and Carrots posts and once you strip out the grudges and innuendo, I struggle to see the substance. it may be there but I cant grasp it.
I get the argument that some owners are bad so there are risks to going down that route - that is undoubtedly true although most owners are decent.
Is there some other substantial argument I have missed. If so, could you calmly and clearly explain what they are.
4) Ultimately the vote if it transpires will come down to a choice. Accept the outside investor or continue down the current road. Surely to make a rational choice we have to judge what the implications of status quo are. If we can expect to stay as a football league club under fan ownership, I suspect the majority would choose this option. if not however, that option is less attractive. I thought the trust board were saying that in their opinion that would not be possible. Have I misunderstood?
If we object to the actions of the Saudi government, should we allow people who represent the House of Saud to invest in British football clubs?
Anyone with serious money from Saudi Arabia is part of the House of Saud.
I say we shouldn't. I don't feel that makes me a racist, although I accept its a delicate line of reasoning.
I too think that the Training Ground deal stinks to high heavens, and colours my view on those running the club. However, I would still be very sceptical of “turnaround specialists” being introduced, whether from USA or anywhere else, who want to take on ownership of our club, not long after we have finally paid off massive debts from the Beeks/Hayes era. These guys are after a return on their investment and have no problem bragging about that on their websites. Who will pay for that profit? It will be the fans of WWFC and the wider people of High Wycombe in my view. We should demand clarity and speed of accounts information from the Trust Board and not think that they “know best”. I haven,t seen anything that shows that we can’t run the club on a sound footing and stay in the EFL.
I am a member of the Share Scheme and a previous Finance Director of the Trust.
The fact that the same people who did the so called 'due dilligence' on Harry Kerr and his dodge pots, are those one's casting eyes over new investment is a major concern to me.
@wandering_jock
"I haven,t seen anything that shows that we can’t run the club on a sound footing and stay in the EFL."
It is a matter of fact that the club has been losing substantial money for years (excluding one offs). Presumably therefore if you believe we are able to stay in the EFL with the current structure, you believe we are able to either substantially increase revenue and/or substantially reduce costs, while maintaining onfield performance. Could you explain which and why you believe that.
Understanding whether that is reality would be a major (possibly the major) consideration for me (if I had a vote).
@DevC, the Trust Board are effectively saying we cannot remain fan owned and stay in the EFL "under their management". An important qualification.
I object to racism and people who see it when there obviously is none in order to climb on their high horse.