Skip to content

Potential new owners

145791038

Comments

  • edited November 2018

    @mooneyman So where exactly did I say that ? I said I don’t understand the need to have a say over the future buyers

  • I think we've seen the worst analogy in gasroom history!

  • Oh come on Eric, you could pick literally any of Dev's.

  • @glasshalffull said:
    Ignoring Nicecarrots and his alter ego marlowchair, who have both made their views known ad nauseum, I think most people have taken the perfectly reasonable view that more details are required before a decision of such magnitude can be taken. I understand the concerns expressed by posters with no axe to grind, but I am still more worried about continuing as we are having been warned in no uncertain terms that this option can only lead to financial meltdown.

    Yet you blindly support the men in charge who have managed and overseen the financial decline of our club.

  • Given the potential investors' desire to have "fun", I wonder if they have also made small investments in the business immediately neighbouring the Seaport Capital headquarters in Fulton Street, New York, which Google maps streetview shows to be a head shop with an extensive range of bongs displayed in the front window.

    https://www.google.com/maps/place/40+Fulton+St,+New+York,+NY+10038,+USA/@40.708122,-74.0045367,3a,22.4y,254.84h,90.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sNbMPKeYVx29szc3oAecaTA!2e0!6s//geo1.ggpht.com/cbk?panoid=NbMPKeYVx29szc3oAecaTA&output=thumbnail&cb_client=search.TACTILE.gps&thumb=2&w=86&h=86&yaw=214.24933&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i16384!8i8192!4m5!3m4!1s0x89c25a3d3745c91d:0xbdf5e384db3bdf94!8m2!3d40.707891!4d-74.0047163

  • The club was in financial trouble before the Trust took over. They made big decisions to try and halt the decline and for a time they were successful, mainly thanks to the Jordan Ibe scenario. Perhaps they were guilty of painting too rosy a picture of the short term financial picture and they might now regret that, but it’s not a reason to vilify them.
    We have now returned to the harsh reality of where the club was before the Trust took over and they have attempted to address that situation by proposing outside investment.

  • You must have contacts within the game who can give you an inside scoop on their time at Derby. And I'm sure you've asked

    What is the general view?

  • I have heard positive things about their time at Derby and let’s not forget that their purchase there was through their company Seaport and, as I understand it, in conjunction with other companies. Bill and Jim made it clear last night that it’s their own money they intend investing in WWFC.

  • edited November 2018

    @JohnnyAllAlone I think the idea is we want to have some control to avoid the scenario of an egomaniac convicted rapist and his extended family of thugs taking over which would be quite worrying for me.

  • I agree that safeguards need to be in place regarding any future sell on even if we return to the situation that we had when the Trust replaced Steve Hayes.

  • The Derby investment (2007 -2015) was through a company called GNS and involved Bill Luby sitting on the board of the club.

    I've spoken to a few Derby County fans who speak favorably of the GNS tenure with the general opinion being that they left the club in a far better position from where they found it.

    Selling to Mel Morris CBE has probably had a positive effect on their legacy also.

  • If we assume they won't get the votes for the 75% stake...perhaps they will come back and offer not all of the money to accept 50% of the business if they can see how exciting it is going to be. I'm not really enjoying this particular episode of Dragon's Den very much...

  • Still struggling a little to understand the implications of a "no" vote.

    Is there a realistic expectation that if this bid fails to clear the 75% hurdle, there will be another one along shortly that would?

    Is the suggestion just that we will slip down to league2 and then live happily ever after in which case to be honest I would be relatively sanguine.

    Is the suggestion that realistically we are likely to slip down through the leagues

    Does the fact that we have already taken a loan from these guys suggest that cash is worse then I understood and that the implications of "no" may be ever worse.

    I believe there are 640 or so votes. Is it really the case that if 540 of those vote and 450 of those vote yes and 90 no, that's it - opportunity rejected - we sink or swim on our own?

    Worrying times.

  • edited November 2018

    But we will potentially be in big trouble if they pull out as they will no doubt want their loan repaid pdq.

  • You raise the most important point in this whole sage @DevC. To my mind there is simply no way we clear the 75% threshold, unless, and apologies if this has been covered earlier in this thread, the board have a plan to 'get the vote out.'

    Very concerned that we've already taken a cash loan from them. Very concerned at the number of people seemingly won over by warm smiles and platitudes. Must we do this every decade?

  • As it's this close to Christmas and I have not yet made my decision can I inquire if 'getting the vote out' might involve substantial amounts in bribes...?

  • The news that the club is in debt to these guys already was not what I wanted to hear; too many echoes of where we were when the vote to give full control to Steve Hayes occurred. The longer this goes on and the more money we allow them to loan to us then the closer we get to being presented with the same doomsday scenario Ivor Beeks presented to the shareholders back then: no option other than to give them control, since the alternative is they will demand their money back and the club will be insolvent and out of business the following day.

  • edited November 2018

    To be fair @floyd there is a plan to get the vote out as the board confirmed last night. It's a small electorate all of whom's recent contact details are known, so I suppose its possible to put a fair bit of pressure on to vote. Indeed the precise whereabouts of all seated voters is known every other Saturday afternoon and even a presumably relatively small number of standing voters must pass through the turnstiles. In a decision of this magnitude and given the structure of the voting system, it does seem important that as many eligible voters as possible should be encouraged to cast their vote.

    Nonetheless I agree we have saddled ourselves with a very high hurdle and I think there is a very real risk of a large majority voting for but not crossing the 75% of all voters threshold which would seem to me likely to provoke something of a constitutional crisis.

    I was surprised and alarmed that we have taken a loan from these guys already. It does suggest that cash is critically tight if this was necessary at this stage.

  • Knowing who the voters are and actually getting them to vote are two different things tho aren't they? But i take your point.

    We're voting on whether to change the fabric of our club, possibly forever. It should be difficult. That's why it's appalling that we've already put ourselves into debt.

  • I thought perhaps we should send Sam Saunders out to knock on doors since he's not up to much else at the moment

  • Realistically though, if the cash runs out , you have two choices - borrow from where you can or cease to be.

    You are right though, it will be extremely hard to get sufficient people to vote. My money would be on a high turnout, an overwhelming yes vote but not enough to cross the threshold. Arguably the worst outcome of all.

  • Based on last night’s figure, if fewer than 160 Legacy Members either vote ‘no’ or abstain, Bill and Jim will be on board. Efforts are being made to increase the Legacy membership (which may or may not change that outcome) and the arithmetic will doubtless be different by January when more detailed information is expected to be presented and the vote taken.

  • @DevC I know I'm going to regret this...but why do you see an overwhelming yes vote?

  • Pure guesswork but its my expectation. Do you expect something else?

  • I expect continued guesswork

  • I expect the unexpected.

  • According to Marlow and Carrots, this entire scenario is unexpected.

  • @DevC said:

    I was surprised and alarmed that we have taken a loan from these guys already. It does suggest that cash is critically tight if this was necessary at this stage.

    Which may be partly due to reportedly paying a substantial transfer fee for Jason McCarthy!

    The current financial situation doesn't seem to add up to me.

  • I was quite shocked at the weekend to catch a brief glimpse of the back of a pair of Beavers on a local river. Definitely a case of Tails of the Unexpected. I'll get my coat.

Sign In or Register to comment.