Good shout, @th100 - they run the club in a perfectly sustainable fashion too, from that link posted on here a while back (which I think may have been posted by you?)
I think everyone needs to calm down a bit. It is absolutely in their best interests to be on a charm offensive at the moment. They're doing it well, for sure, but their proposal needs to be weighed up with very careful consideration
@eric_plant said:
I think everyone needs to calm down a bit. It is absolutely in their best interests to be on a charm offensive at the moment. They're doing it well, for sure, but their proposal needs to be weighed up with very careful consideration
I agree. It’s looking promising so far but it’s very early days.
They’ve not even been in the building for a month yet and we are looking at potentially handing them our 132 year old football club!
Yes, it's in their interests to come across as they have, but I'm not sure they'd have committed to so many changes and made such a marked impact already if it was merely a charm offensive. Early days, of course , but there's nothing about Couhig that makes me think 'Hang on a minute, something's a bit off here'. Unless something scandalous occurs between now and the vote, I don't see how it can be anything but a 'yes'. Sure, we should keep our feet on the ground, but wer'e allowed to let our heads skim the clouds. There's a buzz I've not known around here in a long time - although admittedly I'm a 'young' fan, way too young to have been around for the years leading up to promotion to the League, too young to remember the Cup run - and it's only natural to feel excited. Scrutinise them, sure, and criticise them if and when necessary, but who are we to assume the worst in Rob and co.?
I think a sense of realism needs to take place. We cannot survive losing money year on year.Its not sustainable. It’s certainly not perfect but I want the club to be around for years to come. So it’s a price we have to pay. I know it’s early days but the Couhigs are making a favourable impression.
@eric_plant said:
So that's it then? Nothing else to consider
Very odd response from you Eric to my question. I agree we will have many points to consider before agreeing to hand over our club. However, surely the fact that we are likely to be indebted to Mr Couhig to the tune of approximately £2m if we vote against the sale has to be near the top of our considerations. You cannot just bury your head in the sand on this financial issue.
Again I would ask you (or anyone else) by what means do you (they) think we could raise this money?
Regardless of whether you are in favour of the proposed sale to Rob Couhig, a big issue which people need to be reminded of here is one of Democracy in a Fan Owned Club.
Some time ago the Trust Board chose to take a very large loan from Messrs Luby & Collis, without consulting the members, even though they had no direct involvement in the club.
The Trust Board did not inform the members of an alternative bid from Andy Harman, and did not later disclose the full reasons why that bid was subsequently withdrawn.
They have recently taken a large loan from Rob Couhig, again without seeking authority from the members.
They have approved significant further loans and involvement from Rob’s team, again without approval.
By the time the vote comes at a future date the members will have no choice but to accept the Couhig offer because we will have borrowed so much money that the alternative will be going bust. Hence, there is a pretence here at a democratic vote, but in truth the Trust Board have manipulated the situation to get their wish without actually giving the members a choice.
Tbh its gets boring we know all this and tbh if we want a club in the league then we have no choice, if you want to play in the national league south or bostik league then go and support Marlow or Beaconsfield.
@prufrock_91 writes, "he seems to be a 70 year old, sweet guy," and I agree, but that statement also points to a key reason why some legacy members will be very reluctant to vote to hand over majority ownership. 70 year old guys, no matter how sweet and well-intentioned they may be, don't live forever. Actually, it's not just 70 year old guys: no other individual attempting to take over the club could be expected to be around forever either. The concern is then regarding who will subsequently take ownership. The fans (trust members) would have no effective say in that.
It will come down to whether each legacy member considers this to be -
(a) a vote on letting Rob Couhig and his team takeover and run the club, with the expectation that things will continue as they have started for an extended period into the future; or
(b) a vote on relinquishing control of the club forever so that, in the future event that a person or persons try to take over the club who are not felt to have what it takes to run it or, worse, are believed to have bad intentions, there will be nothing that they will be able to do to stop them taking over.
During the initial "Meet The Couhigs" meeting Rob Couhig commented that somebody had asked him during the drinks break what would happen to his shares when he died. Rob seemed to think this an odd question and not to appreciate why it was being asked. It is, however, very relevant with regard to voting consideration (b) above. The fact that somebody was asking it right from the outset shows that this will be a key factor when the vote is held.
@Steve_Heyward said:
Regardless of whether you are in favour of the proposed sale to Rob Couhig, a big issue which people need to be reminded of here is one of Democracy in a Fan Owned Club.
Some time ago the Trust Board chose to take a very large loan from Messrs Luby & Collis, without consulting the members, even though they had no direct involvement in the club.
The Trust Board did not inform the members of an alternative bid from Andy Harman, and did not later disclose the full reasons why that bid was subsequently withdrawn.
They have recently taken a large loan from Rob Couhig, again without seeking authority from the members.
They have approved significant further loans and involvement from Rob’s team, again without approval.
By the time the vote comes at a future date the members will have no choice but to accept the Couhig offer because we will have borrowed so much money that the alternative will be going bust. Hence, there is a pretence here at a democratic vote, but in truth the Trust Board have manipulated the situation to get their wish without actually giving the members a choice.
Have you posted under a different name before by any chance....
basically if u dont vote for it the club will fold doesnt matter how u dress it up. And I suspect it will be voted through quite easily as most people are very happy with how things have started, early days but we are short of options however that situation has come about !!!
@Steve_Heyward The Trust board are elected by the membership to make decisions on the running of the football club and it appears that all the things they have done so far in relation to the Couhig bid are within their remit. If the membership does not like what they are doing they can take steps to have the board removed and replaced. This is not undemocratic.
I agree that the decisions taken by the board and debt incurred will weigh the voting options heavily in favour of selling to Rob Couhig. Am I happy with that? Not really. Is it undemocratic? No. If I or anyone else had been more willing to challenge the board's decisions we could have taken action, as soon as it became apparent what the intentions of the board were, to canvas against it and rally the Trust membership to instruct the board not to take these actions. As it is, the Trust members in the audience at the "Meet The Couhigs" event expressed support for the boards plans and nobody else has raised a formal challenge, so the process is not, IMO, undemocratic.
I know the Trust board members are not perfect but I do believe they do their roles with hopefully the best interest of the club. Perhaps the unhappy commenters should have put themselves forward to be voted in as members!!!
@davecz said:
I know the Trust board members are not perfect but I do believe they do their roles with hopefully the best interest of the club. Perhaps the unhappy commenters should have put themselves forward to be voted in as members!!!
This is exactly right. It mystifies me why some people portray the Trust board as the enemy, a bunch of evil outsiders who are only in it to feather their own nest.
They are fans like the rest of us, they were elected by the rest of us to make decisions on our behalf. They can be replaced by people who are equally willing to give up their time to run the club for no reward and little gratitude.
is there some middle ground between "everthing they do is wrong" and "you have no right to make any criticism unless you are prepared to stand to be a board member" I wonder?
I think it was said by Trevor Stroud in the meeting that in the event of RC (or presumably his beneficiary, in the event of his passing) selling the club, there is an agreement in place for the Trust to have first refusal to buy the club back.
The obvious flaw in that is the Trust may well not be able to meet whatever asking price was put on the club, especially if it has now become a sustainable, profit-making business as opposed to a financial blackhole.
In the likelihood of the takeover going through, perhaps it would be prudent for the Trust to begin raising a slow-build fund (maybe members subscribing a small amount pcm) to sit, ringfenced, in a high interest bank account somewhere, so should the worst happen a few years down the line and the club is to be sold to Jacob Rees-Mogg to be turned into a debters prison, the Trust might be in a position to step back in.
Comments
Good shout, @th100 - they run the club in a perfectly sustainable fashion too, from that link posted on here a while back (which I think may have been posted by you?)
I don't remember posting it but may have done. Definitely sounds like they're doing it the right way.
Silly me I meant Missy
Dave Whelan?
I think everyone needs to calm down a bit. It is absolutely in their best interests to be on a charm offensive at the moment. They're doing it well, for sure, but their proposal needs to be weighed up with very careful consideration
How do you suggest we can raise around £2m to pay off Rob Couhig if the sale is not approved Eric?
So that's it then? Nothing else to consider
I agree. It’s looking promising so far but it’s very early days.
They’ve not even been in the building for a month yet and we are looking at potentially handing them our 132 year old football club!
Yes, it's in their interests to come across as they have, but I'm not sure they'd have committed to so many changes and made such a marked impact already if it was merely a charm offensive. Early days, of course , but there's nothing about Couhig that makes me think 'Hang on a minute, something's a bit off here'. Unless something scandalous occurs between now and the vote, I don't see how it can be anything but a 'yes'. Sure, we should keep our feet on the ground, but wer'e allowed to let our heads skim the clouds. There's a buzz I've not known around here in a long time - although admittedly I'm a 'young' fan, way too young to have been around for the years leading up to promotion to the League, too young to remember the Cup run - and it's only natural to feel excited. Scrutinise them, sure, and criticise them if and when necessary, but who are we to assume the worst in Rob and co.?
And they have asked for 9 months to prove themselves. No need to make hasty decisions yet
I think a sense of realism needs to take place. We cannot survive losing money year on year.Its not sustainable. It’s certainly not perfect but I want the club to be around for years to come. So it’s a price we have to pay. I know it’s early days but the Couhigs are making a favourable impression.
Exactly
Not at all, for a number of reasons (one of which is being a Tory in Wigan.)
Please ignore this comment, I am checking that my account is working succesfully
Oka... Oh hang on, never mind. Sorry. Nothing.
RC seems to just want to take over a club, improve it and leave a legacy for his family.
I don't think that he's in it for any financial gain from the land - he seems to be a 70 year old, sweet guy.
The only issue with the 75% may be the overly American, bombastic nature of it all at the moment, which is quite the departure from being fan-owned.
Very odd response from you Eric to my question. I agree we will have many points to consider before agreeing to hand over our club. However, surely the fact that we are likely to be indebted to Mr Couhig to the tune of approximately £2m if we vote against the sale has to be near the top of our considerations. You cannot just bury your head in the sand on this financial issue.
Again I would ask you (or anyone else) by what means do you (they) think we could raise this money?
Regardless of whether you are in favour of the proposed sale to Rob Couhig, a big issue which people need to be reminded of here is one of Democracy in a Fan Owned Club.
Some time ago the Trust Board chose to take a very large loan from Messrs Luby & Collis, without consulting the members, even though they had no direct involvement in the club.
The Trust Board did not inform the members of an alternative bid from Andy Harman, and did not later disclose the full reasons why that bid was subsequently withdrawn.
They have recently taken a large loan from Rob Couhig, again without seeking authority from the members.
They have approved significant further loans and involvement from Rob’s team, again without approval.
By the time the vote comes at a future date the members will have no choice but to accept the Couhig offer because we will have borrowed so much money that the alternative will be going bust. Hence, there is a pretence here at a democratic vote, but in truth the Trust Board have manipulated the situation to get their wish without actually giving the members a choice.
Deciding that your first impression of someone is good is not the same as making a hasty decision about the future of the club.
Tbh its gets boring we know all this and tbh if we want a club in the league then we have no choice, if you want to play in the national league south or bostik league then go and support Marlow or Beaconsfield.
@prufrock_91 writes, "he seems to be a 70 year old, sweet guy," and I agree, but that statement also points to a key reason why some legacy members will be very reluctant to vote to hand over majority ownership. 70 year old guys, no matter how sweet and well-intentioned they may be, don't live forever. Actually, it's not just 70 year old guys: no other individual attempting to take over the club could be expected to be around forever either. The concern is then regarding who will subsequently take ownership. The fans (trust members) would have no effective say in that.
It will come down to whether each legacy member considers this to be -
(a) a vote on letting Rob Couhig and his team takeover and run the club, with the expectation that things will continue as they have started for an extended period into the future; or
(b) a vote on relinquishing control of the club forever so that, in the future event that a person or persons try to take over the club who are not felt to have what it takes to run it or, worse, are believed to have bad intentions, there will be nothing that they will be able to do to stop them taking over.
During the initial "Meet The Couhigs" meeting Rob Couhig commented that somebody had asked him during the drinks break what would happen to his shares when he died. Rob seemed to think this an odd question and not to appreciate why it was being asked. It is, however, very relevant with regard to voting consideration (b) above. The fact that somebody was asking it right from the outset shows that this will be a key factor when the vote is held.
Have you posted under a different name before by any chance....
basically if u dont vote for it the club will fold doesnt matter how u dress it up. And I suspect it will be voted through quite easily as most people are very happy with how things have started, early days but we are short of options however that situation has come about !!!
I've not said that it is. My first impression of the Couhigs is good as well
@Steve_Heyward The Trust board are elected by the membership to make decisions on the running of the football club and it appears that all the things they have done so far in relation to the Couhig bid are within their remit. If the membership does not like what they are doing they can take steps to have the board removed and replaced. This is not undemocratic.
I agree that the decisions taken by the board and debt incurred will weigh the voting options heavily in favour of selling to Rob Couhig. Am I happy with that? Not really. Is it undemocratic? No. If I or anyone else had been more willing to challenge the board's decisions we could have taken action, as soon as it became apparent what the intentions of the board were, to canvas against it and rally the Trust membership to instruct the board not to take these actions. As it is, the Trust members in the audience at the "Meet The Couhigs" event expressed support for the boards plans and nobody else has raised a formal challenge, so the process is not, IMO, undemocratic.
I know the Trust board members are not perfect but I do believe they do their roles with hopefully the best interest of the club. Perhaps the unhappy commenters should have put themselves forward to be voted in as members!!!
Welcome @Steve_Heyward . I am sure we have met before. Congratulations on the new name.
This is exactly right. It mystifies me why some people portray the Trust board as the enemy, a bunch of evil outsiders who are only in it to feather their own nest.
They are fans like the rest of us, they were elected by the rest of us to make decisions on our behalf. They can be replaced by people who are equally willing to give up their time to run the club for no reward and little gratitude.
is there some middle ground between "everthing they do is wrong" and "you have no right to make any criticism unless you are prepared to stand to be a board member" I wonder?
I think it was said by Trevor Stroud in the meeting that in the event of RC (or presumably his beneficiary, in the event of his passing) selling the club, there is an agreement in place for the Trust to have first refusal to buy the club back.
The obvious flaw in that is the Trust may well not be able to meet whatever asking price was put on the club, especially if it has now become a sustainable, profit-making business as opposed to a financial blackhole.
In the likelihood of the takeover going through, perhaps it would be prudent for the Trust to begin raising a slow-build fund (maybe members subscribing a small amount pcm) to sit, ringfenced, in a high interest bank account somewhere, so should the worst happen a few years down the line and the club is to be sold to Jacob Rees-Mogg to be turned into a debters prison, the Trust might be in a position to step back in.