@chairboyscentral I think a lot of people are concerned which is why on one hand you have people saying 'Take the ****ing money or we're ****ed' and on the other hand people saying 'Whoaaah! If we take this money we might get ****ed!'
I know Denis works for Ajax but do him and Kuyt have a successful business past to dazzle us with?
@chairboyscentral said:
How much more time and how many more chances do people think we're going to get?
We have no idea really, the board don't seem keen to let people know when we get offers but it seems like we are up to half a dozen already, I think the fact we don't have owners wanting a massive payout helps and the level of debt isn't huge if you want to look at buying or becoming a championship club
The club is likely in very deep shit without investment
Short term we would def struggle to pay bills and it would be a shit storm, There's surely also an argument that chasing the investment and increasing spending is adding risk
yet remarkably few people seem that concerned
Many people are and have been concerned, some over a much longer period
just my feeling, hopefully I'm wrong. I'm also staggered that anyone can have any faith in the Trust which has quite clearly failed -
Faith in the trust or the trust model?, fair to say both have taken a hiding
even if we were able to continue under that model, major reform would be needed.
And money, no doubt
I'll be glad when this is all over.
It won't be over, it'll be the start of a new era, hopefully a successful secure one but the risks will still be there, the work starts and we will all be asked to keep chipping in.
Hold your nerve people, no voting will happen until the deal is seen and people will need to consider if it's the best we are likely to get only on its merits.
The handling of the Bill/Jim/Harman situation
Taking a loan from prospective owners (Bill and Jim)
Securing said loan against Adams Park in a direct breach of the morals of the Charter
Taking further loans from Felicianna in advance of a takeover vote
Increasing the budget this season, with no way of paying the money back to Felicianna in the event of a No vote
Having 'no idea' what happens in the case of a No vote
My faith in the Trust went a long time ago, and yet everyone else seems happy for them to just bumble along. They might be volunteers doing they best but that doesn't excuse absolute incompetence
@HG1 said:
let's be honest, have the Couhigs made a positive difference since they have become involved? I think you would struggle to find a fan that said things have not improved. Actions speak louder than words and they have made positive changes to the matchday experience in a short space of time and I am sure longer term things would only get better. Lets see the bid and not be distracted by this and judge their offer based on facts.
What happened to those cheerleaders btw?
I think they recognised with hindsight, times over here have moved on. What works in the USA might not work over here, so some you will get right and some you will get wrong.
A big problem of the Trust, I feel, is that the board lacks diversity. Doesn't help that our fan base seems to lack diversity - not necessarily in terms of age (it probably isn't any less diverse than other clubs in that sense) but in other ways. I'd be interested to see the data on that if I can get hold of it, because I think we can do better.
@chairboyscentral said:
A big problem of the Trust, I feel, is that the board lacks diversity. Doesn't help that our fan base seems to lack diversity - not necessarily in terms of age (it probably isn't any less diverse than other clubs in that sense) but in other ways. I'd be interested to see the data on that if I can get hold of it, because I think we can do better.
Dale did a good job a couple of years back, but you're right, it could do with a younger face or two. It's much easier for those in semi or full retirement to dedicate the time needed though.
Apologies if this has already been said...but you can GUARANTEE they will want more involvement than being just owners...which Ainsworth won't tolerate.
@thecatwwfc said:
Apologies if this has already been said...but you can GUARANTEE they will want more involvement than being just owners...which Ainsworth won't tolerate.
As stated about the Couhig bid... So what? GA is a great manager, but he's almost certainly in his last year or two with us whatever happens
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, each of us has to judge the Couhig bid when it's revealed on its merits.
Only you, as an individual, can decide how you vote and the criteria you select from the I formation available to you.
But please, IMHO, don't vote NO only if you think there might be a better offer because maybe there isn't actually another offer. Despite what today's article might otherwise suggest.
Who wouldn't be seduced by 3 dutch and Swedish football legends (and erm Dirk Kuyt,). Especially the glamour, Netflix series, and most importantly reopening the youth system.
You do wonder what exactly stalled their bid. I dare say we'll never find out.
However, we now await the full info on the Couhig's bid.
And hope for more than
1) Loan you 2m
2) Sell you when you definitely make the championship.
@thecatwwfc said:
Apologies if this has already been said...but you can GUARANTEE they will want more involvement than being just owners...which Ainsworth won't tolerate.
As stated about the Couhig bid... So what? GA is a great manager, but he's almost certainly in his last year or two with us whatever happens
@thecatwwfc said:
Apologies if this has already been said...but you can GUARANTEE they will want more involvement than being just owners...which Ainsworth won't tolerate.
As stated about the Couhig bid... So what? GA is a great manager, but he's almost certainly in his last year or two with us whatever happens
True true. Was just making a point.
Apologies, didn't mean that to come across as quite so confrontational!
@Twizz said:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, each of us has to judge the Couhig bid when it's revealed on its merits.
Only you, as an individual, can decide how you vote and the criteria you select from the I formation available to you.
But please, IMHO, don't vote NO only if you think there might be a better offer because maybe there isn't actually another offer. Despite what today's article might otherwise suggest.
Spot on. The grass is very often not greener on the other side.
@Twizz said:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, each of us has to judge the Couhig bid when it's revealed on its merits.
Only you, as an individual, can decide how you vote and the criteria you select from the I formation available to you.
But please, IMHO, don't vote NO only if you think there might be a better offer because maybe there isn't actually another offer. Despite what today's article might otherwise suggest.
Spot on. The grass is very often not greener on the other side.
Was the grass greener on the other side of Bill and Jim?
The way I see it, is the club were going to go into Admin due to cash flow issues in June / July.
At this point there were two suitors.
One had money to stop the Admin immediately (Couhig) and ensure the club survived. The other (Dutch/Swedish) did not want to inject the cash there and then.
The Trust board, could not make this public due to NDAs, having been voted in by members, they just made a decision which they thought was best for WWFC.
They've done that and Couhigs are now preferred bidder.
What I would like to be confirmed is that if we had not accepted that money, would we have been in admin, would we have had to release players and non-playing staff etc, etc. If the answer to that is "yes" then I can fully understand why this decision was made to accept money prior to a vote.
I suspect the board do not want to admit this in public, in an effort to get the best bid possible for the club etc, etc.
I really disagree with the board then sanctioning further loans/spending other than was absolutely critical for cashflow before the vote took place. Unless there was an agreement in place with Couhigs that the money is equity and not loans, regardless of the outcome of the vote. I do not believe the additional money is equity.
I want to see a plan. I do feel from the facts that are currently available the Couhigs were a better option than the ex-players.
@Twizz said:
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, each of us has to judge the Couhig bid when it's revealed on its merits.
Only you, as an individual, can decide how you vote and the criteria you select from the I formation available to you.
But please, IMHO, don't vote NO only if you think there might be a better offer because maybe there isn't actually another offer. Despite what today's article might otherwise suggest.
Spot on. The grass is very often not greener on the other side.
Was the grass greener on the other side of Bill and Jim?
I think Bill and Jim's grass was infected with fairy rings!
Makes me chuckle. What ever Marlow chair keeps changing his name to. You can always work out who he is. Ie today. Richard Cheese It’s just the way he writes. The grammar he uses.
Anyway. Why has he never formed his own consortium with Carrots. They are both always so opinionated on the goings on!
@OX66 said:
I think 75% could be in doubt now unfortunately , just believe a few people have had their heads turned but we will see.
On the Gasroom, on the Facebook or out in the real world of people who just want to drink beer and watch football at AP?
I'm not convinced the 75% has ever been in doubt in this case.
At the end of the day it will be a case of voting Yes or No on the deal presented...as long as no-one sees Jan Molby, Gary Barlow and the Secret Footballer having a meeting at Beaconsfield services...
I don't see this development (essentially the Harman bid with more internationally known ex-footballers) materially affecting things. Even the timing of the 'leaking' of their overtures was almost identical.
Also, the bigger the names of the frontmen, the nastier the surprise could be about where the money's really coming from.
The Couhigs have played a PR blinder with how they have put a bridging loan in to keep the show on the road and bolster the squad, not to mention being seen to muck in with various jobs around the club, though there are big question marks about how increased playing budgets will be paid for if we were reportedly losing £700k pa with a lower playing budget. The £1m+ pa losses of the Hayes era could well be on their way back if the crowds don't flock to the family funfair atmosphere that the Couhigs are banking on bringing in crowds that we have historically not been able to sustain before.
I expect that the Legacy Members will hold up the proposals up to scrutiny, and that if we do gamble on giving a 75% stake to the Couhigs, that those so fervently in favour of their involvement are aware of the risks as well as the promised benefits.
@ReadingMarginalista said:
I don't see this development (essentially the Harman bid with more internationally known ex-footballers) materially affecting things. Even the timing of the 'leaking' of their overtures was almost identical.
Also, the bigger the names of the frontmen, the nastier the surprise could be about where the money's really coming from.
The Couhigs have played a PR blinder with how they have put a bridging loan in to keep the show on the road and bolster the squad, not to mention being seen to muck in with various jobs around the club, though there are big question marks about how increased playing budgets will be paid for if we were reportedly losing £700k pa with a lower playing budget. The £1m+ pa losses of the Hayes era could well be on their way back if the crowds don't flock to the family funfair atmosphere that the Couhigs are banking on bringing in crowds that we have historically not been able to sustain before.
I expect that the Legacy Members will hold up the proposals up to scrutiny, and that if we do gamble on giving a 75% stake to the Couhigs, that those so fervently in favour of their involvement are aware of the risks as well as the promised benefits.
Makes me chuckle. What ever Marlow chair keeps changing his name to. You can always work out who he is. Ie today. Richard Cheese It’s just the way he writes. The grammar he uses.
Anyway. Why has he never formed his own consortium with Carrots. They are both always so opinionated on the goings on!
What on earth are you babbling on about? I posted the original article from The Athletic in two posts this morning without any personal comment. Cool story though. Keep chuckling.
@TrueBlu said:
Makes me chuckle. What ever Marlow chair keeps changing his name to. You can always work out who he is. Ie today. Richard Cheese It’s just the way he writes. The grammar he uses.
Anyway. Why has he never formed his own consortium with Carrots. They are both always so opinionated on the goings on!
Not sure on this one. The words earlier were him pasting an article in... though I can see how you thought the tone and style was similar in that in fairness! Plus emerging straight after Carrots writing...
This RC guy though has history on here back to 2015, though very in and out style.
Wycombe Wanderers chairman Trevor Stroud has reaffirmed the full support of the club and Trust boards of directors for Rob Couhig’s proposed majority shareholding in the football club.
Ahead of the meeting of Legacy Members at Adams Park on Tuesday 15th October - at which point the vote to approve Mr Couhig’s proposal will open for a period of two weeks - Mr Stroud said: “The Trust board, as previously communicated, were in discussions with a number of interested parties in the summer, and after careful consideration, voted unanimously in favour of Rob Couhig’s proposal.
“Since reaching this decision in June, we have had no further contact with the alternative parties, nor have we received any formal offers other than Rob’s, and we have had no reason to doubt that our decision was the correct one.
“Our commitment to working with Rob and his team has only been strengthened over the past three months, as a result of the dedication, integrity and expertise displayed by him and his team which we believe will guide this club towards a more prosperous future.
“Rob has demonstrated his commitment from the outset, providing funds up front and agreeing to publicly enter into a period of engagement with our supporters, which no other party was willing to do at a time when the club was facing challenging financial circumstances.
“Without Rob’s financial contribution, the club would not be in position that it is now, and we remain fully focused on securing the approval of our Legacy Members for his proposal. We will continue to honour our obligations of confidentiality to all the parties who submitted proposals.”
@TrueBlu said:
Makes me chuckle. What ever Marlow chair keeps changing his name to. You can always work out who he is. Ie today. Richard Cheese It’s just the way he writes. The grammar he uses.
Anyway. Why has he never formed his own consortium with Carrots. They are both always so opinionated on the goings on!
Not sure on this one. The words earlier were him pasting an article in... though I can see how you thought the tone and style was similar in that in fairness! Plus emerging straight after Carrots writing...
This RC guy though has history on here back to 2015, though very in and out style.
It was a simple cut and paste job of the whole article. I (genuinely) don't like carrots. I do own a couple of chairs though. But in reality, I'm a simple trust member and season ticket holder in the family stand with my 11 year old son. Sadly I have no 'insider' knowledge or anytime to post wild conspiracies.
@TrueBlu said:
Makes me chuckle. What ever Marlow chair keeps changing his name to. You can always work out who he is. Ie today. Richard Cheese It’s just the way he writes. The grammar he uses.
Anyway. Why has he never formed his own consortium with Carrots. They are both always so opinionated on the goings on!
Not sure on this one. The words earlier were him pasting an article in... though I can see how you thought the tone and style was similar in that in fairness! Plus emerging straight after Carrots writing...
This RC guy though has history on here back to 2015, though very in and out style.
It was a simple cut and paste job of the whole article. I (genuinely) don't like carrots. I do own a couple of chairs though. But in reality, I'm a simple trust member and season ticket holder in the family stand with my 11 year old son. Sadly I have no 'insider' knowledge or anytime to post wild conspiracies.
Comments
Yes. But the loans come from Felicianna EFL Limited and not Rob Couhig
@chairboyscentral I think a lot of people are concerned which is why on one hand you have people saying 'Take the ****ing money or we're ****ed' and on the other hand people saying 'Whoaaah! If we take this money we might get ****ed!'
I know Denis works for Ajax but do him and Kuyt have a successful business past to dazzle us with?
We have no idea really, the board don't seem keen to let people know when we get offers but it seems like we are up to half a dozen already, I think the fact we don't have owners wanting a massive payout helps and the level of debt isn't huge if you want to look at buying or becoming a championship club
Short term we would def struggle to pay bills and it would be a shit storm, There's surely also an argument that chasing the investment and increasing spending is adding risk
Many people are and have been concerned, some over a much longer period
Faith in the trust or the trust model?, fair to say both have taken a hiding
And money, no doubt
It won't be over, it'll be the start of a new era, hopefully a successful secure one but the risks will still be there, the work starts and we will all be asked to keep chipping in.
Hold your nerve people, no voting will happen until the deal is seen and people will need to consider if it's the best we are likely to get only on its merits.
The handling of the Bill/Jim/Harman situation
Taking a loan from prospective owners (Bill and Jim)
Securing said loan against Adams Park in a direct breach of the morals of the Charter
Taking further loans from Felicianna in advance of a takeover vote
Increasing the budget this season, with no way of paying the money back to Felicianna in the event of a No vote
Having 'no idea' what happens in the case of a No vote
My faith in the Trust went a long time ago, and yet everyone else seems happy for them to just bumble along. They might be volunteers doing they best but that doesn't excuse absolute incompetence
I think they recognised with hindsight, times over here have moved on. What works in the USA might not work over here, so some you will get right and some you will get wrong.
A big problem of the Trust, I feel, is that the board lacks diversity. Doesn't help that our fan base seems to lack diversity - not necessarily in terms of age (it probably isn't any less diverse than other clubs in that sense) but in other ways. I'd be interested to see the data on that if I can get hold of it, because I think we can do better.
Dale did a good job a couple of years back, but you're right, it could do with a younger face or two. It's much easier for those in semi or full retirement to dedicate the time needed though.
We shouldn't underestimate retaining ownership of the ground and (to an extent) keeping 25% of the club trust-owned.
There is nothing to suggest this other bid would offer this.
Apologies if this has already been said...but you can GUARANTEE they will want more involvement than being just owners...which Ainsworth won't tolerate.
As stated about the Couhig bid... So what? GA is a great manager, but he's almost certainly in his last year or two with us whatever happens
I've said it before, and I'll say it again, each of us has to judge the Couhig bid when it's revealed on its merits.
Only you, as an individual, can decide how you vote and the criteria you select from the I formation available to you.
But please, IMHO, don't vote NO only if you think there might be a better offer because maybe there isn't actually another offer. Despite what today's article might otherwise suggest.
Who wouldn't be seduced by 3 dutch and Swedish football legends (and erm Dirk Kuyt,). Especially the glamour, Netflix series, and most importantly reopening the youth system.
You do wonder what exactly stalled their bid. I dare say we'll never find out.
However, we now await the full info on the Couhig's bid.
And hope for more than
1) Loan you 2m
2) Sell you when you definitely make the championship.
True true. Was just making a point.
Apologies, didn't mean that to come across as quite so confrontational!
Spot on. The grass is very often not greener on the other side.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ... hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
https://youtu.be/JGEgRnvFzLY
Was the grass greener on the other side of Bill and Jim?
The way I see it, is the club were going to go into Admin due to cash flow issues in June / July.
At this point there were two suitors.
One had money to stop the Admin immediately (Couhig) and ensure the club survived. The other (Dutch/Swedish) did not want to inject the cash there and then.
The Trust board, could not make this public due to NDAs, having been voted in by members, they just made a decision which they thought was best for WWFC.
They've done that and Couhigs are now preferred bidder.
What I would like to be confirmed is that if we had not accepted that money, would we have been in admin, would we have had to release players and non-playing staff etc, etc. If the answer to that is "yes" then I can fully understand why this decision was made to accept money prior to a vote.
I suspect the board do not want to admit this in public, in an effort to get the best bid possible for the club etc, etc.
I really disagree with the board then sanctioning further loans/spending other than was absolutely critical for cashflow before the vote took place. Unless there was an agreement in place with Couhigs that the money is equity and not loans, regardless of the outcome of the vote. I do not believe the additional money is equity.
I want to see a plan. I do feel from the facts that are currently available the Couhigs were a better option than the ex-players.
Only time will tell...
I think Bill and Jim's grass was infected with fairy rings!
Makes me chuckle. What ever Marlow chair keeps changing his name to. You can always work out who he is. Ie today. Richard Cheese It’s just the way he writes. The grammar he uses.
Anyway. Why has he never formed his own consortium with Carrots. They are both always so opinionated on the goings on!
I think 75% could be in doubt now unfortunately , just believe a few people have had their heads turned but we will see.
Definitely means there's going to be a whole new area of questions to answer next week.
On the Gasroom, on the Facebook or out in the real world of people who just want to drink beer and watch football at AP?
I'm not convinced the 75% has ever been in doubt in this case.
At the end of the day it will be a case of voting Yes or No on the deal presented...as long as no-one sees Jan Molby, Gary Barlow and the Secret Footballer having a meeting at Beaconsfield services...
I don't see this development (essentially the Harman bid with more internationally known ex-footballers) materially affecting things. Even the timing of the 'leaking' of their overtures was almost identical.
Also, the bigger the names of the frontmen, the nastier the surprise could be about where the money's really coming from.
The Couhigs have played a PR blinder with how they have put a bridging loan in to keep the show on the road and bolster the squad, not to mention being seen to muck in with various jobs around the club, though there are big question marks about how increased playing budgets will be paid for if we were reportedly losing £700k pa with a lower playing budget. The £1m+ pa losses of the Hayes era could well be on their way back if the crowds don't flock to the family funfair atmosphere that the Couhigs are banking on bringing in crowds that we have historically not been able to sustain before.
I expect that the Legacy Members will hold up the proposals up to scrutiny, and that if we do gamble on giving a 75% stake to the Couhigs, that those so fervently in favour of their involvement are aware of the risks as well as the promised benefits.
Nicely summed up.
What on earth are you babbling on about? I posted the original article from The Athletic in two posts this morning without any personal comment. Cool story though. Keep chuckling.
Not sure on this one. The words earlier were him pasting an article in... though I can see how you thought the tone and style was similar in that in fairness! Plus emerging straight after Carrots writing...
This RC guy though has history on here back to 2015, though very in and out style.
Wycombe Wanderers chairman Trevor Stroud has reaffirmed the full support of the club and Trust boards of directors for Rob Couhig’s proposed majority shareholding in the football club.
Ahead of the meeting of Legacy Members at Adams Park on Tuesday 15th October - at which point the vote to approve Mr Couhig’s proposal will open for a period of two weeks - Mr Stroud said: “The Trust board, as previously communicated, were in discussions with a number of interested parties in the summer, and after careful consideration, voted unanimously in favour of Rob Couhig’s proposal.
“Since reaching this decision in June, we have had no further contact with the alternative parties, nor have we received any formal offers other than Rob’s, and we have had no reason to doubt that our decision was the correct one.
“Our commitment to working with Rob and his team has only been strengthened over the past three months, as a result of the dedication, integrity and expertise displayed by him and his team which we believe will guide this club towards a more prosperous future.
“Rob has demonstrated his commitment from the outset, providing funds up front and agreeing to publicly enter into a period of engagement with our supporters, which no other party was willing to do at a time when the club was facing challenging financial circumstances.
“Without Rob’s financial contribution, the club would not be in position that it is now, and we remain fully focused on securing the approval of our Legacy Members for his proposal. We will continue to honour our obligations of confidentiality to all the parties who submitted proposals.”
It was a simple cut and paste job of the whole article. I (genuinely) don't like carrots. I do own a couple of chairs though. But in reality, I'm a simple trust member and season ticket holder in the family stand with my 11 year old son. Sadly I have no 'insider' knowledge or anytime to post wild conspiracies.
I believe you. And I love a 2 account conspiracy!