Don't forget we've had a few player relatives posting on here before.
Definitely Will De Hav's brother, and we all suspect Yves relative has been on before too...
The Holloway family were regulars around the time of his departure from the club.
Err I don’t think I mentioned anything about your character, just about your posts which is very different.
And I must admit I do find it immensely amusing that you are so offended by what is essentially a light-hearted jibe at your tone yet are so vitriolic in some of your posts about Stroud and co.
And before you do go, can we have our ball back please?
@DevC the simple answer is I don’t. But it’s Wycombe. There is a long established degree of amateurism around the club (which I personally find endearing) and I would be shocked (and slightly disappointed if I’m honest) if we had suddenly become all clinical and professional in our dealings.
On the subject of outside investment I am very much in the ‘not if there is any risk to our long-term future’ but accepting that it may very well lead to trips to the likes of Bognor Regis.
However I do recognise there is a degree of selfishness to that viewpoint which is potentially condemning future generations to the ‘I remember when we played in front of 30 000 people for a LEAGUE game’ mumbling of their elders into their 1/2 litres of beer, so I will seriously consider the viability of any offers regardless of my personal view.
I do fully accept that under current and reasonably foreseeable conditions we can not sustain ourselves long-term as a league club at this level whilst we remain purely supporter owned.
@bookertease, if your criteria is “no risk to our long term future” I am afraid this proposal cannot achieve that. No proposal could. The real world isn’t like that. There is always risk. Trouble is the non-investment option (even with a drop down to Bognor level) is not risk free either. Indeed anyone who has tried to shrink a business under financial pressure will tell you it is incredibly hard to do.
Look at evidence elsewhere and that says it is far safer to be in the FL. the vast majority of FL clubs are privately owned. It’s been many years since one has gone out of business - it’s been very much touch and go for a few but all have survived.
Contrast that with non league and clubs dropping down from the league especially and there is a long list of clubs failing - even those receiving a cash injection from owners.
I am afraid I see the “retain fan ownership and drop down the leagues” option as being more risky to the long term future than private ownership but no option can be entirely risk free.
Thanks @DevC. I’ve been talking to a few York, Darlington and Stockport fans recently. Certainly ‘bad’ owners and poor management contributed to the slide of the first two, albeit I accept they’ve not gone out of business as such (although I think Darlington did for a while).
I also live in a town which has seen two extremes of private ownership, one taking it to the brink of extinction (tragi-comically) and another to the heady heights of the Championship - unthinkable a few years ago.
But you are right. No option is really risk free and how would I feel watching Wycombe play at York (for example) in a conference north league fixture in front of 600 people. That warm glow of being owned by us tempered by the ‘what ifs...’ But of course I could be watching the same game with the bitter aftertaste of us having been flogged to Marlow’s Chair Emporium and Vegetable Stand, so there’s no way of knowing what will happen.
I guess wait and see what the offer actually is, try and avoid the background noise and assess the options.
And one more point @DevC. Stop bringing the real world into the equation. Can’t we all just up sticks and move into @LX1’s world. It makes so much more sense than this one!
(That was meant to be a gentle light-heated comment until I realised it is actually true.)
Crikey, who would have thought the word "employee" could cause such consternation
Just illustrates what a polite bunch we are.
Marlow Chair - don't be disheartened by the autoresponders and yes, the ex-players association is a fine institution run by the ever-impressive John Taylor.
Their treatment by the current regime trying to ignore the past glories of the club is just insecurity after all.
I mean why would anyone in their right mind want to upset Keith Ryan, one of the club's humblest and most gifted ex-players?
Look forward to hearing Marlow Chair's contribution if and when he/she decides to do so. After all, if he/she was just talking bollocks then the club wouldn't be so anxious.
Let's hope @Marlowchair reconsiders his position. As from the outset he has been ridiculed and targeted by trolls like DevC and various club stooges. But its abundantly clear that due to the accuracy of his information its coming from a very concerned source close to the board.
I think those who are concerned about exactly what has been happening at our club appreciate Marlow Chairs information sharing.
Can I say that I too hope @marlowchair reconsiders. I believe he can and occasionally does contribute a lot to the debate and my frustration with his posts is that (for me) he loses any moral high ground by being unnecessarily personal (pot-kettle I know) and has a tendency to embellish his position with questionable facts which makes it difficult for an outsider to understand what part of what he is trying to say is actually worth listening to.
I think @ChasHarps comment about him being a "very concerned source close to the board" is probably accurate and fair and it is important to have that type of input available alongside the inevitable spin from the trust board itself.
There is a lot however that still doesn't add up to me with Marlow and there are too many contradictions for me to feel comfortable about some of his opinions and thoughts and I can't help feeling that he is pushing a slightly different agenda, although that is just a feeling.
Still think he was being a little overly-touchy yesterday though. The worst I said was that his posts came across as the rantings and ravings of an obsessive (which to me they often do) but it was a little tongue in cheek and any inference of being an 'obsessive lunatic' which he seems to have taken away from it, was actually directed (with some justification) at myself!
@ChasHarps , it is one of the oddities of social media forums that it is seemingly acceptable to throw insults in one sentence and then ask a question the next.
Not sure how to put this in different words. "its' been many years since a FL club went out of business." As far as I can remember there have been none in the last quarter century since Aldershot and Maidstone.
There have been loads of clubs leaving the league and then failing and phoenix clubs being formed - Rushden, Darlo, Stockport, Boston, Scarborough, Chester Hereford, Kiddy(?) off the top of my head (may be one or two of those just pulled through)- and loads of other nonleague clubs going the same way.
Its a cruel financial world outside the league. The idea that we can serenely slide through the leagues (even if we so chose) with no threat to survival as we pass is fantasy. We may make it through but there is a significant risk that we would not.
The status of WWFC in the future will depend on playing results, which require financial support. However, the major asset of the Trust has is the Stadium which was giving to the town by Frank Adams. The failings of many clubs has been due to the sell off of their ground. Whatever the Trust decide in the near future we must not put at risk the possibility of the Stadium falling out of control of the trust. At present there are debts outstanding on the Stadium, which if not cleared as a result of the transfer of WWFC then the Trust will not have protected the Stadium. The legacy members must be clear on this issue.
All those clubs failed because slipping out of the league into nonleague is a financial minefield. Are you seriously arguing that taking away the possibility of subsidy from owner makes the financial risk from relegation out of the league lower. Could you explain why.
If you want to play "sillybuggers" with the realities of history, 100% of fan owned clubs
slipping out of the league have subsequently gone bust within five years. a sample size of just one though.
All those clubs failed because slipping out of the league into nonleague is a financial minefield. Are you seriously arguing that taking away the possibility of subsidy from owner makes the financial risk from relegation out of the league lower. Could you explain why.
If you want to play "sillybuggers" with the realities of history, 100% of fan owned clubs
slipping out of the league have subsequently gone bust within five years. a sample size of just one though.
We must remember to ask the Americans whether they have time for the "moaning minority" in their vision for the club's future before the vote. Otherwise I'm stuffed.
@marlowchair I would ask that you don’t leave the discussion. Clearly some people on here are speaking on behalf of the people at the club who clearly want to sell, don’t get drowned in the BS.
Talking of 75% votes needed, I see that Wimbledon Park Golf Club's 750 members have voted 82.2% in favour of selling their land to the All England Lawn Tennis Club, for a reported £65 million. Members will be at least £85k better off.
When the golf club shuts down in December 2021, the tennis club will triple its land area for expansion of practice courts and better facilities.
There was an earlier article which put the golf club community in a more representative light. It was reasonably clear that not all the members could simply take their clubs to posher clubs in the area. Loyalties and friendships and history are not easily transferred from one place to another.
This passage is interesting:
"In 2015, the tennis executives tabled a £25m bid, which was rejected by 58% of members. This spring the All England upped the stakes to £50m – before making its “best and final” £65m bid."
We should be mindful that whatever financial proposals the Americans make, they are just the opening proposals. Much like Brexit, with which our proposed takeover has clear parallels, everything is negotiable. The PM has agreed a deal with the EU, says it's the best deal possible, but still has to get it agreed with the members in the House of Commons. Changes to the proposed deal may be required to achieve that, otherwise it may be end up being a no deal.
Comments
@Malone said:
The Holloway family were regulars around the time of his departure from the club.
Err I don’t think I mentioned anything about your character, just about your posts which is very different.
And I must admit I do find it immensely amusing that you are so offended by what is essentially a light-hearted jibe at your tone yet are so vitriolic in some of your posts about Stroud and co.
And before you do go, can we have our ball back please?
@DevC the simple answer is I don’t. But it’s Wycombe. There is a long established degree of amateurism around the club (which I personally find endearing) and I would be shocked (and slightly disappointed if I’m honest) if we had suddenly become all clinical and professional in our dealings.
On the subject of outside investment I am very much in the ‘not if there is any risk to our long-term future’ but accepting that it may very well lead to trips to the likes of Bognor Regis.
However I do recognise there is a degree of selfishness to that viewpoint which is potentially condemning future generations to the ‘I remember when we played in front of 30 000 people for a LEAGUE game’ mumbling of their elders into their 1/2 litres of beer, so I will seriously consider the viability of any offers regardless of my personal view.
I do fully accept that under current and reasonably foreseeable conditions we can not sustain ourselves long-term as a league club at this level whilst we remain purely supporter owned.
@bookertease, if your criteria is “no risk to our long term future” I am afraid this proposal cannot achieve that. No proposal could. The real world isn’t like that. There is always risk. Trouble is the non-investment option (even with a drop down to Bognor level) is not risk free either. Indeed anyone who has tried to shrink a business under financial pressure will tell you it is incredibly hard to do.
Look at evidence elsewhere and that says it is far safer to be in the FL. the vast majority of FL clubs are privately owned. It’s been many years since one has gone out of business - it’s been very much touch and go for a few but all have survived.
Contrast that with non league and clubs dropping down from the league especially and there is a long list of clubs failing - even those receiving a cash injection from owners.
I am afraid I see the “retain fan ownership and drop down the leagues” option as being more risky to the long term future than private ownership but no option can be entirely risk free.
Thanks @DevC. I’ve been talking to a few York, Darlington and Stockport fans recently. Certainly ‘bad’ owners and poor management contributed to the slide of the first two, albeit I accept they’ve not gone out of business as such (although I think Darlington did for a while).
I also live in a town which has seen two extremes of private ownership, one taking it to the brink of extinction (tragi-comically) and another to the heady heights of the Championship - unthinkable a few years ago.
But you are right. No option is really risk free and how would I feel watching Wycombe play at York (for example) in a conference north league fixture in front of 600 people. That warm glow of being owned by us tempered by the ‘what ifs...’ But of course I could be watching the same game with the bitter aftertaste of us having been flogged to Marlow’s Chair Emporium and Vegetable Stand, so there’s no way of knowing what will happen.
I guess wait and see what the offer actually is, try and avoid the background noise and assess the options.
And one more point @DevC. Stop bringing the real world into the equation. Can’t we all just up sticks and move into @LX1’s world. It makes so much more sense than this one!
(That was meant to be a gentle light-heated comment until I realised it is actually true.)
@DevC I have finally lost the will to live. You win.
Morning Gasroomers.
Crikey, who would have thought the word "employee" could cause such consternation
Just illustrates what a polite bunch we are.
Marlow Chair - don't be disheartened by the autoresponders and yes, the ex-players association is a fine institution run by the ever-impressive John Taylor.
Their treatment by the current regime trying to ignore the past glories of the club is just insecurity after all.
I mean why would anyone in their right mind want to upset Keith Ryan, one of the club's humblest and most gifted ex-players?
Look forward to hearing Marlow Chair's contribution if and when he/she decides to do so. After all, if he/she was just talking bollocks then the club wouldn't be so anxious.
Mr. Peter Parrot Face please review your decision accordingly and for similar reasons.
Let's hope @Marlowchair reconsiders his position. As from the outset he has been ridiculed and targeted by trolls like DevC and various club stooges. But its abundantly clear that due to the accuracy of his information its coming from a very concerned source close to the board.
I think those who are concerned about exactly what has been happening at our club appreciate Marlow Chairs information sharing.
I totally disagree, @chasharps.
Top skills, Chas.
Always astonishing to hear how many people don't want to hear what is going on.
@ Devc
Just questioning your reasoning behind you saying "it's been many years since a FL club went out of business.
Can I say that I too hope @marlowchair reconsiders. I believe he can and occasionally does contribute a lot to the debate and my frustration with his posts is that (for me) he loses any moral high ground by being unnecessarily personal (pot-kettle I know) and has a tendency to embellish his position with questionable facts which makes it difficult for an outsider to understand what part of what he is trying to say is actually worth listening to.
I think @ChasHarps comment about him being a "very concerned source close to the board" is probably accurate and fair and it is important to have that type of input available alongside the inevitable spin from the trust board itself.
There is a lot however that still doesn't add up to me with Marlow and there are too many contradictions for me to feel comfortable about some of his opinions and thoughts and I can't help feeling that he is pushing a slightly different agenda, although that is just a feeling.
Still think he was being a little overly-touchy yesterday though. The worst I said was that his posts came across as the rantings and ravings of an obsessive (which to me they often do) but it was a little tongue in cheek and any inference of being an 'obsessive lunatic' which he seems to have taken away from it, was actually directed (with some justification) at myself!
We haven't had a gasroom flounce for a while. He'll be back.
Bookertease, you have nothing to apologise for.
@ChasHarps , it is one of the oddities of social media forums that it is seemingly acceptable to throw insults in one sentence and then ask a question the next.
Not sure how to put this in different words. "its' been many years since a FL club went out of business." As far as I can remember there have been none in the last quarter century since Aldershot and Maidstone.
There have been loads of clubs leaving the league and then failing and phoenix clubs being formed - Rushden, Darlo, Stockport, Boston, Scarborough, Chester Hereford, Kiddy(?) off the top of my head (may be one or two of those just pulled through)- and loads of other nonleague clubs going the same way.
Its a cruel financial world outside the league. The idea that we can serenely slide through the leagues (even if we so chose) with no threat to survival as we pass is fantasy. We may make it through but there is a significant risk that we would not.
The status of WWFC in the future will depend on playing results, which require financial support. However, the major asset of the Trust has is the Stadium which was giving to the town by Frank Adams. The failings of many clubs has been due to the sell off of their ground. Whatever the Trust decide in the near future we must not put at risk the possibility of the Stadium falling out of control of the trust. At present there are debts outstanding on the Stadium, which if not cleared as a result of the transfer of WWFC then the Trust will not have protected the Stadium. The legacy members must be clear on this issue.
"Rushden, Darlo, Stockport, Boston, Scarborough, Chester Hereford, Kiddy"
How many of those were fan owned when they dropped out of the league? You know, off the top of your head
That wasn't the question though Eric.
All those clubs failed because slipping out of the league into nonleague is a financial minefield. Are you seriously arguing that taking away the possibility of subsidy from owner makes the financial risk from relegation out of the league lower. Could you explain why.
If you want to play "sillybuggers" with the realities of history, 100% of fan owned clubs
slipping out of the league have subsequently gone bust within five years. a sample size of just one though.
Remember the good old days:
BFP: 10th July 2009
Gasroom is 'counter productive' claims Blues' new owner
NEW Wanderers owner Steve Hayes has told the club’s full time ‘moaning minority’ that he has got no time for them in his vision for the club’s future.
I wasn't a season ticket holder then....how did that all work out?
In hindsight that quote was all a bit Kim Jong Un wasn't it?
bit touchy
We must remember to ask the Americans whether they have time for the "moaning minority" in their vision for the club's future before the vote. Otherwise I'm stuffed.
@marlowchair I would ask that you don’t leave the discussion. Clearly some people on here are speaking on behalf of the people at the club who clearly want to sell, don’t get drowned in the BS.
Well said Mr Sandwich, never give in to the troll element on here marlowchair...
Talking of 75% votes needed, I see that Wimbledon Park Golf Club's 750 members have voted 82.2% in favour of selling their land to the All England Lawn Tennis Club, for a reported £65 million. Members will be at least £85k better off.
When the golf club shuts down in December 2021, the tennis club will triple its land area for expansion of practice courts and better facilities.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/46561439
Piers Morgan getting an extra £85000, now if that doesn’t get you feeling all Christmassy nothing will
There was an earlier article which put the golf club community in a more representative light. It was reasonably clear that not all the members could simply take their clubs to posher clubs in the area. Loyalties and friendships and history are not easily transferred from one place to another.
A fellow supporter has drawn my attention to this background piece on the Wimbledon saga:
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/dec/01/amateur-golfers-taking-on-the-might-of-wimbledon-rupert-neate
This passage is interesting:
"In 2015, the tennis executives tabled a £25m bid, which was rejected by 58% of members. This spring the All England upped the stakes to £50m – before making its “best and final” £65m bid."
We should be mindful that whatever financial proposals the Americans make, they are just the opening proposals. Much like Brexit, with which our proposed takeover has clear parallels, everything is negotiable. The PM has agreed a deal with the EU, says it's the best deal possible, but still has to get it agreed with the members in the House of Commons. Changes to the proposed deal may be required to achieve that, otherwise it may be end up being a no deal.