A member of the board did put his hands up and said they May have acted in nievity and could have done it another way, but hey, it is what it is, we are where we are, so maybe let’s get this vote done and not let it not cloud your judgement. The night of the presentation is not the time for mud slinging, maybe call another meeting before or after this date. But don’t make your self or the club look stupid on the night of the meeting, please
Well said @TrueBlu (twice), I'm sure that you haven't been trying @bookertease's 'common sense' Merlot at this time of day so your comments must just be plain old common sense. Thank you.
I’m not sure what input you require at this stage. The Americans came over to introduce themselves to Legacy members in November and answered every question that was put to them. They couldn’t go into fine detail because their proposal hadn’t been finalised at that stage. They will be here again at the end of the month and we’ll hear a lot more detail then.
You say ‘people would love to judge the American proposal when/if it turns up’ but that is exactly why this January meeting has been arranged.
Haven't you said all that stuff before @marlowchair?
It worries me how certain some people seem to be without knowing any of the deal.
It worries me how some of the mud thrown at Stroud has stuck despite no real evidence.
It worries me that this vote will be determined by those who don't vote rather than those that do.
@mooneyman said:
You could argue that Stroud and Beeks have been very clever (albeit underhand) to steer the club in to a position where we all have no option but to vote for the takeover.
Unless someone comes along with a spare £500k by around the beginning of November we won't be able to repay the loan so the Americans will be able to take possession of Adams Park.
I just hope that Stroud has no active role in the running of the club post the takeover.
Personally I thing we would be better off taking our chances on finding an alternative lender to pay off the loan from these guys by November rather than simply throwing in the towell and capitulating to these guys. Having seen this kind of thing happen in the business world before now I suspect that their strategy is to get the club into even more debt after they take over so that it will make it even more difficult to pay off the loans by their repayment date. This would then make it inevitable that Adams Park would fall into their hands and be sold probably for > @mooneyman said:
Do you anyone with a spare £500k to give us?
Well as it happens Yes, I do know someone who is a lifelong supporter of The Chairboys who did offer to lend the Club a very large sum of money from the sale of a property, on very favourable terms to the Club, to help pay off the American's loan, but as I understand it, his offer was turned down. I think that more or less says it all as far as the intentions of the Club is concerned.
However, if it comes to a crunch and the Club can't borrow money from the banks and finance houses because of it's historically poor credit rating emanating from the Steve Hayes era, there are many other more modern ways to raise money these days. I have long been disappointed that the Club won't introduce a proper share scheme so that all fans (and maybe others too) can invest in the club. Alternatively, the Club could consider some form of Crowdfunding or Seedfunding to raise money to pay off the American guys loan. What I think we need is a bit of lateral thinking and someone at board level with some fresh ideas on the financing front.
@glasshalffull said:
I’m not sure what input you require at this stage. The Americans came over to introduce themselves to Legacy members in November and answered every question that was put to them. They couldn’t go into fine detail because their proposal hadn’t been finalised at that stage. They will be here again at the end of the month and we’ll hear a lot more detail then.
You say ‘people would love to judge the American proposal when/if it turns up’ but that is exactly why this January meeting has been arranged.
I think it would be in Trevor, the board, and the Americans favour if they would have tackled head on some of the inuendo and genuine concerns around intent and process in order for people to get on with the actual proposal, I'm sure that's what the statement is for but i fear it doesn't go far enough. Also I hope people are given enough time and notice to be able to scrutinize the proposal , raise concerns and suggest amendments but this seems unlikely.
@mooneyman said:
You could argue that Stroud and Beeks have been very clever (albeit underhand) to steer the club in to a position where we all have no option but to vote for the takeover.
Unless someone comes along with a spare £500k by around the beginning of November we won't be able to repay the loan so the Americans will be able to take possession of Adams Park.
I just hope that Stroud has no active role in the running of the club post the takeover.
Personally I thing we would be better off taking our chances on finding an alternative lender to pay off the loan from these guys by November rather than simply throwing in the towel and capitulating to these guys. Having seen this kind of thing happen in the business world before now I suspect that their strategy is to get the club into even more debt after they take over, so that it will make it even more difficult to pay off the loans by their repayment date. This would then make it inevitable that Adams Park would fall into their hands, and the stadium and surrounding land sold off probably for property re-development at a tidy profit. Is that what you'd really like to see?
You have absolutely no evidence that the Americans motives for wanting to invest are what you describe.
Their time at Derby County suggests the complete opposite. You then leap to the conclusion that they would sell Adams Park for property re-development despite historic proof that getting planning permission for this would be, at best, extremely difficult if not near impossible to achieve.
I'm merely pointing out real and tangible potential risks and possible "worse case" scenarios - it's the kind of work I've been doing professionally in The City for the last 35 years, so I know what I'm talking about. The only time we're likely to see any evidence of these guy's motivation is after it's happened. It's my understanding that these guys pulled out of Derby County when they didn't get what they wanted, so what more evidence do you need that they're not "investing" for the longer term and could possibly pull the plug if things don't go their way.
It sure is a relief that probably, all being well, that near over 90% of Facebook ww supporters are in favour unlike the Gasroomers with what appears like a big fat NO. But knowing how fickle the British public are they’ll say yes. At least with the fb voice I’m feeling more confident about it all
After having a quick look through the Facebook group, the reasons given for having made their mind up were typically, to paraphrase - "It's a no brainer", "it's progress", "we need money". If that's the level of thought that's gone into deciding that they would vote for a proposal with next to no details as to the amount of investment is proposed, then I wouldn't say that it would fill me with confidence.
The close scrutiny of the offer as it stands, as well the worrying development that we have taken out a loan with the prospective owners before they have formally taken a stake in the club and the controversy over a potential breach of WWT rule 102 is all part of having a club owned and run by supporters. Just apathetically waving things like this through with barely a second thought would far more dangerous for the future of the club.
I look forward to what the meeting on the 28th brings, by the sounds of it there are a lot of details that need to be filled in before any judgement can be made. In the absence of these, the only sensible position to take is to be inclined to turn down the deal until it is proven to be the right thing for the club.
Welcome back @marlowchair. And apologies too as I didn’t mean to upset you with my (mostly) tongue-in-cheek comments.
My issue with a lot of your posts was not their veracity more that they contained (as I read them) too much personal animosity that detracted from what you were saying.
But we are where we are and unless Trevor Stroud resigns as you wish nothing really changes and we need to seriously look at the actual offer on the table and judge whether it is in the best interests of our club in the short AND long term.
@DefactoFan “working professionally in the City for 30 years” is probably not a sensible thing to say if you want people to listen to your point of view...
You really have to feel for @marlowchair, who has spent several months trying to warn us of what’s going on, only to be dismissed as a bitter conspiracy theorist.
I'm merely pointing out real and tangible potential risks and possible "worse case" scenarios - it's the kind of work I've been doing professionally in The City for the last 35 years, so I know what I'm talking about. The only time we're likely to see any evidence of these guy's motivation is after it's happened. It's my understanding that these guys pulled out of Derby County when they didn't get what they wanted, so what more evidence do you need that they're not "investing" for the longer term and could possibly pull the plug if things don't go their way.
I don’t know what you’re ‘understanding’ is based upon, but I have been told by the person who was in the most senior position at Derby County during the Americans’ tenure there that they were ‘great guys and really good operators’ which totally contradicts your interpretation of their motives. I’m astonished that a professional in this field could make the statement ‘What more evidence do you need that they’re not investing for the longer term etc’ based merely upon hearsay.
@bookertease said: @DefactoFan “working professionally in the City for 30 years” is probably not a sensible thing to say if you want people to listen to your point of view...
(cf British History 2008 to 2018)
The financial crisis of 2008 happened largely as a consequence of company Boards ignoring the risks that people like myself and others in internal audit and financial regulation fields were bringing to their attention.
Well all this has me scratching my head. The Americans I remember them saying were in it for a bit of fun after they are quizzed on why on earth would they want to invest in a club that is losing money significantly. Then, to add to their fun, they loan us £500,000 as I understand, but ensure that they can never really be miserable when a charge is placed on Adams Park. Not so funny now. Thinking further ahead, when we need another £500,000 next year, they loan us that amount all for a bit of fun. Am I being daft or could we end up with the Americans, if elected,
not seeing the funny side, pulling out of WWFC, and demanding the return of their fun money and us having to sell the stadium to service this debt. Or am I being a little paranoid....
I would like to make a suggestion of a way forward here.
Those of you with a vote will largely converge today at a football ground on the outskirts of a small Bucks town for (hopefully) an entertaining afternoons leisure. You, however you are currently minded to vote, no doubt hope that you and future generations will be able to enjoy similar afternoons long into the future. This is not some minor vote with limited consequences, it may very well determine the likelihood of those future afternoons being possible (whatever the best outcome is). look around you as you walk in, reflect a little, resolve, if you will, to do all you can to cast aside how you would like the world to be and cast your vote based on actual realities as you see them. Your vote may be the one that makes the difference.
social media can be a fun, irreverent place and a place where useful information can be shared and opinions exchanged. we all spend too much time here, so we must enjoy it. It can also be a deeply negative place of conspiracy theories, hidden agendas, character assassinations, lies and manipulation by "one eyed men" of the "blind". Lies and half truths can and often do become accepted social media reality. Be careful not to accept too easily the lies of those with other agendas on all sides of the argument over the next few weeks.
In a couple of weeks, perhaps less, we will have one plausible positive alternative for how the club could move forward. It will no doubt be flawed - all man-made propositions are - there will be uncertainties and risks - all things relating to the future always do - but for all its limitations there will be a positive option.
so the next couple of weeks is the time for alternative positive options to break cover and reveal themselves. If Mr. Harman and his mates genuinely have a positive alternative, let us hear what it is (lets nail the lie that Non Disclosure Agreements prevent him doing so). It may be compelling - in which case lets know about it - it may have similar flaws, uncertainties and risks but at least let us understand it - it may not exist at all. If it does not break cover and remains simply a social media rumour, I think we have to assume the latter for the purpose of the vote.
Those who believe passionately that fan ownership is the best option going forward should similarly state that positive option. How would they finance the club, what would the likely implications be, why is that better. Perhaps that is the best option for the club. lets hear the positive reasons why.
Perhaps there are other positive options. Lets hear what they are and the evidence for them.
This is a huge decision that surely needs to be made based on an assessment of realistic options rather than in an avalanche of character assassination and lies. lets hope it is made in that way.
Finally a suggestion to the Trust board. Communication in my view has been poor and given mistrust and fear an opportunity to flourish. I would suggest a weekly update published every friday between now and the end of the vote process. If there is nothing much to say, fine, tell everyone there is nothing much to say.
Enjoy the game folks. I (as I am sure someone will no doubt point out) will not be there but hope to get along next week dodging horse punchers on the way.......
Extraordinary how one individual (I assume) instantly and without fail gives @DevC the thumbs down. Whether I agree or not with any of his comments I always find they give food for thought and I cannot say that about too many postings.
I'll bite, in my opinion only Dev raises some good points in his overly long post that also rehashes many older and poorer points and borderline suggests dissenters are dishonest or dim. He does this regularly wether by accident or on purpose. It's perfectly reasonable that some people would dislike that post. I'm sure some people will dislike this one. I'm not sure this is a problem and don't really see why people need to rally and declare every criticism of a post or the club as abuse.
Whilst some people are overly negative towards the trust and the Americans there's plenty that just see the $ signs and think the Messiah is here.
I was about to post something about a lack of analysis of the situation from the Facebook group. But then I saw Dev’s latest essay.
Jesus.
It surprises me that many people are utterly unable to learn the lessons of the past. It’s even more incredible that they can’t learn from the recent history OF THEIR OWN CLUB!
I’m an undecided legacy member, but vagueness and chicanery remind me of the Hayes era, so the fun Americans have got their work cut out to get my vote.
I respect your opinion but why associate the Americans or any other bidders with mistakes that you feel might have been made in the past? On that basis is it right to assume that you would not entertain the idea of any new investors?
The way the club has handled this is cack-handed in my opinion but I am waiting to see the detail. There is nothing wrong with detailed discussion even if the lack of information ends up with some people dazzled by white teeth and cash and other people seeing Lucifer under every bed. Fan forums are full of abuse and complaints about abuse across the board as far as I can see and they all have their devs Richie's and marlowchairs. As we see nationally sometimes a vote brings out the worst in everyone! Here's to kicking Doncaster off the park!!
This debate covers all manner of thoughts , but at the end of the day the situation can be summed up as this. WWFC needs money to continue at its current level. The Trust board appear to have found a likely saviour, but will have to give up ownership of the Football Club. As a legacy member I do not see this as a problem. However, I do see a major problem with the current mortgage on Adams Park. If we hear on the 28th that within the agreement all outstanding charges on FALL will be cleared and that the Trust are no longer in Debt to WWFC I for one will certainly vote YES. The Trust Board have not provided the safeguard which the members understood was a fundamental issue. Namely the Legacy of Frank Adams . This should never be lost by the Trust.
Comments
A member of the board did put his hands up and said they May have acted in nievity and could have done it another way, but hey, it is what it is, we are where we are, so maybe let’s get this vote done and not let it not cloud your judgement. The night of the presentation is not the time for mud slinging, maybe call another meeting before or after this date. But don’t make your self or the club look stupid on the night of the meeting, please
Well said @TrueBlu (twice), I'm sure that you haven't been trying @bookertease's 'common sense' Merlot at this time of day so your comments must just be plain old common sense. Thank you.
I’m not sure what input you require at this stage. The Americans came over to introduce themselves to Legacy members in November and answered every question that was put to them. They couldn’t go into fine detail because their proposal hadn’t been finalised at that stage. They will be here again at the end of the month and we’ll hear a lot more detail then.
You say ‘people would love to judge the American proposal when/if it turns up’ but that is exactly why this January meeting has been arranged.
Haven't you said all that stuff before @marlowchair?
It worries me how certain some people seem to be without knowing any of the deal.
It worries me how some of the mud thrown at Stroud has stuck despite no real evidence.
It worries me that this vote will be determined by those who don't vote rather than those that do.
Personally I thing we would be better off taking our chances on finding an alternative lender to pay off the loan from these guys by November rather than simply throwing in the towell and capitulating to these guys. Having seen this kind of thing happen in the business world before now I suspect that their strategy is to get the club into even more debt after they take over so that it will make it even more difficult to pay off the loans by their repayment date. This would then make it inevitable that Adams Park would fall into their hands and be sold probably for > @mooneyman said:
Well as it happens Yes, I do know someone who is a lifelong supporter of The Chairboys who did offer to lend the Club a very large sum of money from the sale of a property, on very favourable terms to the Club, to help pay off the American's loan, but as I understand it, his offer was turned down. I think that more or less says it all as far as the intentions of the Club is concerned.
However, if it comes to a crunch and the Club can't borrow money from the banks and finance houses because of it's historically poor credit rating emanating from the Steve Hayes era, there are many other more modern ways to raise money these days. I have long been disappointed that the Club won't introduce a proper share scheme so that all fans (and maybe others too) can invest in the club. Alternatively, the Club could consider some form of Crowdfunding or Seedfunding to raise money to pay off the American guys loan. What I think we need is a bit of lateral thinking and someone at board level with some fresh ideas on the financing front.
I think it would be in Trevor, the board, and the Americans favour if they would have tackled head on some of the inuendo and genuine concerns around intent and process in order for people to get on with the actual proposal, I'm sure that's what the statement is for but i fear it doesn't go far enough. Also I hope people are given enough time and notice to be able to scrutinize the proposal , raise concerns and suggest amendments but this seems unlikely.
I'm merely pointing out real and tangible potential risks and possible "worse case" scenarios - it's the kind of work I've been doing professionally in The City for the last 35 years, so I know what I'm talking about. The only time we're likely to see any evidence of these guy's motivation is after it's happened. It's my understanding that these guys pulled out of Derby County when they didn't get what they wanted, so what more evidence do you need that they're not "investing" for the longer term and could possibly pull the plug if things don't go their way.
It sure is a relief that probably, all being well, that near over 90% of Facebook ww supporters are in favour unlike the Gasroomers with what appears like a big fat NO. But knowing how fickle the British public are they’ll say yes. At least with the fb voice I’m feeling more confident about it all
After having a quick look through the Facebook group, the reasons given for having made their mind up were typically, to paraphrase - "It's a no brainer", "it's progress", "we need money". If that's the level of thought that's gone into deciding that they would vote for a proposal with next to no details as to the amount of investment is proposed, then I wouldn't say that it would fill me with confidence.
The close scrutiny of the offer as it stands, as well the worrying development that we have taken out a loan with the prospective owners before they have formally taken a stake in the club and the controversy over a potential breach of WWT rule 102 is all part of having a club owned and run by supporters. Just apathetically waving things like this through with barely a second thought would far more dangerous for the future of the club.
I look forward to what the meeting on the 28th brings, by the sounds of it there are a lot of details that need to be filled in before any judgement can be made. In the absence of these, the only sensible position to take is to be inclined to turn down the deal until it is proven to be the right thing for the club.
Welcome back @marlowchair. And apologies too as I didn’t mean to upset you with my (mostly) tongue-in-cheek comments.
My issue with a lot of your posts was not their veracity more that they contained (as I read them) too much personal animosity that detracted from what you were saying.
But we are where we are and unless Trevor Stroud resigns as you wish nothing really changes and we need to seriously look at the actual offer on the table and judge whether it is in the best interests of our club in the short AND long term.
@DefactoFan “working professionally in the City for 30 years” is probably not a sensible thing to say if you want people to listen to your point of view...
(cf British History 2008 to 2018)
You really have to feel for @marlowchair, who has spent several months trying to warn us of what’s going on, only to be dismissed as a bitter conspiracy theorist.
I don’t know what you’re ‘understanding’ is based upon, but I have been told by the person who was in the most senior position at Derby County during the Americans’ tenure there that they were ‘great guys and really good operators’ which totally contradicts your interpretation of their motives. I’m astonished that a professional in this field could make the statement ‘What more evidence do you need that they’re not investing for the longer term etc’ based merely upon hearsay.
The financial crisis of 2008 happened largely as a consequence of company Boards ignoring the risks that people like myself and others in internal audit and financial regulation fields were bringing to their attention.
Well all this has me scratching my head. The Americans I remember them saying were in it for a bit of fun after they are quizzed on why on earth would they want to invest in a club that is losing money significantly. Then, to add to their fun, they loan us £500,000 as I understand, but ensure that they can never really be miserable when a charge is placed on Adams Park. Not so funny now. Thinking further ahead, when we need another £500,000 next year, they loan us that amount all for a bit of fun. Am I being daft or could we end up with the Americans, if elected,
not seeing the funny side, pulling out of WWFC, and demanding the return of their fun money and us having to sell the stadium to service this debt. Or am I being a little paranoid....
I was joking @DefactoFan
I would like to make a suggestion of a way forward here.
Those of you with a vote will largely converge today at a football ground on the outskirts of a small Bucks town for (hopefully) an entertaining afternoons leisure. You, however you are currently minded to vote, no doubt hope that you and future generations will be able to enjoy similar afternoons long into the future. This is not some minor vote with limited consequences, it may very well determine the likelihood of those future afternoons being possible (whatever the best outcome is). look around you as you walk in, reflect a little, resolve, if you will, to do all you can to cast aside how you would like the world to be and cast your vote based on actual realities as you see them. Your vote may be the one that makes the difference.
social media can be a fun, irreverent place and a place where useful information can be shared and opinions exchanged. we all spend too much time here, so we must enjoy it. It can also be a deeply negative place of conspiracy theories, hidden agendas, character assassinations, lies and manipulation by "one eyed men" of the "blind". Lies and half truths can and often do become accepted social media reality. Be careful not to accept too easily the lies of those with other agendas on all sides of the argument over the next few weeks.
In a couple of weeks, perhaps less, we will have one plausible positive alternative for how the club could move forward. It will no doubt be flawed - all man-made propositions are - there will be uncertainties and risks - all things relating to the future always do - but for all its limitations there will be a positive option.
so the next couple of weeks is the time for alternative positive options to break cover and reveal themselves. If Mr. Harman and his mates genuinely have a positive alternative, let us hear what it is (lets nail the lie that Non Disclosure Agreements prevent him doing so). It may be compelling - in which case lets know about it - it may have similar flaws, uncertainties and risks but at least let us understand it - it may not exist at all. If it does not break cover and remains simply a social media rumour, I think we have to assume the latter for the purpose of the vote.
Those who believe passionately that fan ownership is the best option going forward should similarly state that positive option. How would they finance the club, what would the likely implications be, why is that better. Perhaps that is the best option for the club. lets hear the positive reasons why.
Perhaps there are other positive options. Lets hear what they are and the evidence for them.
This is a huge decision that surely needs to be made based on an assessment of realistic options rather than in an avalanche of character assassination and lies. lets hope it is made in that way.
Finally a suggestion to the Trust board. Communication in my view has been poor and given mistrust and fear an opportunity to flourish. I would suggest a weekly update published every friday between now and the end of the vote process. If there is nothing much to say, fine, tell everyone there is nothing much to say.
Enjoy the game folks. I (as I am sure someone will no doubt point out) will not be there but hope to get along next week dodging horse punchers on the way.......
Extraordinary how one individual (I assume) instantly and without fail gives @DevC the thumbs down. Whether I agree or not with any of his comments I always find they give food for thought and I cannot say that about too many postings.
Micra is spot on as usual and (cue abuse) DevC makes some excellent points.
strewth. Just ... strewth.
@TrueBlu, surely any responsible member will wait to see the proposal before making their mind up.
You’re right Steve but I can think of at least 3 or 4 posters who have clearly already made their minds up.
???
I'll bite, in my opinion only Dev raises some good points in his overly long post that also rehashes many older and poorer points and borderline suggests dissenters are dishonest or dim. He does this regularly wether by accident or on purpose. It's perfectly reasonable that some people would dislike that post. I'm sure some people will dislike this one. I'm not sure this is a problem and don't really see why people need to rally and declare every criticism of a post or the club as abuse.
Whilst some people are overly negative towards the trust and the Americans there's plenty that just see the $ signs and think the Messiah is here.
I was about to post something about a lack of analysis of the situation from the Facebook group. But then I saw Dev’s latest essay.
Jesus.
It surprises me that many people are utterly unable to learn the lessons of the past. It’s even more incredible that they can’t learn from the recent history OF THEIR OWN CLUB!
I’m an undecided legacy member, but vagueness and chicanery remind me of the Hayes era, so the fun Americans have got their work cut out to get my vote.
I respect your opinion but why associate the Americans or any other bidders with mistakes that you feel might have been made in the past? On that basis is it right to assume that you would not entertain the idea of any new investors?
The way the club has handled this is cack-handed in my opinion but I am waiting to see the detail. There is nothing wrong with detailed discussion even if the lack of information ends up with some people dazzled by white teeth and cash and other people seeing Lucifer under every bed. Fan forums are full of abuse and complaints about abuse across the board as far as I can see and they all have their devs Richie's and marlowchairs. As we see nationally sometimes a vote brings out the worst in everyone! Here's to kicking Doncaster off the park!!
@micra , looks like he's on a -6 now!
This debate covers all manner of thoughts , but at the end of the day the situation can be summed up as this. WWFC needs money to continue at its current level. The Trust board appear to have found a likely saviour, but will have to give up ownership of the Football Club. As a legacy member I do not see this as a problem. However, I do see a major problem with the current mortgage on Adams Park. If we hear on the 28th that within the agreement all outstanding charges on FALL will be cleared and that the Trust are no longer in Debt to WWFC I for one will certainly vote YES. The Trust Board have not provided the safeguard which the members understood was a fundamental issue. Namely the Legacy of Frank Adams . This should never be lost by the Trust.
@arnos_grove , what's that phrase about those who don't learn from history are going to repeat the mistakes?
Not normally within a decade though!