Can I request that people wait to hear the facts before rushing to their keyboards to give credence to social media rumours? If Trust/Legacy members check their emails tonight they will see an explanation from Trevor Stroud of the current situation.
Err @DevC Please would you list those on here whom are Mr Harmans' mates that are in league with him to spread lies and half truths. I would value what statements in your opinion fall in to those categories as well.
I hold my hands up @EwanHoosaami. My wife’s cousin went out with Andy Harman 30-odd years ago. Despite having never met him, I think that classifies me as an extremely close confidant of his who is not to be trusted.
Converting loans to equity...I have had a career so far removed from business so I am in the dark. What does that actually mean as far as the Americans and the stadium/club is concerned. Dev C can you help me out here!!!
@BuckinghamBlue said:
I’m so relieved the club took out the loan and not the trust so no rules broken, just a minute
I think the primary cocern about the loan was not was a rule broken but what happens if the US bid isn’t accepted. Unless I’ve missed it we have no definitive answer as to whether the charge on the ground means the bidders can force a sale or only get their money back if the ground is sold at some point in the future. Had the letter tonight clarified that I would have found it more helpful. I hope this will be raised at the meeting or answered in the bid details we are due to receive this week.
@EwanHoosaami said:
Err @DevC Please would you list those on here whom are Mr Harmans' mates that are in league with him to spread lies and half truths. I would value what statements in your opinion fall in to those categories as well.
I asked him that but he chose to ignore me. Par for the course when he can't back up his accusations I'm afraid.
@EwanHoosaami said:
Err @DevC Please would you list those on here whom are Mr Harmans' mates that are in league with him to spread lies and half truths. I would value what statements in your opinion fall in to those categories as well.
I asked him that but he chose to ignore me. Par for the course when he can't back up his accusations I'm afraid.
Well, I am sure @DevC will turn up at either/both meetings and he can tell me to my face.
BTW, I am happy to wear my alias in badge format. As I have nothing to hide it doesn't worry me. I am quite approachable and have let it known on here in the past who I am. I often turn up on match days on a white motorbike, which I park underneath the fire escape opposite Lindys burger van if anyone wants to say hello?
@TrueBlu said:
On Wednesday could you all come with your Ailas’s in the Gasroom on a name badge pls. Just so I can put a face to a name. I think that would be fun!
I’m going to give Andy Harman a proper bear hug, so I can subtly slap a sticker on his lapel that says GASROOM @TREVOR. That said, I can only think of one person who has ever posted on here telling us of his affluent / entrepreneur lifestyle. Aggressive when questioned, not keen on the current regime. Could Andy Harman be the force behind @Wwfc2015_ ?
@MBS , to answer your question, WWFC currently owe Luby some money. If WWFC fail to repay it, there is an agreement that FALL have to. We don’t know the amount but let’s say it is £400k.
In a debt equity swap, WWFC issue shares to Luby. Luby pays WWFC for the shares, WWFC use the cash to repay the loan to Luby.
As a result there is no debt, so nothing that needs some security so the charge on the stadium is got rid of.
That is the general concept. For the detail obviously we need to see the proposal in this case.
@EwanHoosaami , in answer to your question , and I obviously apologise for not being here to answer your question instantly, are Marlow, Carrots and the gentleman who lied early today (see above). I am not including you in the list of those who have IMHO issued vicious personal abuse along with deliberate lies and half truths, designed to exploit the fears and mislead those whose working lives have not been in corporate finance.
In that situation @mooneyman, then obviously the club has a debt to pay resulting from having higher outgoings than income. That wasn’t the question MBS asked.
@DevC said:
In that situation @mooneyman, then obviously the club has a debt to pay resulting from having higher outgoings than income. That wasn’t the question MBS asked.
And to the best of your knowledge could the American creditors force an immediate repayment?
Let’s not forget there 500k against the stadia only represents 5% of the value of it. So were we not able to pay surely they’d end up with 5% ownership of it. Not that they could really do much with that.
Do correct me if I’m wrong.
I’m really not to fussed about this loan charge as the club have actually made 2 payments already so only 10 to go!
That depends entirely on the loan agreement @Manboobs. None of us have seen that as far as I know and the legalese in the charge is hard to decipher.
Legal rights and what is done in practise are often very different anyway. Luby has built up a good reputation for investing in sports teams. Hard to see him jeapodisong that for a relatively small (to him) debt. Just my view though.
@DevC, I may not know a great deal, but I know for sure that you clog up this message board like no other. You consistently slag off @marlowchair and @NiceCarrots but offer no insight, no originally, no flow.
@Wendoverman except IF I can't/don't pay my mortgage I do have the option of selling my house to whoever I want and using the proceeds to pay off my mortgage. As I said before it's a subtle distinction but an important one.
Without knowing/understanding the terms of the charge on Adams Park it's not possible to say what would happen if we can't/don't pay the debt to the Americans.
However, I wouldn't want a situation where we were forced into selling Adams Park. Sadly this seems to be the situation we might be in if we don't vote for the Americans (because we don't have the money to pay the debt). And I want the situation clearly spelt out by the Trust at the forthcoming meeting.
@DevC said: @EwanHoosaami , in answer to your question , and I obviously apologise for not being here to answer your question instantly, are Marlow, Carrots and the gentleman who lied early today (see above). I am not including you in the list of those who have IMHO issued vicious personal abuse along with deliberate lies and half truths, designed to exploit the fears and mislead those whose working lives have not been in corporate finance.
What lies have Marlow & Carrots told, I have no knowledge of any?? I can only assume that they, (rightly IMHO), had knowledge of the loan agreement that involved a charge on AP. So deep was there concern they, without giving direct information on the matter, (possibly because of NDA?), felt obliged to express on the gasroom, their displeasure about the machinations of the trust board. Since it was discovered that a charge on Adams Park had been administered, many fans, some being legacy members are quite rightly pissed off. Now many have serious doubts about the "secretive nature" of the trust. Trevor Strouds' letter saying we haven't broken our own rule 102 just , to me, stinks of an Alistair Campbell spin. Maybe they haven't, strictly speaking, but like many on here, we had presumed that by its separation from WWFC, AP was untouchable & the trust have found a way to circumnavigate the rules, without consultation. So I for one fully understand why Marlow and Carrots took the route they did but I'm not aware of any lies, so please enlighten. I wouldn't know either of them if they jumped up and down on my privates, so wouldn't know if they were speaking on behalf of Andy Harman but it never struck me that they were, maybe I'm naive on this one?
Happy for you to prove me wrong/educate me DevC.
Even I’m struggling to defend some of your suppositions here @DevC. Whilst I agree that some posters here have been excessively personal against certain individuals on the Trust Board (and elsewhere) and a tad deferential to the Andrew Harmans of this world that doesn’t automatically mean that they are being cheerleaders for the latter as you seem to imply.
Just read back through the tortuous history of these threads @EwanHoosaami .
@bookertease , I have been struck by how many of these posters seem to be aware of Hartman’s innermost thoughts and plans long before they are announced despite apparently having never met or spoken to him. It all doesn’t ring true to me.
But it is what it is I suppose. I mentioned long ago the parallels to Brexit and I see others have mentioned it too. Our friends have launched a apparently highly effective campaign to turn our elected trust board from an extension of us into an elite working against our interests for their own ill defined personal agenda, not helped it has to be said by the Trust falling into the welltrodden trap of forgetting to communicate when things get busy and controversial just at the time when they should be communicating most.
We now come to the denouement. Shortly those with a vote will have a choice between a detailed offer , with all the real world flaws and compromises that entails and a less defined outline proposal which I suspect will have all sorts of aspirations towards training grounds and youth academies and very possibly £350m a week extra for the NHS.all fronted by an ex player instead of a nasty foreigner.
It will be a choice between head and heart and we saw in 2016 what tends to win out there. I suspect the gasroom electorate at least is minded to choose similarly. Let’s hope the outcome is not the same chaos and damage to the club that Brexit has caused the country. At the end of the day all of us just want the best for the football club we support.
Comments
Well said And let us resolve to ensure that no-one be insufferably patronising unto others upon this forum.
Can I request that people wait to hear the facts before rushing to their keyboards to give credence to social media rumours? If Trust/Legacy members check their emails tonight they will see an explanation from Trevor Stroud of the current situation.
I’m so relieved the club took out the loan and not the trust so no rules broken, just a minute
Err @DevC Please would you list those on here whom are Mr Harmans' mates that are in league with him to spread lies and half truths. I would value what statements in your opinion fall in to those categories as well.
I hold my hands up @EwanHoosaami. My wife’s cousin went out with Andy Harman 30-odd years ago. Despite having never met him, I think that classifies me as an extremely close confidant of his who is not to be trusted.
Dev will be mortified to hear I have a vote too.
Worrying times!
Converting loans to equity...I have had a career so far removed from business so I am in the dark. What does that actually mean as far as the Americans and the stadium/club is concerned. Dev C can you help me out here!!!
I think the primary cocern about the loan was not was a rule broken but what happens if the US bid isn’t accepted. Unless I’ve missed it we have no definitive answer as to whether the charge on the ground means the bidders can force a sale or only get their money back if the ground is sold at some point in the future. Had the letter tonight clarified that I would have found it more helpful. I hope this will be raised at the meeting or answered in the bid details we are due to receive this week.
Dev's doing it again!
On Wednesday could you all come with your Ailas’s in the Gasroom on a name badge pls. Just so I can put a face to a name. I think that would be fun!
I asked him that but he chose to ignore me. Par for the course when he can't back up his accusations I'm afraid.
WW investment chat from the BBC3CR Monday Night Sports Show earlier this evening.
Scroll to 33:30: https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p06w837m
Well, I am sure @DevC will turn up at either/both meetings and he can tell me to my face.
BTW, I am happy to wear my alias in badge format. As I have nothing to hide it doesn't worry me. I am quite approachable and have let it known on here in the past who I am. I often turn up on match days on a white motorbike, which I park underneath the fire escape opposite Lindys burger van if anyone wants to say hello?
I’m going to give Andy Harman a proper bear hug, so I can subtly slap a sticker on his lapel that says GASROOM @TREVOR. That said, I can only think of one person who has ever posted on here telling us of his affluent / entrepreneur lifestyle. Aggressive when questioned, not keen on the current regime. Could Andy Harman be the force behind @Wwfc2015_ ?
@MBS , to answer your question, WWFC currently owe Luby some money. If WWFC fail to repay it, there is an agreement that FALL have to. We don’t know the amount but let’s say it is £400k.
In a debt equity swap, WWFC issue shares to Luby. Luby pays WWFC for the shares, WWFC use the cash to repay the loan to Luby.
As a result there is no debt, so nothing that needs some security so the charge on the stadium is got rid of.
That is the general concept. For the detail obviously we need to see the proposal in this case.
@EwanHoosaami , in answer to your question , and I obviously apologise for not being here to answer your question instantly, are Marlow, Carrots and the gentleman who lied early today (see above). I am not including you in the list of those who have IMHO issued vicious personal abuse along with deliberate lies and half truths, designed to exploit the fears and mislead those whose working lives have not been in corporate finance.
But what happens if the takeover isn't approved Dev?
In that situation @mooneyman, then obviously the club has a debt to pay resulting from having higher outgoings than income. That wasn’t the question MBS asked.
And to the best of your knowledge could the American creditors force an immediate repayment?
Let’s not forget there 500k against the stadia only represents 5% of the value of it. So were we not able to pay surely they’d end up with 5% ownership of it. Not that they could really do much with that.
Do correct me if I’m wrong.
I’m really not to fussed about this loan charge as the club have actually made 2 payments already so only 10 to go!
"vicious personal abuse"??
Have some posts been deleted?
That depends entirely on the loan agreement @Manboobs. None of us have seen that as far as I know and the legalese in the charge is hard to decipher.
Legal rights and what is done in practise are often very different anyway. Luby has built up a good reputation for investing in sports teams. Hard to see him jeapodisong that for a relatively small (to him) debt. Just my view though.
@DevC, I may not know a great deal, but I know for sure that you clog up this message board like no other. You consistently slag off @marlowchair and @NiceCarrots but offer no insight, no originally, no flow.
Give it a rest, you absolute melt.
@Wendoverman except IF I can't/don't pay my mortgage I do have the option of selling my house to whoever I want and using the proceeds to pay off my mortgage. As I said before it's a subtle distinction but an important one.
Without knowing/understanding the terms of the charge on Adams Park it's not possible to say what would happen if we can't/don't pay the debt to the Americans.
However, I wouldn't want a situation where we were forced into selling Adams Park. Sadly this seems to be the situation we might be in if we don't vote for the Americans (because we don't have the money to pay the debt). And I want the situation clearly spelt out by the Trust at the forthcoming meeting.
@DevC I honestly believe you need some sort of professional help.
What lies have Marlow & Carrots told, I have no knowledge of any?? I can only assume that they, (rightly IMHO), had knowledge of the loan agreement that involved a charge on AP. So deep was there concern they, without giving direct information on the matter, (possibly because of NDA?), felt obliged to express on the gasroom, their displeasure about the machinations of the trust board. Since it was discovered that a charge on Adams Park had been administered, many fans, some being legacy members are quite rightly pissed off. Now many have serious doubts about the "secretive nature" of the trust. Trevor Strouds' letter saying we haven't broken our own rule 102 just , to me, stinks of an Alistair Campbell spin. Maybe they haven't, strictly speaking, but like many on here, we had presumed that by its separation from WWFC, AP was untouchable & the trust have found a way to circumnavigate the rules, without consultation. So I for one fully understand why Marlow and Carrots took the route they did but I'm not aware of any lies, so please enlighten. I wouldn't know either of them if they jumped up and down on my privates, so wouldn't know if they were speaking on behalf of Andy Harman but it never struck me that they were, maybe I'm naive on this one?
Happy for you to prove me wrong/educate me DevC.
Even I’m struggling to defend some of your suppositions here @DevC. Whilst I agree that some posters here have been excessively personal against certain individuals on the Trust Board (and elsewhere) and a tad deferential to the Andrew Harmans of this world that doesn’t automatically mean that they are being cheerleaders for the latter as you seem to imply.
Just read back through the tortuous history of these threads @EwanHoosaami .
@bookertease , I have been struck by how many of these posters seem to be aware of Hartman’s innermost thoughts and plans long before they are announced despite apparently having never met or spoken to him. It all doesn’t ring true to me.
But it is what it is I suppose. I mentioned long ago the parallels to Brexit and I see others have mentioned it too. Our friends have launched a apparently highly effective campaign to turn our elected trust board from an extension of us into an elite working against our interests for their own ill defined personal agenda, not helped it has to be said by the Trust falling into the welltrodden trap of forgetting to communicate when things get busy and controversial just at the time when they should be communicating most.
We now come to the denouement. Shortly those with a vote will have a choice between a detailed offer , with all the real world flaws and compromises that entails and a less defined outline proposal which I suspect will have all sorts of aspirations towards training grounds and youth academies and very possibly £350m a week extra for the NHS.all fronted by an ex player instead of a nasty foreigner.
It will be a choice between head and heart and we saw in 2016 what tends to win out there. I suspect the gasroom electorate at least is minded to choose similarly. Let’s hope the outcome is not the same chaos and damage to the club that Brexit has caused the country. At the end of the day all of us just want the best for the football club we support.
@Dev. Please stop.
Let’s hear the bids / proposals and then debate the merits.
You are the equivalent of Gove telling us we’ve had enough of experts.
Accusing people of being liars and puppets is extremely counter-productive and unhelpful.
Jesus.....
Is Dave Carroll one of the ex-players then?