@EwanHoosaami that would indeed be correct. But there is also no more of a reason for any talent uncovered to sign professionally for us than anyone else.
There's no doubting an academy would be an aspiration but what's its benefit to WWFC? If indeed there is one.
@EwanHoosaami That's the piece I am struggling with. Some of the commentary on this thread is suggesting Andy Harman would set up and run the academy separately from WWFC. If that is the case, then what has the setting up of the academy got to do with a bid for a stake in WWFC (other than sounding good to those who lament the demise of our former youth set up)?
If they are to be run separately, Mr Harman could set up his own academy any time he wants, if that is something he wants to do, without having to be part owner of WWFC.
@EwanHoosaami - I agree. Whilst the club will no doubt be expected to help with the coaching, it may be advantageous to have some of the academy players making up numbers in our training sessions.
@EwanHoosaami said:
Surely though, if the academy is separate from WWFC, it's loss or profit & running cost issues are not the football clubs concern, any more than say a business down Hillbottom Road, or am I being a bit too simplistic on this?
Yes that's true, but then by definition it's a third party/ independent academy likely with an affiliation to WWFC, and we wouldn't be owed fees/ sell ons etc?
I could be wrong but either the club takes on the financial burden and therefore also the potential financial gains, or the academy runs independently and the club doesn't take on the risk or reward, don't think we can essentially have our cake and eat it, happy to be proved wrong!
OK, so it appears that the only "hold" we would have on any player would be on a personal/moral level, hoping to prey on their "guilt feelings" if they considered signing for another club. TBH, if we are not at financial risk, that would be ok for me.
Conversely, if that is the case, the academy shouldn't really be a "main" factor in deciding which way to vote if it's an option.
@EwanHoosaami said:
OK, so it appears that the only "hold" we would have on any player would be on a personal/moral level, hoping to prey on their "guilt feelings" if they considered signing for another club. TBH, if we are not at financial risk, that would be ok for me.
Conversely, if that is the case, the academy shouldn't really be a "main" factor in deciding which way to vote if it's an option.
We would also get to look at the players regularly, give them the opportunity to train with the first team etc, get preferential treatment/ deals when "signing" them from the academy, but as my understanding is, legally/ technically I believe you're right.
This is still all massive speculation on my part and I'm sure AH will give more details if the American bid is unsuccessful and his is a possibility
@EwanHoosaami I agree. My focus is survival of the club and continuing with GA's present model of loans and picking up young players out of favour which is working well for us is fine by me. The Academy (of whatever form) can be an aspiration which everyone would agree with, but there are more pressing matters in my opinion. Let's not be side-tracked.
... except that Mr Harman has £3m to invest and has earmarked a third of that towards setting up an academy. If his academy plan isn't actually a very good idea isn't it better to raise that before he spends £1m which could otherwise be invested directly into the club?
Quite so. Given our on field performances and position in League 1, I'm going to be looking at any potential investor/buyer in terms of are their plans revolutionary or evolutionary?
We have come this far, not least in a significant part, due to the tremendous skill and ability shown by the football management team of GA, Dobbo et al and the work they have done with the players and in finding/encouraging talent to develope.
We shouldn't ignore that fact when deciding what direction we go next in terms of the ownership of the club.
I wasn’t there but didn’t I read on a post on here that AH intended it to be self-funding by charging some(?) academy players to join/train with ‘his’ academy?
In this case it would (presumably) be more attractive if it was affiliated to a football club, I.e. us. This takes sell on fees out of the equation. The better ‘graduates’ would get siphoned off to the bigger clubs but it may allow us to get first pick of the second tier ones.
Total speculation on my part and I’ve no idea if this is allowable under FA rules or whatever.
So if i’m Reading the last couple of pages worth correctly, AH bid includes:
A new academy that may of may not have anything to actually do with the club and seemingly won’t have a direct feed of players for us. Won’t cost us anything but actually won’t benefit us directly either
He’s committing to “invest” £3 million pounds which he hasn’t decided either it will be as equity or loans. So while he might just be a minority’s holder, he might be one that sinks 3 million quid into us and decide he wants it back later (sound familiar?). Especially if he falls out with others running the place, like he has done once already.
I might be overly pessimistic but that’s what seems to be what people are talking about.
If so, I can see why the trust didn’t select it as a credible deal. Less water tight for the future than the titanic.
This could just be to be a well timed personal attack torpedo to affect the current board and its plans than any actual real and credible bid for the future of our club. If this is the substance of his bid, it seems nothing but an attempt to make the America bid fail by splitting the vote.
And it all could to be down to personal arguments. Which would be a discrace.
Aren't there some massive assumptions being made about the proposed academy here? We have barely even seen the bare bones of any such proposal, and yet people are already drawing conclusions as to how much use it would be to us. Surely the mention of Ken Wilson (currently Elite Performance Scout for the Scottish FA for junior players) being appointed director of any such academy should reassure people that there is some pretty solid knowledge and understanding of how the system works?
I personally think that the way we currently operate is admirable and we are reaping the benefits of it, without necessarily needing an academy. I don't buy into the whole "football fortune" thing when it comes to picking up young players that have been released, developing them and selling them on a few years down the line. In fact, I find it quite insulting to the likes of Ainsworth and Dobbo. Was it "fortunate" to scout O'Nien, sign him, develop him massively as a player and then sell him for decent money?
Not much is being spoken about Ben Langdon the Third of Andy Harman's team, son of legendary cartoonist and Wanderers Fan David, he apparently shares his father's lifelong passion for the blues, and is a successful businessman in his own right.
This trio seem to have a genuine desire to see the Wanderers and the local community
do well, and as Andy said were here for the long term and not to 'spin' or flip' the club.
Im not sure we will be able to say that about the Yankie bid !!
@TheDancingYak on the flip side to your post, just how long do you think the Yanks are in for, doesn't look long term to me? Also, whom of the two would you think has the better chance of Wycombe having a longer term future?
For the record, I would rather have a long sustainablity bouncing around L1 & 2 than a short term rise up 1 division and being sold on to a land grab buyer.
It is now after five thirty on the last working day before voting opens.
We have not received details of the deal.
We were told we'd receive this before Christmas.
It is nearer February, they've been talking for two years, they've now got a first change against the stadium yet we were told at two public meetings that the stadium was not on the table.
And we still don't know what's happening apart from they want Private Equity Investors.
If the Trust try to give up to 25% away without asking, there will be a reaction.
I wonder if the arrangements for Monday's meeting have changed.
@NiceCarrots said:
It is now after five thirty on the last working day before voting opens.
We have not received details of the deal.
We were told we'd receive this before Christmas.
It is nearer February, they've been talking for two years, they've now got a first change against the stadium yet we were told at two public meetings that the stadium was not on the table.
And we still don't know what's happening apart from they want Private Equity Investors.
If the Trust try to give up to 25% away without asking, there will be a reaction.
I wonder if the arrangements for Monday's meeting have changed.
Stroud has probably been too busy at the ice cream factory to worry about sending out emails to us!
No that's not correct, someone steals Shroudy's car every morning, parks it in Beechdean's car park before going on the razzl in the King William up the hill.
@ChasHarps said:
No that's not correct, someone steals Shroudy's car every morning, parks it in Beechdean's car park before going on the razzl in the King William up the hill.
Thought the King Willy had closed down a couple of years ago?
@EwanHoosaami said: @TheDancingYak on the flip side to your post, just how long do you think the Yanks are in for, doesn't look long term to me? Also, whom of the two would you think has the better chance of Wycombe having a longer term future?
Have you been privy to detail of the yanks bid? Without any detail of it we’re just guessing? It might also be a complete none starter to me too.
What i do know is that an alternative (aggrieved for not having his bid taken further, apparently) party held a meeting in hotel, to announce his plan, just before hearing the official bids detail, which has little substance and could put us right back in the situation sharky left us in, if it were to end badly. How exactly would we pay £3m back if he decides it was a loan and wants it back?
I await the detail of the American bid. But AH’s bid has nothing that would make me want to vote for it either.
@TheDancingYak you seem quite angry...what's wrong with people going to listen to one man's plan which might end badly before we hear another man's plan that might end badly?
Unfortunately I had to miss the meeting with Andrew Harman on Wednesday. He has agreed to pop in to the Woodlands Bar tomorrow to outline his proposals to me, along with the season-ticket holders I go to matches with who hail from Lincoln, Leicester, Derby & Buckingham. If anyone in the Woodlands would like to hear too he’ll be over about 1.30/1.45.
@Wendoverman said: @TheDancingYak you seem quite angry...what's wrong with people going to listen to one man's plan which might end badly before we hear another man's plan that might end badly?
I’m angry at the timing of the alternative bid, yes.
While there has (rightly) been questions asked about the way the board have handled this sale, the one thing that has come from this alternative, is that for me, they were right to dismiss it and not take it further.
If he was so confident that his alternative should have been listened to right now and to call a meeting about it (just before the official bid detail is due to come out) I would expect him to know if it will be £3m in equity or debt by now.
This smackes if AH trying to torpedo the American bid before the detail of it is announced to put egg on the faces of those he has a running fied with.
Comments
@EwanHoosaami that would indeed be correct. But there is also no more of a reason for any talent uncovered to sign professionally for us than anyone else.
There's no doubting an academy would be an aspiration but what's its benefit to WWFC? If indeed there is one.
@EwanHoosaami That's the piece I am struggling with. Some of the commentary on this thread is suggesting Andy Harman would set up and run the academy separately from WWFC. If that is the case, then what has the setting up of the academy got to do with a bid for a stake in WWFC (other than sounding good to those who lament the demise of our former youth set up)?
If they are to be run separately, Mr Harman could set up his own academy any time he wants, if that is something he wants to do, without having to be part owner of WWFC.
@EwanHoosaami - I agree. Whilst the club will no doubt be expected to help with the coaching, it may be advantageous to have some of the academy players making up numbers in our training sessions.
Yes that's true, but then by definition it's a third party/ independent academy likely with an affiliation to WWFC, and we wouldn't be owed fees/ sell ons etc?
I could be wrong but either the club takes on the financial burden and therefore also the potential financial gains, or the academy runs independently and the club doesn't take on the risk or reward, don't think we can essentially have our cake and eat it, happy to be proved wrong!
OK, so it appears that the only "hold" we would have on any player would be on a personal/moral level, hoping to prey on their "guilt feelings" if they considered signing for another club. TBH, if we are not at financial risk, that would be ok for me.
Conversely, if that is the case, the academy shouldn't really be a "main" factor in deciding which way to vote if it's an option.
We would also get to look at the players regularly, give them the opportunity to train with the first team etc, get preferential treatment/ deals when "signing" them from the academy, but as my understanding is, legally/ technically I believe you're right.
This is still all massive speculation on my part and I'm sure AH will give more details if the American bid is unsuccessful and his is a possibility
@EwanHoosaami I agree. My focus is survival of the club and continuing with GA's present model of loans and picking up young players out of favour which is working well for us is fine by me. The Academy (of whatever form) can be an aspiration which everyone would agree with, but there are more pressing matters in my opinion. Let's not be side-tracked.
... except that Mr Harman has £3m to invest and has earmarked a third of that towards setting up an academy. If his academy plan isn't actually a very good idea isn't it better to raise that before he spends £1m which could otherwise be invested directly into the club?
Quite so. Given our on field performances and position in League 1, I'm going to be looking at any potential investor/buyer in terms of are their plans revolutionary or evolutionary?
We have come this far, not least in a significant part, due to the tremendous skill and ability shown by the football management team of GA, Dobbo et al and the work they have done with the players and in finding/encouraging talent to develope.
We shouldn't ignore that fact when deciding what direction we go next in terms of the ownership of the club.
@Sherrinford I just did raise it.
I wasn’t there but didn’t I read on a post on here that AH intended it to be self-funding by charging some(?) academy players to join/train with ‘his’ academy?
In this case it would (presumably) be more attractive if it was affiliated to a football club, I.e. us. This takes sell on fees out of the equation. The better ‘graduates’ would get siphoned off to the bigger clubs but it may allow us to get first pick of the second tier ones.
Total speculation on my part and I’ve no idea if this is allowable under FA rules or whatever.
So if i’m Reading the last couple of pages worth correctly, AH bid includes:
A new academy that may of may not have anything to actually do with the club and seemingly won’t have a direct feed of players for us. Won’t cost us anything but actually won’t benefit us directly either
He’s committing to “invest” £3 million pounds which he hasn’t decided either it will be as equity or loans. So while he might just be a minority’s holder, he might be one that sinks 3 million quid into us and decide he wants it back later (sound familiar?). Especially if he falls out with others running the place, like he has done once already.
I might be overly pessimistic but that’s what seems to be what people are talking about.
If so, I can see why the trust didn’t select it as a credible deal. Less water tight for the future than the titanic.
This could just be to be a well timed personal attack torpedo to affect the current board and its plans than any actual real and credible bid for the future of our club. If this is the substance of his bid, it seems nothing but an attempt to make the America bid fail by splitting the vote.
And it all could to be down to personal arguments. Which would be a discrace.
Aren't there some massive assumptions being made about the proposed academy here? We have barely even seen the bare bones of any such proposal, and yet people are already drawing conclusions as to how much use it would be to us. Surely the mention of Ken Wilson (currently Elite Performance Scout for the Scottish FA for junior players) being appointed director of any such academy should reassure people that there is some pretty solid knowledge and understanding of how the system works?
I personally think that the way we currently operate is admirable and we are reaping the benefits of it, without necessarily needing an academy. I don't buy into the whole "football fortune" thing when it comes to picking up young players that have been released, developing them and selling them on a few years down the line. In fact, I find it quite insulting to the likes of Ainsworth and Dobbo. Was it "fortunate" to scout O'Nien, sign him, develop him massively as a player and then sell him for decent money?
Not much is being spoken about Ben Langdon the Third of Andy Harman's team, son of legendary cartoonist and Wanderers Fan David, he apparently shares his father's lifelong passion for the blues, and is a successful businessman in his own right.
This trio seem to have a genuine desire to see the Wanderers and the local community
do well, and as Andy said were here for the long term and not to 'spin' or flip' the club.
Im not sure we will be able to say that about the Yankie bid !!
@TheDancingYak on the flip side to your post, just how long do you think the Yanks are in for, doesn't look long term to me? Also, whom of the two would you think has the better chance of Wycombe having a longer term future?
For the record, I would rather have a long sustainablity bouncing around L1 & 2 than a short term rise up 1 division and being sold on to a land grab buyer.
It is now after five thirty on the last working day before voting opens.
We have not received details of the deal.
We were told we'd receive this before Christmas.
It is nearer February, they've been talking for two years, they've now got a first change against the stadium yet we were told at two public meetings that the stadium was not on the table.
And we still don't know what's happening apart from they want Private Equity Investors.
If the Trust try to give up to 25% away without asking, there will be a reaction.
I wonder if the arrangements for Monday's meeting have changed.
I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't some fast and furious rewrite of the USA proposal happening now!
@EwanHoosaami ha ha I said that as well.
'Er...put in £1 million quid for an Academy, a new roof and a deal with a major crisp company...'
Stroud has probably been too busy at the ice cream factory to worry about sending out emails to us!
No that's not correct, someone steals Shroudy's car every morning, parks it in Beechdean's car park before going on the razzl in the King William up the hill.
Thought the King Willy had closed down a couple of years ago?
Must be the Gate in Brian's bum then !!
That'll be it! A pretty mean "surf & turf" served there once.
Have you been privy to detail of the yanks bid? Without any detail of it we’re just guessing? It might also be a complete none starter to me too.
What i do know is that an alternative (aggrieved for not having his bid taken further, apparently) party held a meeting in hotel, to announce his plan, just before hearing the official bids detail, which has little substance and could put us right back in the situation sharky left us in, if it were to end badly. How exactly would we pay £3m back if he decides it was a loan and wants it back?
I await the detail of the American bid. But AH’s bid has nothing that would make me want to vote for it either.
More of a 'Spin & Flip' being discussed in there now !!
Speen has no pubs anymore, the Hampden arms, the Gate or the Pink & lily would be the nearest places for secret sculduggery
Or Maybe the North Dean Mafia take their violin cases and 'Beeksy Blinder' caps into the Harrow !!
@TheDancingYak you seem quite angry...what's wrong with people going to listen to one man's plan which might end badly before we hear another man's plan that might end badly?
Unfortunately I had to miss the meeting with Andrew Harman on Wednesday. He has agreed to pop in to the Woodlands Bar tomorrow to outline his proposals to me, along with the season-ticket holders I go to matches with who hail from Lincoln, Leicester, Derby & Buckingham. If anyone in the Woodlands would like to hear too he’ll be over about 1.30/1.45.
I’m angry at the timing of the alternative bid, yes.
While there has (rightly) been questions asked about the way the board have handled this sale, the one thing that has come from this alternative, is that for me, they were right to dismiss it and not take it further.
If he was so confident that his alternative should have been listened to right now and to call a meeting about it (just before the official bid detail is due to come out) I would expect him to know if it will be £3m in equity or debt by now.
This smackes if AH trying to torpedo the American bid before the detail of it is announced to put egg on the faces of those he has a running fied with.