Skip to content

Andrew Harman bid for WWFC

11416181920

Comments

  • Hard not to be positive about this development however. I do share some of @TheDancingYak’s worries about the substance of AH’s proposals although am reassured a little by those in his corner (including yet another AH who I have tremendous respect for), so allowing the bid to be formalised will present us with two actual propositions to consider (assuming the Americans don’t just give up in despair) on their respective merits which has to be for the best.

    In terms of where we go with our esteemed Trust Board, for me the sensible thing to do would be to follow the SGM proposal for the breach of Rule 102 and if it can be concluded to the members’ satisfaction that they have indeed broken it (rather than just bent it a bit) then immediately follow this up with a vote of no confidence.

    The question for me however is all about the timing. I can see that it would be cathartic to do it sooner rather than later but in a relatively short time (I assume) we are likely to have to make a serious decision about our clubs future. I’m not sure the inevitable disruption caused by having to find a brand new Board in the run up to this will be of any benefit and may make matters worse.

  • Right. We can now consider both bids in detail or so it seems. The time for tearing each other apart on here has surely finished. There are hard questions to answer for both bidders and that is the priority.
    Will AH have time and access to the books as the US team have had?
    Is AH loaning or asking for equity?
    What is the true nature of the academy?
    Will AH want a majority in the future?
    How will the US guys get their loan repaid if unsuccessful?
    How do both bidders plan to stop £600k year on year losses without football fortune?
    What will both bidders do if losses continue?
    What motives beyond profit do they have for wanting to put money into a very uncertain business?
    And many more that the businessmen and women amongst us can and should be thinking of.

    As for tbe board? Well it doesn’t look good for them. I’m not certain if it’s amateurish, coloured by vendetta or downright corrupt but it seems to have been a balls up. Personally I’d be minded to hold off on a no confidence motion until we have the answers to tbe bid questions and a decision made. Whilst I think there may be enough bad feeling to remove them, bringing a new amateur board would only make bid process harder to manage. Once the decision is made then it will be time to decide the board’s future.

    In the meantime I hope those of you who understand the football business keep asking questions and digging up information. But let’s leave the shit slinging alone for a while eh?

  • What a load of bollocks this has become. For the trust to imply it was late interest is utter rubbish. I have tried to find reasons for Stroud and co making "amateur " mistakes but it's surely the end now. I posted on the gasroom a week or two ago that Harman was interested and had been also he had a meeting scheduled for Friday of that week. If anyone has any communication with Stroud, ask him how that meeting went would you. Stroud has treated Harmon with utter contempt and disregard. As one esteemed member on here privately messaged me, Stroud is a weasel. The sooner him and his private mafia go, the better.

  • Wait, in what way is this recognising a mistake and now doing the right thing? There’s no actual reason given in either statement for the postponement, it’s just yet another delay and yet another excuse for not showing the Americans’ proposal. It’s an utter farce.

  • I'm not sure a lot of these assumptions are the real reason for the postponement. The lack of pre meeting material promised weeks ago are surely a sign this meeting wasn't ever ready to happen. 'The guys' haven't cancelled flights at the last minute. Harman has done them a favour and given them an excuse.
    They were never getting the 75% with all the theories around the voter base. It's a chance for everything to reset, get prepared and go again. I didn't read anything much in the Trust release but I was surprised it focused on postponement when the meeting hasn't been postponed. Maybe it's a chance for the Trust to answer some questions.
    Finally as Harman gave us 48 hours notice this week he has plenty of time to present more at this meeting

  • Surely the key point now is whether Stroud and his cronies are competent or honest enough to evaluate the two bids and come up with a new recommendation. I would say no.

    If my opinion is shared, then at the absolute minimum a new Chairman needs to be appointed NOW.

  • @TheDancingYak said:
    I can read it two ways @drcongo. One is the way your implying, the other is “we’ve been speaking to him for months and he’s only come out with something solid now. Now that he has, lets hear it. He’s welcome to bid”

    I’m slightly more inclined to think it’s the latter, mostly because it’s a joint statement with the Americans.

    As you can see from my previous statements I have though AH bid is as much of a fly in the boards ointment as it is a real bid.

    By inviting him into the formal bid process now, the board and yanks could trying to wrestle the narrative back with a “put up, or shut up” reposts.

    Either way, this is a shit show. And Marlowchair is probably about right in regards to the suitability of the people running the process.

    It’s also possible that now the club is publicly in an “open” process that other interested individuals or consortia might table formal approaches to be fair.

    This develop may be excellent news in terms of us truly seeking , and hopefully finding , the depth of the market interest in our club

  • Well this is getting increasingly bizarre by the day. @marlowchair the admission from the board was tacit, but I take the point you were laying on thick that the Trust can't go around pretending they didn't know that Andrew Harman was interested in making a bid.

    A sign that the "power group" at the top of WWT are sitting up and taking notice that the members are stirring?

  • @Glenactico said:
    Clearly not ideal at all. But I think you have to give them some credit for listening, recognising the mistake and making the right choice eventually. It takes some courage to admit the fault at such a late stage and suffer the personal loss of face as a result.

    That doesn’t answer any of the questions about how we got here in the first place. But at lest we appear to have reached a more satisfactory outcome allowing both parties to present on equal terms.

    Except they admit no fault at all. They write a contradictory tin pot statement implying that the delay is the new bidders fault for entering late in the piece....whilst then admitting they’ve been talking to him for months .

    Farce doesn’t even get close to describing it. More worrying is the language and defiance/ denial evident in their actions and words . It’s simply not their fault you see , they’ve acted perfectly competently and above board in all of this in their belief.its astonishing.

  • I struggle with the idea that there is actually “market interest” in any organisation with annual costs £500,000 more than annual income and no realistic way to significantly improve things.

    The world of football is indeed bonkers

  • @mooneyman said:
    Surely the key point now is whether Stroud and his cronies are competent or honest enough to evaluate the two bids and come up with a new recommendation. I would say no.

    If my opinion is shared, then at the absolute minimum a new Chairman needs to be appointed NOW.

    I take your point that they may not be capable of recommending a bid on a fair way but if the bid process has now moved on from that to us being able to evaluate all bids, then they are sidelined for now. And by being sidelined it allows us to leave them there for now as more pressing concerns are dealt with.

  • @Right_in_the_Middle said:
    I'm not sure a lot of these assumptions are the real reason for the postponement. The lack of pre meeting material promised weeks ago are surely a sign this meeting wasn't ever ready to happen. 'The guys' haven't cancelled flights at the last minute. Harman has done them a favour and given them an excuse.
    They were never getting the 75% with all the theories around the voter base. It's a chance for everything to reset, get prepared and go again. I didn't read anything much in the Trust release but I was surprised it focused on postponement when the meeting hasn't been postponed. Maybe it's a chance for the Trust to answer some questions.
    Finally as Harman gave us 48 hours notice this week he has plenty of time to present more at this meeting

    This is an excellent post. There is effectively no reason, nothing stopping the legacy members being sent the information and detail around the American bid . It should have been sent as promised prior to harmans late meeting so that wasn’t it ...

    Remember it was already delayed as one promised date passed before Monday’s meeting was eventually scheduled. The info around the us bid must be distributed as promised , that is of course if it was ready and prepared at all .

    I congratulate the director who encouraged and facilitated this latest delay given the circumstances.

  • How anybody can think that Stroud (and getting rid of him will get rid of the real people pulling the strings) can stay in charge after all of this complete and utter mess amazes me. He needs to go. Now.

  • Wouldn’t we prudent to check that we are indeed losing £500k a year and that situation cannot be rectified?

    I can’t help but get the feeling that there has been an effort into conditioning people into believing that the there is no choice but sell the club and that we are “unsustainable” in our current form.

    That would be job number one for any replacement Board should that situation come to pass.

  • @TheatreOfChairs this would be a turn of events even more astonishing than what has come to light this week

  • @mooneyman said:
    Surely the key point now is whether Stroud and his cronies are competent or honest enough to evaluate the two bids and come up with a new recommendation. I would say no.

    If my opinion is shared, then at the absolute minimum a new Chairman needs to be appointed NOW.

    Let's not forget that it was Stroud and the current board who told us in the first place that we were so desperate for investment, despite the fact that less than a year earlier the finances were presented at the AGM and were apparently looking good.

    I'm not saying that we are not in need of investment - I honestly don't know - but given that the man saying we need investment is the very man whose integrity/ ability so many of us have lost confidence in, I would agree Stroud should go NOW so that the whole process can be re-evaluated and conducted properly from the beginning ****if**** investment is indeed necessary.

    I for one do not want us to relinquish ownership of our club to anyone unless it is absolutely necessary.

  • Precisely, but the fact that Stroud is chair of both club and trust and in the employ of a major creditor means there is an existential problem to the integrity and transparency of the way OUR club has been run, surely he must see that he has to resign either one or both positions

  • @HolmerBlue said:
    How anybody can think that Stroud (and getting rid of him will get rid of the real people pulling the strings) can stay in charge after all of this complete and utter mess amazes me. He needs to go. Now.

    Quite possiby. I’m just not sure now is the time.

  • It’s actually very feasible. The acceptance that we must lose £500k annually because “ that’s the lot of a league 1 or 2 EFL club “ is a myth that mark Burrell and Trevor Stroud began pushing and Trevor has continued.

    It’s lazy.we all can see the lack of basic operational quality and delivery within the club. The board ( Trevor) has overseen this crap show of a basic sale proposition process so poorly yet everyone believes they are running our club in its most profitable, financially healthy fashion? That’s nonsensical,

    By very definition , if the skills & competency displayed by Trevor and board in running this process are reflected in their governance, systems and attention to detail in our business model & operations.....£500k is a conservative cost if the incompetence is reflected in other areas .

    A new CEO & chair, adequate commercial lead, food & Beverage manager etc can turn £500k losses of total incompetents into a very small loss , and if any,in a short space of time (2-3 years)

  • I just don’t think that is true.

  • I don't believe that either. This scattergun approach to try to blame all sorts of speculative scenarios on Stroud and now the whole board isn't going to work. Leapong on every half baked idea and blaming them us incorrect and frankly counter productive.
    Lower league football clubs lose money. That is the sad state football is in. Wycombe could be above the curve but no more than that.

  • Don’t get me wrong. I don’t doubt for one minute that we’re running at an operating loss, it’s whether it is possible for that to be rectified that matters or whether it is now a hopeless cause.

    From the outset it’s seemed odd that we’d reached a point in League Two where we had relative financial security, only for that to seemingly fall apart once we were in League One where we get a fair bit of extra money from the league’s central tv deal and bigger crowds - coincidentally just as we get an offer to buy the club.

    All I would like to see is that going forward we consider three options, the American bid, Harman’s bid and whether we need to sell at all. As given recent events my faith in those who told us the club had to be sold has been somewhat shaken.

  • @Right_in_the_Middle said:
    I don't believe that either. This scattergun approach to try to blame all sorts of speculative scenarios on Stroud and now the whole board isn't going to work. Leapong on every half baked idea and blaming them us incorrect and frankly counter productive.
    Lower league football clubs lose money. That is the sad state football is in. Wycombe could be above the curve but no more than that.

    But it’s illogical to believe otherwise. If you believe their demonstrated skills and competence displayed around the sale process,communication of it and attention to important detail has been poor, it is illogical to believe they can miraculously be very good at demonstrating required skills , competence and attention to detail around basic day to day running of the club.

    Sure, it may not be £500k per annum worth of basic mediocrity , but new ceo , chair etc with at least some experience and required skillset must lessen that to soletwte between a 0 and £500k loss

  • Sure, it may not be £500k per annum worth of basic mediocrity , but new ceo , chair etc with at least some experience and required skillset must lessen that to soletwte between a 0 and £500k loss

    Okay let’s say the loss was reduced to 400k 1st year, 250k second year and break even from then on. We’d still have a debt of 650k to someone wouldn’t we? Unless I’m missing something, if the club makes even a small loss year on year it would eventually have to be repaid or the club sold or someone willing to bail us out for altruistic reasons found.

  • And that's exactly why I posed it as a question. Is running a sustainable supporter owned club, as say Exeter City have done on similar sized crowds for considerably longer than we have, now a hopeless cause?

    I certainly don't remember the Board or lots of people on this message board arguing that it was this time last year.

    If it is then private ownership or a hybrid model is clearly an inevitability.

    However, I'd certainly welcome a second opinion on the club's current financial predicament given some of what we've read over the last few days.

  • Anyone who thinks that Andrew Howard stepping down when he did was anything other than making it look like the current books (losing £500k a year) were nothing to do with him are onto a wrong'un. The man has still been in the room, just without anything left at his door.

  • From my (very) basic understanding we have consistently run at an operating loss of around £500k pa over the past few years, saved by primarily player sales so it isn’t recent.

    I accept a lot of that has being paying off dept but also given us one of the lowest budgets in the league (allegedly).

    We have also during this time had one of our most successful spells as a league club on the field. Obviously this is mostly due to GA and his team but it was interesting to see him namecheck TS for facilitating the Bolton loan.

    Regardless, the recent shambles has gone beyond a reassuring (to me) amateurish incompetence into the realms of Brexit-level f$%€-up. If he has any sense TS should probably do a Theresa and promise to step down as soon as the results of any bid vote is held.

    One (of many) issue I struggle to understand though is the role of Howard. He has no official role at the club any more does he? Given his declaration that he doesn’t support us, why is he still (allegedly) pulling the strings? Is it as simple as him doing the work of the puppet-master (IB)?

  • edited January 2019

    deleted

  • Can't Mr Howard get his money back by making deductions from Mr Shrouds pay packet ??

Sign In or Register to comment.