Can you contact me please to discuss? Ideally, on the phone.
I have no interest in upsetting the moderators of this forum, happy to abide by the rules and appreciate the time you spend on allowing us fans to have a say.
One thing irritated me regarding the Trevor Stroud email of yesterday evening was that he still wants both potential investors to pitch to the Board, following which the Board will select their preferred bidder who will, I assume, then be asked to present to the members.
In the spirit of transparency and the shambles to date, would it not be better to have both bidders present to the membership rather than just the Board, who really don’t seem to be trusted at all right now.
Also, Trevor Stroud should surely release a statement regarding the reasons for the Board by-passing rule 102 and us ending up with a charge over AP, which we all assumed was safe from such risk? Even if rule 102 isn’t water tight, we all know the spirit of the clause is to protect the ground.
I totally agree, I have lost faith in the Trust Board to make the right decision and for the right reasons. This could well be a charade to look as if they are doing the right thing by looking at the AH bid only to go back to their original decision. I am not saying its not the better option but lets have this process open and get to see the two bid proposals and lets us judge it ourselves. We should have a simple vote on firstly which one to back and then a second vote to see if it goes through assuming its a majority vote. if its a minority stake and the fans back that then it goes straight through. Some will argue that is what the Trust Board are for but lets face it they have pulled the vote on Monday because of fan pressure and to my mind that is not acting in our best interests.
Looks to me like we have three options.
1) Accept the USA bid
2) Accept AH's bid
3) Do nothing.
Option 3 isn't really viable as we will go bust very quickly.
1 & 2 Will both need careful scrutiny, not by the trust but the voting members. There may of course be other potential suiters come forward if it is a free , open & honest procedure, but I admit unlikely.
Only then, should there be an opportunity for the members to choose which option they prefer and subsequently the members to vote to see if it gets to the required 75% required.
A bit long winded, but at least then, it will be open, transparent and fair, which it clearly hasn't been to date.
I dont disagree but Point 3 is an interesting one @EwanHoosaami because we aren't getting a benefactor. Nobody's plan seems to be carry on as you are, I'll just give you enough money to cover your losses, although they may have to do so depending on the terms they agree. Need that detail around loans and covering debts.
Trying to save money, take in more and head in the direction of break even helped by bits "football fortune" will be the intent of the new owners whoever they are.
They may be able to invest in staff or facilities that help this.
The odd thing for many is that we seemed to go very quickly from meetings with this being plan A and it being nearly there to it being unthinkable and totally ridiculous.
@Brownie said:
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.
How long do you think Stroud will keep his job at Beechdean once he’s no longer chairman and of no use.
Poor Trev been manipulated and out witted by the puppet master.
So obvious when he “resigned” in Oct knowing there was an astronomical HMRC bill due Nov and no funds to repay.
I've read lots of posts about the relative merits of the two bids, it's good to have debate. However, the one thing I would say is that when posting about financial matters the posts have been mainly based on heresay, assumptions or interpretation of 'facts'. For Andy Harman a number of posts have mentioned the number of dissolved companies next to his name at Companies House.
Andy and his brother set up a company called Annodata in the late '80s and this was so successful they recently sold it to Japanese company Kyocera. Nearly all the dissolved companies referred to were based at the same address as Annodata (i.e. wholly-owned subsidiaries) and were possibly dissolved as a result of this sale and not poor business acumen by Mr Harmon. If they were dissolved prior to the sale then I'm sure there was a valid business reason for doing so and losses if any, would have been deducted from Annodata's balance sheet. It is very dangerous to make assumptions on what you find on Companies House if you do not know all the facts.
Baring this in mind, everyone needs to take step back and think before posting, it is too easy to make quick assumptions. We should leave matters of finance and due dilligence to the experts!!!
I think that Andy Harmon would be good for Wycombe but agree that details of both bids need to be seen before a final decision could be made!!!
Talked to a couple of people today quite independently who I only know on nodding terms but it turns out both have roles in the club. They were both exasperated about the bid debate and being maligned. Time will tell but they seem to think faced with having to table a bid Andy Harman may well back down as his bid was threadbare and financially suspect compared to the very professional one tabled by the yanks. They questioned - as some of us have on here - this plan for an academy set up for a million sort of connected to the club but not quite. It was interesting as both of these people were sensible professionals i have seen tbem around tbe stand for a good few years. They said what Mr Harman has proposed so far would not get past first stage in any normal business. I am not claiming one thing or the other and am no businessman but it certainly gave me food for thought. They also thought for all the work that Trevor Stroud puts into the club he has been treated very unfairly. I know this has been a fractious debate verging on the personal and i have swung between opinions while keen to see both bids but i'm just putting that put there while it is fresh in my mind.
Thanks for the observations @Wendoverman. These things are never as simple as people like to paint them. At least however we should get to find out how serious and valid AH is before we have to make any decisions.
Let’s not allow sentiment and the “ poor old volunteer just doing his best “ mentality take away from the fact that since being a director TS has been handed a full time consultancy by our main sponsor , failed to tell anyone that including his own trust board , still tries to play semantics and deny he works there when it became public saying he is “ a consultant “ , been handed the chairmanship by same channels, directly overseen the most laughable proposed sale process conceivable , engineered a charge over Adams Park that breaks Trust rules despite standing in front of a meeting and swearing under no circumstances was Adams Park involved in the deal ,kept that secret until it leaked and he had to pen a letter trying to excuse it and play it down , sitting members of his board stating he runs a power group and no questions or concerns are able to be heard or entertained, run the club backwards Financially at an alarming rate duting his tenure , resignations of his two right hand men on football club board ,and a few rather more serious matters that were discussed at the meeting by former staff early this week ....
But go easy on him let’s label very reasonable calls for his resignation as a witch hunt ...?
No director has gained more from Wwfc in recent years than TS and good luck to him, but he must accept criticism and judgment from constituents in return for the glory and consultancy he enjoys
Im not sentimentalising anything as the trevor issue is a side one for me. I'm only repeating what was said to me today by people more in the know than I am. They were not responding to a gasroom post or an attack on them by anyone just discussing the issues in a calm and measured manner...which impressed me as they seemed perfectly reasonable no horns cloven hoofs or smell of self-serving sulphorus corruption about them. As I have said before the fact that the yanks have taken a step back while andy's bid is put forward suggests to me they both want there to be a positive outcome and that they are confident in what they are proposing. But of course they wouldalso want that if they planned on fleeing us!! I will be interested to see what the other AH has to say though. I thought it was important for me to pass on that info not that it necessarily simplifies anything for anyone. And we won. Huzzah!!
Only 25 minutes and the prosecutor in chief is back responding the same stuff. You don't like him @marlowchair. I get that. Just let everyone else make there own mind up without your constant, repetitIve and bitter accusations.
It's definitely a witch hunt
The whole problem is that it’s too early to tell as it hasn’t been given due process to be tabled with any substance behind it. From what was presented to the trust / TS I think it certainly could be viable especially given the minority share Aspect of it, but whether it stacks up v the American bid once details are drilled down , no one can say really .
I can say this, if the basic outline of financial contributions wasn’t comparable to the American bid, the board would not be giving it due time and consideration now....
@marlowchair Two people post their observations based on conversations they have had at the game today which are questioning the viability of the Harman proposal. @Wendoverman also states that the people he spoke to feel that Trevor Stroud has been treated unfairly
You then go on another rant about him.
What is your actual beef as you are now coming across as a bit obsessive?
@Wendoverman said:
Or do you think we can survive without outside investment? Honest questions. No agenda for or against either bid.
No, we have had outside investment reasonably consistently since Hayes left, we need it.
It has been in he form of loans to the club , short term cash flow relief etc for a number of years, from good benefactors like Howard and others.
We need it, or an overdraft which is hard to get.
With better senior management in place , not expensive mistakes, without the wastage that takes place in spending ( I know right? ),without the large loan repayment liabilities , and with a basic market level commercial revenue ,the gap can be reduced to less than £100k per year . Mixed with decent cup and football fortune every 3/4 years we are very comfortable .
@Wendoverman said:
Im not sentimentalising anything as the trevor issue is a side one for me. I'm only repeating what was said to me today by people more in the know than I am. They were not responding to a gasroom post or an attack on them by anyone just discussing the issues in a calm and measured manner...which impressed me as they seemed perfectly reasonable no horns cloven hoofs or smell of self-serving sulphorus corruption about them. As I have said before the fact that the yanks have taken a step back while andy's bid is put forward suggests to me they both want there to be a positive outcome and that they are confident in what they are proposing. But of course they wouldalso want that if they planned on fleeing us!! I will be interested to see what the other AH has to say though. I thought it was important for me to pass on that info not that it necessarily simplifies anything for anyone. And we won. Huzzah!!
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Only 25 minutes and the prosecutor in chief is back responding the same stuff. You don't like him @marlowchair. I get that. Just let everyone else make there own mind up without your constant, repetitIve and bitter accusations.
It's definitely a witch hunt
I’m pretty comfortable with the label considering the benefit to process, governance and transparency it has been to the members and supporters of our club in recent months , cheers.
You could always try and defend the actions I outlined in a rational way, point by point .
Or just hysterically label it a witch hunt , up to you of course
@JohnnyAllAlone said: @marlowchair Two people post their observations based on conversations they have had at the game today which are questioning the viability of the Harman proposal. @Wendoverman also states that the people he spoke to feel that Trevor Stroud has been treated unfairly
You then go on another rant about him.
What is your actual beef as you are now coming across as a bit obsessive?
You wonder what on earth was in Carrots post that got removed when you read some of these anti Stroud posts!
Comments
@nicecarrots I’ve deleted your post because I think it crossed the line into something potentially libellous.
Hi Chris,
Happy to offer you an unreserved apology.
Can you contact me please to discuss? Ideally, on the phone.
I have no interest in upsetting the moderators of this forum, happy to abide by the rules and appreciate the time you spend on allowing us fans to have a say.
Please accept my apology.
One thing irritated me regarding the Trevor Stroud email of yesterday evening was that he still wants both potential investors to pitch to the Board, following which the Board will select their preferred bidder who will, I assume, then be asked to present to the members.
In the spirit of transparency and the shambles to date, would it not be better to have both bidders present to the membership rather than just the Board, who really don’t seem to be trusted at all right now.
Also, Trevor Stroud should surely release a statement regarding the reasons for the Board by-passing rule 102 and us ending up with a charge over AP, which we all assumed was safe from such risk? Even if rule 102 isn’t water tight, we all know the spirit of the clause is to protect the ground.
At the risk of upsetting the Gasroom elders by ‘derailing’ this thread, thank goodness we have a game of football to talk about for one day at least.
I totally agree, I have lost faith in the Trust Board to make the right decision and for the right reasons. This could well be a charade to look as if they are doing the right thing by looking at the AH bid only to go back to their original decision. I am not saying its not the better option but lets have this process open and get to see the two bid proposals and lets us judge it ourselves. We should have a simple vote on firstly which one to back and then a second vote to see if it goes through assuming its a majority vote. if its a minority stake and the fans back that then it goes straight through. Some will argue that is what the Trust Board are for but lets face it they have pulled the vote on Monday because of fan pressure and to my mind that is not acting in our best interests.
The Vere will be a hot bed of intrigue, rumour, gossip and real ale this afternoon.....can't wait!
Oh and a game of football might also take place....
Looks to me like we have three options.
1) Accept the USA bid
2) Accept AH's bid
3) Do nothing.
Option 3 isn't really viable as we will go bust very quickly.
1 & 2 Will both need careful scrutiny, not by the trust but the voting members. There may of course be other potential suiters come forward if it is a free , open & honest procedure, but I admit unlikely.
Only then, should there be an opportunity for the members to choose which option they prefer and subsequently the members to vote to see if it gets to the required 75% required.
A bit long winded, but at least then, it will be open, transparent and fair, which it clearly hasn't been to date.
@NiceCarrots no need to apologise!
At least we now know Andrew Harman's outline proposal for a minority interest thanks to him telling us himself.
After all this time, we (the members) still have no idea what the Americans are offering for a majority share.
I dont disagree but Point 3 is an interesting one @EwanHoosaami because we aren't getting a benefactor. Nobody's plan seems to be carry on as you are, I'll just give you enough money to cover your losses, although they may have to do so depending on the terms they agree. Need that detail around loans and covering debts.
Trying to save money, take in more and head in the direction of break even helped by bits "football fortune" will be the intent of the new owners whoever they are.
They may be able to invest in staff or facilities that help this.
The odd thing for many is that we seemed to go very quickly from meetings with this being plan A and it being nearly there to it being unthinkable and totally ridiculous.
Thanks Chris, I am suspended with immediate effect while I await the outcome of an internal disciplinary review.
If only the Trust operated like that.
How long do you think Stroud will keep his job at Beechdean once he’s no longer chairman and of no use.
Poor Trev been manipulated and out witted by the puppet master.
So obvious when he “resigned” in Oct knowing there was an astronomical HMRC bill due Nov and no funds to repay.
I've read lots of posts about the relative merits of the two bids, it's good to have debate. However, the one thing I would say is that when posting about financial matters the posts have been mainly based on heresay, assumptions or interpretation of 'facts'. For Andy Harman a number of posts have mentioned the number of dissolved companies next to his name at Companies House.
Andy and his brother set up a company called Annodata in the late '80s and this was so successful they recently sold it to Japanese company Kyocera. Nearly all the dissolved companies referred to were based at the same address as Annodata (i.e. wholly-owned subsidiaries) and were possibly dissolved as a result of this sale and not poor business acumen by Mr Harmon. If they were dissolved prior to the sale then I'm sure there was a valid business reason for doing so and losses if any, would have been deducted from Annodata's balance sheet. It is very dangerous to make assumptions on what you find on Companies House if you do not know all the facts.
Baring this in mind, everyone needs to take step back and think before posting, it is too easy to make quick assumptions. We should leave matters of finance and due dilligence to the experts!!!
I think that Andy Harmon would be good for Wycombe but agree that details of both bids need to be seen before a final decision could be made!!!
Talked to a couple of people today quite independently who I only know on nodding terms but it turns out both have roles in the club. They were both exasperated about the bid debate and being maligned. Time will tell but they seem to think faced with having to table a bid Andy Harman may well back down as his bid was threadbare and financially suspect compared to the very professional one tabled by the yanks. They questioned - as some of us have on here - this plan for an academy set up for a million sort of connected to the club but not quite. It was interesting as both of these people were sensible professionals i have seen tbem around tbe stand for a good few years. They said what Mr Harman has proposed so far would not get past first stage in any normal business. I am not claiming one thing or the other and am no businessman but it certainly gave me food for thought. They also thought for all the work that Trevor Stroud puts into the club he has been treated very unfairly. I know this has been a fractious debate verging on the personal and i have swung between opinions while keen to see both bids but i'm just putting that put there while it is fresh in my mind.
In case you were wondering I'm not @devc
Thanks for the observations @Wendoverman. These things are never as simple as people like to paint them. At least however we should get to find out how serious and valid AH is before we have to make any decisions.
I heard similar things @Wendoverman and have been for a little while now. Hope we are not witnessing a witch hunt.
Why would people hunt unless they had a reason ?
Let’s not allow sentiment and the “ poor old volunteer just doing his best “ mentality take away from the fact that since being a director TS has been handed a full time consultancy by our main sponsor , failed to tell anyone that including his own trust board , still tries to play semantics and deny he works there when it became public saying he is “ a consultant “ , been handed the chairmanship by same channels, directly overseen the most laughable proposed sale process conceivable , engineered a charge over Adams Park that breaks Trust rules despite standing in front of a meeting and swearing under no circumstances was Adams Park involved in the deal ,kept that secret until it leaked and he had to pen a letter trying to excuse it and play it down , sitting members of his board stating he runs a power group and no questions or concerns are able to be heard or entertained, run the club backwards Financially at an alarming rate duting his tenure , resignations of his two right hand men on football club board ,and a few rather more serious matters that were discussed at the meeting by former staff early this week ....
But go easy on him let’s label very reasonable calls for his resignation as a witch hunt ...?
No director has gained more from Wwfc in recent years than TS and good luck to him, but he must accept criticism and judgment from constituents in return for the glory and consultancy he enjoys
Do you think Andy Harman's bid is a viable proposition @Marlowchair from what you have seen of it/ know of it and compared to the other bid?
Or do you think we can survive without outside investment? Honest questions. No agenda for or against either bid.
Im not sentimentalising anything as the trevor issue is a side one for me. I'm only repeating what was said to me today by people more in the know than I am. They were not responding to a gasroom post or an attack on them by anyone just discussing the issues in a calm and measured manner...which impressed me as they seemed perfectly reasonable no horns cloven hoofs or smell of self-serving sulphorus corruption about them. As I have said before the fact that the yanks have taken a step back while andy's bid is put forward suggests to me they both want there to be a positive outcome and that they are confident in what they are proposing. But of course they wouldalso want that if they planned on fleeing us!! I will be interested to see what the other AH has to say though. I thought it was important for me to pass on that info not that it necessarily simplifies anything for anyone. And we won. Huzzah!!
Only 25 minutes and the prosecutor in chief is back responding the same stuff. You don't like him @marlowchair. I get that. Just let everyone else make there own mind up without your constant, repetitIve and bitter accusations.
It's definitely a witch hunt
The whole problem is that it’s too early to tell as it hasn’t been given due process to be tabled with any substance behind it. From what was presented to the trust / TS I think it certainly could be viable especially given the minority share Aspect of it, but whether it stacks up v the American bid once details are drilled down , no one can say really .
I can say this, if the basic outline of financial contributions wasn’t comparable to the American bid, the board would not be giving it due time and consideration now....
@marlowchair Two people post their observations based on conversations they have had at the game today which are questioning the viability of the Harman proposal. @Wendoverman also states that the people he spoke to feel that Trevor Stroud has been treated unfairly
You then go on another rant about him.
What is your actual beef as you are now coming across as a bit obsessive?
No, we have had outside investment reasonably consistently since Hayes left, we need it.
It has been in he form of loans to the club , short term cash flow relief etc for a number of years, from good benefactors like Howard and others.
We need it, or an overdraft which is hard to get.
With better senior management in place , not expensive mistakes, without the wastage that takes place in spending ( I know right? ),without the large loan repayment liabilities , and with a basic market level commercial revenue ,the gap can be reduced to less than £100k per year . Mixed with decent cup and football fortune every 3/4 years we are very comfortable .
I was obviously responding to ritm
I’m pretty comfortable with the label considering the benefit to process, governance and transparency it has been to the members and supporters of our club in recent months , cheers.
You could always try and defend the actions I outlined in a rational way, point by point .
Or just hysterically label it a witch hunt , up to you of course
Examples please
You wonder what on earth was in Carrots post that got removed when you read some of these anti Stroud posts!