How do you know why Gareth mentioned TS, did he tell you? How do you know that Mr Howard suggested that TS could use a little positive press, did he tell you?
I’m pretty sure GA acknowledged Trevor Stroud’s input in his comments on the official website about the signing of Luke Bolton on loan until the end of the season.
I do not recall any reference to a need for a little positive press.
@glasshalffull said:
How do you know why Gareth mentioned TS, did he tell you? How do you know that Mr Howard suggested that TS could use a little positive press, did he tell you?
Ties you up in knots doesn’t it? Don’t get so worked up you’ll still be allowed in for your free meal.
Avoiding answering the questions I see. And for the record, I have had one ‘free meal’ at Adams Park in the last two seasons when I was the guest of a visiting chairman. Yet another of your assumptions that you parade as the truth.
@glasshalffull said:
Avoiding answering the questions I see. And for the record, I have had one ‘free meal’ at Adams Park in the last two seasons when I was the guest of a visiting chairman. Yet another of your assumptions that you parade as the truth.
@marlowchair You have also avoided my question from yesterday.
"What is your actual beef (with Trevor Stroud) as you are coming across as a bit obsessive ?"
Please read my post again to understand the context.
I don’t have a “beef” with Trevor Stroud. I have an incredibly forthright opinion on his performance as director and chairman of the club, the results of which we have been witnessing for the past few weeks.
That, and the decision making that for our club to this situation causes me to be adamant Trevor is not the right person to lead our club anymore.
I’m unsure as to why people on here still continue to doubt @marlowchair and strangely make accusations. Clearly this isn’t a personal vendetta as some of you are alluding to. There is clear evidence that the recent actions of TS are somewhat dodgy to say the least, hence why a member of the trust formally asked Andrew Harman to make the bid himself.
@Bacon_Sandwich The problem I and some others have with @marlowchair is not so much what he says it’s how he says it. It does read most of the time like a personal vendetta and whilst his facts and inside knowledge are well-informed and helpful it doesn’t necessarily mean that his interpretation (always) is. As such I think it is right that people question him when it does get too personal.
Having said that, I think his post at 06.13 this morning is absolutely spot on and honestly explains his perspective on what is going on and all his posts (probably ever) should be read in that context.
A personal vendetta would suggest I have a personal issue with Trevor that has led to unfounded attempts to discredit him in some way of seeking retribution.
That’s not the case.
Whistleblowing on actual behaviours and decision making of an elected leader of a member owned organisation, motivated by rectifying wrongs and securing the best future and security for said organisation is vastly different .
You've said lots on this forum recently @marlowchair. Can you remind me what you've said that turned out to be fact and not just an opinion believed by a few others.
I can't get past the personal vendetta I'm afraid and it worries me what effect it is having on the debate.
I obviously unwittingly must have spoken to members of the 'power group' then. Fiendishly they looked like normal people and spoke quite convincingly and reasonably about the two bids. I should not have worn my 'i'm wendoverman off the gasroom' t-shirt and perhaps they would not have tried to trick me with their lies and deceit. I feel dirty and used. #propagandatool
Marlow Chair - don't be put off by boardroom auto-responders.
The board's response to the Americans' cancellation needs to be discussed at tonight's meeting.
The next tactic, allegedly, is to get Harman's bid and to dismiss it without sharing the information with the members before agreeing to the Private Equity Investors bid. I suppose this could change if people were offered a title and some consultancy work but I don't see that happening.
The decision-making of the Board has put the future of the club at risk and thus they are completely responsible for the situation so please excuse some members if they question the board's judgement and the motivations behind it.
The last time they recommended a consortium it was Hooper and Harry (Henry) Kerr of Avalon. Please google Mr. Kerr - he is on the run believed to be somewhere near Vienna.
The Football Club directors were unanimous, heads of terms, delighted to announce etc with the no-show punters above so please excuse us for not falling into line again.
Have the Trust board run criminal checks on all the individuals looking to bid this time?
The might want to make sure before tonight's meeting.
As far as I understand it and I may be wrong and look forward to seeing the details...yanks bid is equity and the fear is Andy's bid when examined in detail may turn out to be loans. I think suggesting people are involved in or involving criminals is not helpful. I am not a boardroom responder but a normal run of the mill fan. Very run of the mill as Mrs W would confirm.
Nothing run of the mill about you @Wendoverman. Regardless of whether they hit the nail on the head (they very often do) and satirical as they often are, your posts are the only ones (apart from my own, of course) that are unfailingly entertaining.
To clarify, I am not suggesting any of these people are criminals I am suggesting that in the light of previous 'bidders' it is vitally important to conduct a proper criminal check as part of the due diligence.
Control of the club has sat with our largest and most important creditor for the past 4 years. He was granted the chairmanship and full control day to day of all matters. That’s not in dispute, any staff, management or directlr who is honest will confirm.
Legitimising that control for new owners should be demanded so I’ve no problem with either bid being granted equity as long as the deal is negotiated well by capable people without bias or conflict of interest .
I personally believe run better we can trade well t support owned but that’s just my view and I accept that.
Equity v loans only relates to the initial purchase deal anyway , ie is harmans £2mil buying 49% of the club or is it , or portion of it ,going in as loans in Return for 49%
And
Is the Americans full cash investment going in as purchase price in return for shares or loans ?
We know the £500k loan already given will be transferred to equity. To match that all harman has to do is put in £500k and receive same equity the US guys would have got .
After this initial deal, Both parties will need to prop up monthly losses by putting cash in and both will use normal practice of calling hem directors loans. Hence my view the argument is moot ,
again , it’s the terms and details negotiated that will ultimately make the decision good or bad regardless of who we sell to.
Yet again we come back to what quality we have representing our club in that process.
@Wendoverman said:
I obviously unwittingly must have spoken to members of the 'power group' then. Fiendishly they looked like normal people and spoke quite convincingly and reasonably about the two bids. I should not have worn my 'i'm wendoverman off the gasroom' t-shirt and perhaps they would not have tried to trick me with their lies and deceit. I feel dirty and used. #propagandatool
You would probably find two or three people who would speak quite convincingly about Harman's bid such as Keith Ryan and Keith Scott. Most people in this world will have supporters, even Brexit Boris!
@Guppys_Left_Leg, is not so much about cutting 'fat' and controlling costs, more about raising revenue. Such as not having empty boxes on match day, getting more use out of the stadium during the week, getting local businesses more involved with the club.
It would need a marketing/sales person 100% dedicated to raising revenue, not getting side tracked on admin matters.
@Steve_Peart said: @Guppys_Left_Leg, is not so much about cutting 'fat' and controlling costs, more about raising revenue. Such as not having empty boxes on match day, getting more use out of the stadium during the week, getting local businesses more involved with the club.
It would need a marketing/sales person 100% dedicated to raising revenue, not getting side tracked on admin matters.
We are not a club with huge fulltime numbers but we have ample staff and management to cover these areas. The issue isn’t he numbers it’s the peformance and experience .
Fulltime-
general manager
Financial controller
Club secretary
Media and marketing manager
Food and beverage manager
Bar manager
Stadium manager
Ticketing and retail manager
Reception & events co-ordinator
Commercial & events manager
Media assistant
Head chef
Stadium & stewarding Co-ordinator
Plus various casual and part time staff under those above , mostly matchday related which is of course understandable but more than a few day to day week to week.
The argument from harman and the Americans is that we are short in numbers and there is upside in new resources to sell and push and market other revenue streams.
There is another argument that the above list for a league football club is more than enough . We have one first team squad, no academy or reserves , no cup runs adding work load and distracting from day to day core business focus....
Something simply isn’t right. Our resources are underperforming.At a meeting last year the GM got up and passionately argued that he and he team were working hard.
Based on the above there is an argument that we are not performing in-line with the resources allocated and numbers in the off pitch squad .
@marlowchair, the GM has made it clear to me that his main task is to control costs, so I know he is not fully focused on selling. Nor, I assume, is the Head of Media & Marketing.
Who is the Commercial & Events Manager? It's not listed on the club's contact page, or is it the Projects & Events Manager (Charlotte Cobb). I must admit I wasn't aware of that position. There is also a Conference Co-ordinator listed.
I think until both bids have been explained and examined I am bowing out of this debate as it's just going round in circles with little information and entrenched arguments. If you can go round in entrenched circles.
Reference the AH Proposal. Ah wants to start an academy. But a training camp at another location. This is nuts. We have training facilities but to have 2 training locations. Am I missing something here!?
Comments
How do you know why Gareth mentioned TS, did he tell you? How do you know that Mr Howard suggested that TS could use a little positive press, did he tell you?
I’m pretty sure GA acknowledged Trevor Stroud’s input in his comments on the official website about the signing of Luke Bolton on loan until the end of the season.
I do not recall any reference to a need for a little positive press.
Ties you up in knots doesn’t it? Don’t get so worked up you’ll still be allowed in for your free meal.
Avoiding answering the questions I see. And for the record, I have had one ‘free meal’ at Adams Park in the last two seasons when I was the guest of a visiting chairman. Yet another of your assumptions that you parade as the truth.
Sure.
@marlowchair You have also avoided my question from yesterday.
"What is your actual beef (with Trevor Stroud) as you are coming across as a bit obsessive ?"
Please read my post again to understand the context.
I don’t have a “beef” with Trevor Stroud. I have an incredibly forthright opinion on his performance as director and chairman of the club, the results of which we have been witnessing for the past few weeks.
That, and the decision making that for our club to this situation causes me to be adamant Trevor is not the right person to lead our club anymore.
I’m unsure as to why people on here still continue to doubt @marlowchair and strangely make accusations. Clearly this isn’t a personal vendetta as some of you are alluding to. There is clear evidence that the recent actions of TS are somewhat dodgy to say the least, hence why a member of the trust formally asked Andrew Harman to make the bid himself.
@Bacon_Sandwich The problem I and some others have with @marlowchair is not so much what he says it’s how he says it. It does read most of the time like a personal vendetta and whilst his facts and inside knowledge are well-informed and helpful it doesn’t necessarily mean that his interpretation (always) is. As such I think it is right that people question him when it does get too personal.
Having said that, I think his post at 06.13 this morning is absolutely spot on and honestly explains his perspective on what is going on and all his posts (probably ever) should be read in that context.
A personal vendetta would suggest I have a personal issue with Trevor that has led to unfounded attempts to discredit him in some way of seeking retribution.
That’s not the case.
Whistleblowing on actual behaviours and decision making of an elected leader of a member owned organisation, motivated by rectifying wrongs and securing the best future and security for said organisation is vastly different .
Greg Le Mond
You've said lots on this forum recently @marlowchair. Can you remind me what you've said that turned out to be fact and not just an opinion believed by a few others.
I can't get past the personal vendetta I'm afraid and it worries me what effect it is having on the debate.
I obviously unwittingly must have spoken to members of the 'power group' then. Fiendishly they looked like normal people and spoke quite convincingly and reasonably about the two bids. I should not have worn my 'i'm wendoverman off the gasroom' t-shirt and perhaps they would not have tried to trick me with their lies and deceit. I feel dirty and used. #propagandatool
Marlow Chair - don't be put off by boardroom auto-responders.
The board's response to the Americans' cancellation needs to be discussed at tonight's meeting.
The next tactic, allegedly, is to get Harman's bid and to dismiss it without sharing the information with the members before agreeing to the Private Equity Investors bid. I suppose this could change if people were offered a title and some consultancy work but I don't see that happening.
The decision-making of the Board has put the future of the club at risk and thus they are completely responsible for the situation so please excuse some members if they question the board's judgement and the motivations behind it.
The last time they recommended a consortium it was Hooper and Harry (Henry) Kerr of Avalon. Please google Mr. Kerr - he is on the run believed to be somewhere near Vienna.
The Football Club directors were unanimous, heads of terms, delighted to announce etc with the no-show punters above so please excuse us for not falling into line again.
Have the Trust board run criminal checks on all the individuals looking to bid this time?
The might want to make sure before tonight's meeting.
This, of course, is all allegedly.
As far as I understand it and I may be wrong and look forward to seeing the details...yanks bid is equity and the fear is Andy's bid when examined in detail may turn out to be loans. I think suggesting people are involved in or involving criminals is not helpful. I am not a boardroom responder but a normal run of the mill fan. Very run of the mill as Mrs W would confirm.
Nothing run of the mill about you @Wendoverman. Regardless of whether they hit the nail on the head (they very often do) and satirical as they often are, your posts are the only ones (apart from my own, of course) that are unfailingly entertaining.
A chilled out entertainer @micra that's me ;-)
To clarify, I am not suggesting any of these people are criminals I am suggesting that in the light of previous 'bidders' it is vitally important to conduct a proper criminal check as part of the due diligence.
Derby County probably took care of that @NiceCarrots. Reckon Andy’s pretty clean.
Equity v loans debate is moot in my view.
Control of the club has sat with our largest and most important creditor for the past 4 years. He was granted the chairmanship and full control day to day of all matters. That’s not in dispute, any staff, management or directlr who is honest will confirm.
Legitimising that control for new owners should be demanded so I’ve no problem with either bid being granted equity as long as the deal is negotiated well by capable people without bias or conflict of interest .
I personally believe run better we can trade well t support owned but that’s just my view and I accept that.
Equity v loans only relates to the initial purchase deal anyway , ie is harmans £2mil buying 49% of the club or is it , or portion of it ,going in as loans in Return for 49%
And
Is the Americans full cash investment going in as purchase price in return for shares or loans ?
We know the £500k loan already given will be transferred to equity. To match that all harman has to do is put in £500k and receive same equity the US guys would have got .
After this initial deal, Both parties will need to prop up monthly losses by putting cash in and both will use normal practice of calling hem directors loans. Hence my view the argument is moot ,
again , it’s the terms and details negotiated that will ultimately make the decision good or bad regardless of who we sell to.
Yet again we come back to what quality we have representing our club in that process.
You would probably find two or three people who would speak quite convincingly about Harman's bid such as Keith Ryan and Keith Scott. Most people in this world will have supporters, even Brexit Boris!
@marlowchair
You state 'run better' again
I have no doubt improvements can be made - they can in all businesses.
I just don't see where the fat is in the budget to save £500k a year. Well certainly not, yet continue to have a League club.
@Guppys_Left_Leg have you seen the budget then?
@Guppys_Left_Leg, is not so much about cutting 'fat' and controlling costs, more about raising revenue. Such as not having empty boxes on match day, getting more use out of the stadium during the week, getting local businesses more involved with the club.
It would need a marketing/sales person 100% dedicated to raising revenue, not getting side tracked on admin matters.
At least £100k in senior salaries not getting sufficient performance or ROI for a start.
We are not a club with huge fulltime numbers but we have ample staff and management to cover these areas. The issue isn’t he numbers it’s the peformance and experience .
Fulltime-
general manager
Financial controller
Club secretary
Media and marketing manager
Food and beverage manager
Bar manager
Stadium manager
Ticketing and retail manager
Reception & events co-ordinator
Commercial & events manager
Media assistant
Head chef
Stadium & stewarding Co-ordinator
Plus various casual and part time staff under those above , mostly matchday related which is of course understandable but more than a few day to day week to week.
The argument from harman and the Americans is that we are short in numbers and there is upside in new resources to sell and push and market other revenue streams.
There is another argument that the above list for a league football club is more than enough . We have one first team squad, no academy or reserves , no cup runs adding work load and distracting from day to day core business focus....
Something simply isn’t right. Our resources are underperforming.At a meeting last year the GM got up and passionately argued that he and he team were working hard.
Based on the above there is an argument that we are not performing in-line with the resources allocated and numbers in the off pitch squad .
@marlowchair, the GM has made it clear to me that his main task is to control costs, so I know he is not fully focused on selling. Nor, I assume, is the Head of Media & Marketing.
Who is the Commercial & Events Manager? It's not listed on the club's contact page, or is it the Projects & Events Manager (Charlotte Cobb). I must admit I wasn't aware of that position. There is also a Conference Co-ordinator listed.
Ok so that’s one extra Steve. I wasn’t aware of the projects and events title.
If the GM has one focus and that’s controlling costs , his remit isn’t very general then is it? What’s the financial controller doing ?
Like I said , £100k Easily poorly spent , managed, utilised or wasted , whatever the reason , it’s not good enough .
I think until both bids have been explained and examined I am bowing out of this debate as it's just going round in circles with little information and entrenched arguments. If you can go round in entrenched circles.
You can but it hurts.
Reference the AH Proposal. Ah wants to start an academy. But a training camp at another location. This is nuts. We have training facilities but to have 2 training locations. Am I missing something here!?