dagnogo
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 872
|
Post by dagnogo on Jul 19, 2015 19:18:17 GMT
This kind of attitude is exactly what's wrong with the football club. Mustn't expect more from those running the club because they're paying. If you have an idea, we don't care because you're not a millionaire. And even then, two blokes who had the money got the boot because they dared to rock he boat. Thing is, the board aren't paying - it's loans with interest. Plus, the money has been wasted - how much went on Buckle and his players, McGhee and his, Ward and his? With the wage bills we had, we should've been safe in League 1 all along. The reason no-one pops up to take over now (to our knowledge, unless they have turned down offers on the quiet) is the debt. The club has always had potential, look at the fanbase and the attendances, clubs do better than us on gates half our size. But no-one's going to pay up front to cover Nick and co for their losses and their mistakes. The fact that no-one wants to blow millions to cover the debts before they invest a penny in the club doesn't mean Higgs and frienda are the beat people for the job. If only they'd see that and seek some help.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 19:32:11 GMT
Dissapointing post Balders.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 19:54:13 GMT
I just don't see the point in everyone moaning about the bad job Higgs and Co do when without the funds to change anything it's all going to stay the same.
Chillax dudes, let it all run it's course!
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Jul 19, 2015 20:01:40 GMT
It's been the same for a while..
Just a shame we can't harness negative and turn it to positive..
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 20:07:01 GMT
That's the second time you've said how much better we are now than when we had those bounders 'Flook and Bennett' leaving us in the lurch. Wasn't Gordon Bennett a paid employee who simply went to work (very successfully) for someone else, as is everybody's right? Are you thinking of Flook and Bradshaw? Bradshaw was def there in the day. Happy to be put right if someone knows better. I thought it was Bennett though...??...maybe wrong? Said it twice cos no one seems to recognise it, or remember. Board deserted in 1985/86. Dunford major took over (bless him). Convenient. For them. We've always had cause for criticism of board, but no one stumps up cash to make a difference. No one has replied to Balders. It's relevant and to the point.. Gorden Bennet was Rovers chief executive at the time not a board member. Millionaires row as the Rovers board was known at the time, let the Rovers down through mismanagement a damn sight more than Nick Higgs has. IMO.
|
|
|
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Jul 19, 2015 20:11:35 GMT
Bradshaw was def there in the day. Happy to be put right if someone knows better. I thought it was Bennett though...??...maybe wrong? Said it twice cos no one seems to recognise it, or remember. Board deserted in 1985/86. Dunford major took over (bless him). Convenient. For them. We've always had cause for criticism of board, but no one stumps up cash to make a difference. No one has replied to Balders. It's relevant and to the point.. Gorden Bennet was Rovers chief executive at the time not a board member. Millionaires row as the Rovers board was known at the time, let the Rovers down through mismanagement a damn sight more than Nick Higgs has. IMO. I can't remember exactly, crazytrain. I just know we were let down by those whom you would expect to stick close to us if rovers were important to their lives. Maybe you're right. Just hope that doesn't happen again. BB was there at some point, then wasn't, now is..
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Jul 19, 2015 20:12:15 GMT
That last paragraph is indeed idyllic. I hope so. I hold out little hope though. As for your first paragraph, whole heartedly fallen for any bait as that's whom I am. I never walked away from dark times at Eastville or Twerton pre 1990. Or, when we were relegated last year. I haven't millions to my name, BG. I wish I did. But folk that do, and choose to run our club (for better or worse) have stood their round so to speak. Put more in than the average fan has, so I just think they deserve a break now and again. Balders sort of summed it up for me. If anyone can do better, pump the dosh in and I'll support you...please?...I'm not saying everything rosy, but like said before, could be worse Darlo, Hereford, etc.. Why would anyone pump their own money in to cover all of Higgs' losses so that he can walk away, unscathed, and put out a BS statement about leaving the club in a better state then when he arrived? Simply not going to happen. Doesn't that mean then, that Higgs IS the only game in town?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 20:15:40 GMT
Gorden Bennet was Rovers chief executive at the time not a board member. Millionaires row as the Rovers board was known at the time, let the Rovers down through mismanagement a damn sight more than Nick Higgs has. IMO. I can't remember exactly, crazytrain. I just know we were let down by those whom you would expect to stick close to us if rovers were important to their lives. Maybe you're right. Just hope that doesn't happen again. BB was there at some point, then wasn't, now is.. Glad we got that cleared up. I don't see why Gordon Bennett should be slated. Flook and Bradshaw, then. Whatever became of Martin Flook?
|
|
dagnogo
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 872
|
Post by dagnogo on Jul 19, 2015 20:34:04 GMT
I just don't see the point in everyone moaning about the bad job Higgs and Co do when without the funds to change anything it's all going to stay the same. Chillax dudes, let it all run it's course! I guess folk are worried that at the ens of the course, the Mem gets sold to get the debts paid off if the appeal fails and we lose our home.
|
|
toteend
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 305
|
Post by toteend on Jul 19, 2015 20:43:46 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it.
Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor.
|
|
dagnogo
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 872
|
Post by dagnogo on Jul 19, 2015 20:50:53 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it. Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor. I see what you mean, but no investor has come in to date. Thing is, although we know (roughly) what the debts are, we don't know what the asking price is. Higgs might say "well, the Mem is worth £12m so give us that and we'll spend £7m of it on debt repayments".
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 21:01:10 GMT
Why would anyone pump their own money in to cover all of Higgs' losses so that he can walk away, unscathed, and put out a BS statement about leaving the club in a better state then when he arrived? Simply not going to happen. Doesn't that mean then, that Higgs IS the only game in town? It means that he makes himself the only game in town, quite deliberately.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 21:02:23 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it. Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor. He's still clinging to the notion that he can get £30,000,000 for our stadium.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Jul 19, 2015 21:24:27 GMT
Doesn't that mean then, that Higgs IS the only game in town? It means that he makes himself the only game in town, quite deliberately. So the club is deliberately being run at a loss and he has put in millions of pounds just so nobody can ever take it away from him? Interesting theory.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 21:26:06 GMT
It means that he makes himself the only game in town, quite deliberately. So the club is deliberately being run at a loss and he has put in millions of pounds just so nobody can ever take it away from him? Interesting theory. No, he could advertise the club at it's value, nothing, zero pounds, and put the stadium into trust so that it can't be sold and leave the FC homeless.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 21:29:12 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it. Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor. Yes, if an investor was going to sell the Mem to realise its potential as a housing estate then yes he/she could double their money if they then wound the club up. However, as a stadium The Mem is worth less than the debt which renders the business as a going concern insolvent. A good deal for the club and an investor with the club at heart would be to take over the mortgage on the stadium with Wonga or some other lender and the current owners stand down and say goodbye to their losses. We would then be back to the same position as we were before Mr Higgs burdened the club with such huge loss and debt. It does appear though that Mr Higgs is chasing his losses and he knows that the only way he will get his lost money back is to win his personal battle with Sainsburys.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 19, 2015 21:50:53 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it. Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor. Yes, if an investor was going to sell the Mem to realise its potential as a housing estate then yes he/she could double their money if they then wound the club up. However, as a stadium The Mem is worth less than the debt which renders the business as a going concern insolvent. A good deal for the club and an investor with the club at heart would be to take over the mortgage on the stadium with Wonga or some other lender and the current owners stand down and say goodbye to their losses. We would then be back to the same position as we were before Mr Higgs burdened the club with such huge loss and debt. It does appear though that Mr Higgs is chasing his losses and he knows that the only way he will get his lost money back is to win his personal battle with Sainsburys. Exactly this, but the mortgage could and should have been settled with the fortune made by Trollope and Lennie's JPT, promotion and FA cup run.
This is the thing about UWE, even if it had of happened we were never told who was going to own it, if the FC would have to pay to use it and what would happen with non-football income.
It's hard to see what the 'out' is for Higgs if he wants back the money he has wasted.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jul 20, 2015 6:45:26 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it. Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor. The Mem.is worth f**k all as a football.stadium though. A new.investor would have to either redevelop the Mem or.find another 15m to build UWE
|
|
toteend
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 305
|
Post by toteend on Jul 20, 2015 13:51:08 GMT
Got it in one Sprout. That's exactly why Talksport Radio voted us the most eligible club in Britain.
The reasons given were:
Not expensive to buy Huge potential fan base. Superb site to develop new stadium. Planning permission already obtained to develop the stadium. New investors could redevelop existing site with several viable alternatives which even I can think of, but not telling Scrafton and Co, unless it's an open air toilet for Mr Carstairs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2015 14:09:16 GMT
I wonder why people say investors won't come in because of the debts. If I could afford to clear them in exchange for the Mem I would jump at it. Our debts total approx £7.5m (inc the Wonga loan), whilst the Mem is worth between £12 & £15 million. No problem for any investor. So, are you saying that Higgs will walk away and hand the stadium over in exchange for the £7.5m (your figure) needed to clear the debt?
|
|