|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Mar 20, 2016 14:02:17 GMT
but very good for BRFC (if not for myself as the seller)
do you have any speculation as to the price paid? In simple sums the net asset value might have been something like....
value of the Mem (absent Sainsburys, but with pp) £15m debts to directors, Wonga, solicitors' bills and others -£7m NAV £8m plus 'goodwill'
if, say, the Al Qadi's paid £15m they would have paid £7m for goodwill and the 'net future value of cashflows generated'. Might that be within sight of the ballpark I'm wondering?
Hopefully it will be very very good for the club and the fans because it couldn't have been much worse. As to the purchase price paid, I would bet that it was much lower than most people would think. If NH got £15m from Wael for the club he's an absolute genius. Can't imagine it would be anything like that.
|
|
|
Post by richmace on Mar 21, 2016 6:31:01 GMT
It's weird, I class myself as one of the naughty 50 but I honestly think it is time to put all of this to bed now. As the saying goes "we have got our Rovers back". Bans have been overturned, old faces are back supporting the club they loved. Things have changed more than any of us could have dreamed of. Yes there are questions that we would liked answered but do we need them answered now? Agree 100%
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Mar 21, 2016 6:46:55 GMT
It's weird, I class myself as one of the naughty 50 but I honestly think it is time to put all of this to bed now. As the saying goes "we have got our Rovers back". Bans have been overturned, old faces are back supporting the club they loved. Things have changed more than any of us could have dreamed of. Yes there are questions that we would liked answered but do we need them answered now? Agree 100% Disagree - everything is as relevant as ever it was. Just because the Romans (and their glass) aren't around any more doesn't make them any more discussable
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Mar 21, 2016 6:48:21 GMT
Disagree - everything is as relevant as ever it was. Just because the Romans (and their glass) aren't around any more doesn't make them any more discussable But i was never one of a 'naughty 50', so maybe we've been at cross purposes throughout
|
|
|
Post by johnanagram on Mar 21, 2016 15:18:33 GMT
Disagree - everything is as relevant as ever it was. Just because the Romans (and their glass) aren't around any more doesn't make them any more discussable But i was never one of a 'naughty 50', so maybe we've been at cross purposes throughout You were, you were a very naughty boy!!!!
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Mar 21, 2016 18:56:12 GMT
Hopefully it will be very very good for the club and the fans because it couldn't have been much worse. As to the purchase price paid, I would bet that it was much lower than most people would think. If NH got £15m from Wael for the club he's an absolute genius. Can't imagine it would be anything like that. Think he'd just be lucky to get his loans paid off as where would NH be now w/o the takeover, circa £10m in debt, the UWE plans turned to dust and no real way of selling the Mem to pay off the debts, or get his loans back, even keeping the club from Admin would have been a fight w/o him pouring millions into the club.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,171
Member is Online
|
Post by eppinggas on Mar 22, 2016 8:54:56 GMT
Let it go Tone. You did your best and it wasn't good enough. There were parts of the contract where we tried to change things yet still the concencus is that it's all Sainsburys fault. We got it wrong and allowed things to get out of hand. Supreme Court, really ? I really think that unless there is an agenda elsewhere then it's time to let go and move on. Personally, I am relieved this has been dealt with pretty soon in the new owners guardianship of the club and that the Al Qadi family can now sort things out and get on with the stadium sans the soap opera that this has been The appropriate phrase, I believe is, "Give them enough rope".
|
|
|
Post by fatherjackhackett on Mar 22, 2016 9:16:09 GMT
Getting rid of Higgs, Watola, Boycie and the other shysters who previously occupied Box 1?
Given a choice between what is now happening and the above mentioned at UWE still running the club like a 70s corner shop, I'd say that in the end, we won.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,171
Member is Online
|
Post by eppinggas on Mar 22, 2016 9:30:55 GMT
That would be an ecumenical matter Father.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,263
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Mar 22, 2016 15:50:43 GMT
Getting rid of Higgs, Watola, Boycie and the other shysters who previously occupied Box 1? Given a choice between what is now happening and the above mentioned at UWE still running the club like a 70s corner shop, I'd say that in the end, we won. Boycie still trying, very hard, to be in with the new owners though or, at least, it seems that way. I never understood what his role was and what he actually brought to the table. I know he was supposed to be the man to sort merchandising but that has been an abject exercise in futility. How has he managed to stay onboard ? I really don't get it
|
|
|
Post by didlesknowmydad on Mar 23, 2016 0:32:27 GMT
Getting rid of Higgs, Watola, Boycie and the other shysters who previously occupied Box 1? Given a choice between what is now happening and the above mentioned at UWE still running the club like a 70s corner shop, I'd say that in the end, we won. Boycie still trying, very hard, to be in with the new owners though or, at least, it seems that way. I never understood what his role was and what he actually brought to the table. I know he was supposed to be the man to sort merchandising but that has been an abject exercise in futility. How has he managed to stay onboard ? I really don't get it It wouldn't be that Boycie had financial interests in his merchandising role?
|
|