|
Post by alloutofgas on Aug 24, 2017 13:20:25 GMT
My head defo hurts after reading all the rubbish posted on both forums, with consortium offers, administration, DC leaving, UWE crap etc etc Whatever we say or do on here and the other place will not make one difference to what our owners do or say and for the life of me i cant get excited about any of it Come Saturday, i will be at the game watching the best football team in League 1 play and i will give one jot about the politics of the club I take it all you lot will be at the game ? Nothing to see hear, move along..... 'HERE'
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 24, 2017 13:35:22 GMT
Nothing to see hear, move along..... 'HERE' I hear what you are saying Thanks for the head up i've changed it (s**t predictive text)
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 24, 2017 14:37:13 GMT
Well there was no £10m pot of cash sat on the balance sheet at the last accounts, when Dwane had already put in place the Revolving Credit Facility. So where has the loan cash gone? Spent on the training ground? So you're saying we've borrowed £10m from the owners of the training ground to then spend on increasing the value of their asset? Whiffs of fraud dies that or asset stripping. Or actually cash was required to pay off loans. Wonga ex directors etc, and to meet the regular, negative, cadhflow of the business. If you believe the £10m is for the training ground (cost and expenses to date £1m? Of which Dwane paid the cost of £1m as they have unequivocally said they own the site) your living in cloud cuckoo land or the club is sat with £9-10m in its bank account. Which do you think is the likely answer. Surely if its a credit facility, it's there to be drawn on as required and wouldn't be shown as cash immediately? Like an overdraft facility with a bank?
Credit facilities are perfectly normal, I don't think i own shares in asingle company without some agreed dredit facility with a bank, venture capitalists etc. However, with the strong posiblity of £10m being used up fairly quickly, if I was a Director of Bristol Rovers FC I would want to know what contingency is in place for when it does run out.
Yes but the last set of accounts showed that we are already owing approx £7m under the facility. As it's a Revolving Credit Facility you can only then borrow thst £7m again if you've first repaid it. Di you believe we've repaid anything since the last set if accounts? As you point out many companies have these facilities available but not many companies that have consistently negative cadhflow have them. Of course not many companies are spending the proceeds of there only asset in that situation luckily for us our owners are happy to lend us that money knowing it's covered by the security they have arranged. What a great wheeze that is
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 24, 2017 14:38:37 GMT
Don't ask Henbury difficult questions like that it'll make his head hurt My head defo hurts after reading all the rubbish posted on both forums, with consortium offers, administration, DC leaving, UWE crap etc etc Whatever we say or do on hear and the other place will not make one difference to what our owners do or say and for the life of me i cant get excited about any of it Come Saturday, i will be at the game watching the best football team in League 1 play and i will give one jot about the politics of the club I take it all you lot will be at the game ? For someone who cares not a jot you have a hell of a posting record on both forums. I'll just take that you are living in cloud cuckoo land
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Aug 24, 2017 14:43:32 GMT
Fitting together the pieces of the jigsaw to try to reveal a clear picture is anything but boring to me but I accept we are all different. The facts are in the accounts which show that for an outlay of £6.2 million Dwane Sports acquired a business with an asset which had been recently valued by Sainsburys at £29 million and which, even if you considered the Sainsburys offer unreal, would probably have been thought to be worth at least £15 million. Why did Wael use the term "amazing value" to describe the deal he got ? Did he think the league 2 team he purchased was amazing value at £6.2 million ? Or was it the business operation that was losing over £1 million per year when he bought it ? Perhaps it was the opportunity offered by the UWE planning permission that he thought was worth so much. But I think most people would conclude that the amazing value he was talking about was getting £15 million worth of land for £6.2 million with a football club thrown in. We all know Wael's priority and passion was for the football club but he was only able to sell the idea to his family because of the land. My supposition is that too much emphasis was placed on the "amazing value" and not enough forethought was given to how the ongoing project was to be managed and financed. The disappearance of the three experts pictured with Wael soon after the deal was completed was a first indication that no clear plan was being followed. Events since then support the theory that they wanted the deal done because it was "amazing value" and would see what they could make of it afterwards. Forethought and planning does not seem to be one of our owners strengths as witnessed by the vacuum which occurred in the aftermath of the UWE Stadium abandonment. Like everyone else I wish Wael and Steve had been ready with an inspiring plan to cheer us all up and give us realistic hope for the future but the fact is they were not. On the other hand there is also lots of evidence of strategic thinking and planning; bringing in Cunnah and co bringing in the moneyball man from Germany buying the training ground setting up the development squad, with good people investing in medical/fitness staff and nutrition 5 year deal for DC biggish signings by our standards a different 'tone' and culture about the place etc etc it's just the money for the stadium and maybe training ground development that is missing, not a lack of forethought and planning? I wish it were true ampg but I am afraid the only strategy which has been successful is the one which set out to give the impression that strategic thinking and planning was in place and which has set the "tone and culture about the place" up till recently. Michael Cunnah and Lee Atkins were consultants not hired executives on long term contracts. Will Dubey was probably the same although his disappearance has not been officially announced so we cannot be sure. It is very easy to hire skilled and high profile business consultants to give the impression they are "your people" when in fact it is really no different from hiring a carpenter or plumber to do work for you. This is why it is doubly disappointing that Wael is using exactly the same ruse with his Mem redevelopment musings. Surely we won't fall for it twice ? And sadly the same thing may well apply with other staff because a little research will show that our Head of Medical actually still has his own private practise in Mangotsfield and I believe other members of his team may be self employed as well. There is nothing wrong with this, it may make perfect business sense, but the heavy implication has been that these people are "our people" and there is long term investment taking place whereas that doesn't seem to be entirely the case. The announcement of a 5 year contract for DC was intended to give the impression of a serious commitment to the club by the owners and most fans see it that way. Although details are not disclosed I think it should be obvious to anyone who has ever offered or accepted an employment contract that there will be get out clauses for both sides. So by trying to gain goodwill by implying that Rovers are making a large financial commitment in guaranteeing DC his salary for 5 years the club are, IMO, being less than candid with us. I can't criticise the club for signing player for undisclosed fees because everyone does that but I think we have been carried away by wishful thinking and want to believe the upper figures which were speculated over in the press. Likewise the improvement to the development squad are to be applauded although that is something, the emphasis on youth, which we all agreed Nick Higgs got right. But whether a long term programme like this should be using up resources when there are so many other important priorities to address I'm not sure. And don't get me started on the training ground land .... I might go into a trance ! But, seriously, the question which bugs me most about this is whether the £1.18 million needed to finance the reported purchase price came from Rovers £10 million credit facility ? If it did then it will have significantly reduced Rovers available working capital which is not good for the club's business and is bound to impact on funding for the team. And why would a company which is already losing money make a loan to another related company to buy an unproductive piece of land ? Hopefully we will learn at some point that Dwane Colony Ltd funded the purchase without relying on the credit facility of their associated company.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 24, 2017 15:02:29 GMT
On the other hand there is also lots of evidence of strategic thinking and planning; bringing in Cunnah and co bringing in the moneyball man from Germany buying the training ground setting up the development squad, with good people investing in medical/fitness staff and nutrition 5 year deal for DC biggish signings by our standards a different 'tone' and culture about the place etc etc it's just the money for the stadium and maybe training ground development that is missing, not a lack of forethought and planning? I wish it were true ampg but I am afraid the only strategy which has been successful is the one which set out to give the impression that strategic thinking and planning was in place and which has set the "tone and culture about the place" up till recently. Michael Cunnah and Lee Atkins were consultants not hired executives on long term contracts. Will Dubey was probably the same although his disappearance has not been officially announced so we cannot be sure. It is very easy to hire skilled and high profile business consultants to give the impression they are "your people" when in fact it is really no different from hiring a carpenter or plumber to do work for you. This is why it is doubly disappointing that Wael is using exactly the same ruse with his Mem redevelopment musings. Surely we won't fall for it twice ? And sadly the same thing may well apply with other staff because a little research will show that our Head of Medical actually still has his own private practise in Mangotsfield and I believe other members of his team may be self employed as well. There is nothing wrong with this, it may make perfect business sense, but the heavy implication has been that these people are "our people" and there is long term investment taking place whereas that doesn't seem to be entirely the case. The announcement of a 5 year contract for DC was intended to give the impression of a serious commitment to the club by the owners and most fans see it that way. Although details are not disclosed I think it should be obvious to anyone who has ever offered or accepted an employment contract that there will be get out clauses for both sides. So by trying to gain goodwill by implying that Rovers are making a large financial commitment in guaranteeing DC his salary for 5 years the club are, IMO, being less than candid with us. I can't criticise the club for signing player for undisclosed fees because everyone does that but I think we have been carried away by wishful thinking and want to believe the upper figures which were speculated over in the press. Likewise the improvement to the development squad are to be applauded although that is something, the emphasis on youth, which we all agreed Nick Higgs got right. But whether a long term programme like this should be using up resources when there are so many other important priorities to address I'm not sure. And don't get me started on the training ground land .... I might go into a trance ! But, seriously, the question which bugs me most about this is whether the £1.18 million needed to finance the reported purchase price came from Rovers £10 million credit facility ? If it did then it will have significantly reduced Rovers available working capital which is not good for the club's business and is bound to impact on funding for the team. And why would a company which is already losing money make a loan to another related company to buy an unproductive piece of land ? Hopefully we will learn at some point that Dwane Colony Ltd funded the purchase without relying on the credit facility of their associated company. on the balance of probabilities I don't think I agree with you there swiss. The reasons for giving the impression of strategic thinking without actually doing seem to me to be to dress things up for sale, or to curry favour (eg with fans) in the short term - but its an awful lot of fash to go to without very good reason your points about the consultant contracts are interesting, but I think bringing the right people in (which in itself demonstrates some vision) is more important than the contractual basis under which they operate (which you maybe agree with based on the above) so I think they strategic approach is very much there, its the finance which is a concern the Cunnah/Atkins/Dubey thing is very much unexplained though. I thought Will Dubey is 'probably' still with us?
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Aug 24, 2017 15:02:35 GMT
My head defo hurts after reading all the rubbish posted on both forums, with consortium offers, administration, DC leaving, UWE crap etc etc Whatever we say or do on hear and the other place will not make one difference to what our owners do or say and for the life of me i cant get excited about any of it Come Saturday, i will be at the game watching the best football team in League 1 play and i will give one jot about the politics of the club I take it all you lot will be at the game ? For someone who cares not a jot you have a hell of a posting record on both forums. I'll just take that you are living in cloud cuckoo land No that's our owners
|
|
faggotygas
Byron Anthony
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,862
|
Post by faggotygas on Aug 24, 2017 15:05:27 GMT
Surely if its a credit facility, it's there to be drawn on as required and wouldn't be shown as cash immediately? Like an overdraft facility with a bank?
Credit facilities are perfectly normal, I don't think i own shares in asingle company without some agreed dredit facility with a bank, venture capitalists etc. However, with the strong posiblity of £10m being used up fairly quickly, if I was a Director of Bristol Rovers FC I would want to know what contingency is in place for when it does run out.
Yes but the last set of accounts showed that we are already owing approx £7m under the facility. As it's a Revolving Credit Facility you can only then borrow thst £7m again if you've first repaid it. Di you believe we've repaid anything since the last set if accounts? As you point out many companies have these facilities available but not many companies that have consistently negative cadhflow have them. Of course not many companies are spending the proceeds of there only asset in that situation luckily for us our owners are happy to lend us that money knowing it's covered by the security they have arranged. What a great wheeze that is Presumably that credit is only borrowed as its paid out, so would never show as cash in the bank (or only fleetingly). It would be shown as borrowings and expenditure in the year end accounts. Or have I got that wrong?
Totally agree your last paragraph, and it worries me. Why are the fans directors not enquiring as to the future financial security of the club? I'd want to know the answer to the above question before buying a tenner's worth of shares in a business, let alone the amount that the supporter's club has put in. I've invested in loss-making companies before, but I want to know the turnaround plan and short, medium and long term cashflow and credit situation first and be comfortable with it.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 24, 2017 15:15:12 GMT
Yes but the last set of accounts showed that we are already owing approx £7m under the facility. As it's a Revolving Credit Facility you can only then borrow thst £7m again if you've first repaid it. Di you believe we've repaid anything since the last set if accounts? As you point out many companies have these facilities available but not many companies that have consistently negative cadhflow have them. Of course not many companies are spending the proceeds of there only asset in that situation luckily for us our owners are happy to lend us that money knowing it's covered by the security they have arranged. What a great wheeze that is Presumably that credit is only borrowed as its paid out, so would never show as cash in the bank (or only fleetingly). It would be shown as borrowings and expenditure in the year end accounts. Or have I got that wrong?
Totally agree your last paragraph, and it worries me. Why are the fans directors not enquiring as to the future financial security of the club? I'd want to know the answer to the above question before buying a tenner's worth of shares in a business, let alone the amount that the supporter's club has put in. I've invested in loss-making companies before, but I want to know the turnaround plan and short, medium and long term cashflow and credit situation first and be comfortable with it.
The supporters club/fans directors have been distinctly silent following the collapse of the UWE deal. Mind you they have said sorry for a cock up that meant 199 wasn't open
As I said sometime ago, as irrelevant/ineffectual/too close to the club, the SC and directors may have been in the past and the 'propping' up of the old regime, when the Al-Qadis took over 92% of the club, their voice became more important than ever for reasons such as we are all talking about now, but it appears they have lost it completely
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Aug 24, 2017 15:44:21 GMT
I wish it were true ampg but I am afraid the only strategy which has been successful is the one which set out to give the impression that strategic thinking and planning was in place and which has set the "tone and culture about the place" up till recently. Michael Cunnah and Lee Atkins were consultants not hired executives on long term contracts. Will Dubey was probably the same although his disappearance has not been officially announced so we cannot be sure. It is very easy to hire skilled and high profile business consultants to give the impression they are "your people" when in fact it is really no different from hiring a carpenter or plumber to do work for you. This is why it is doubly disappointing that Wael is using exactly the same ruse with his Mem redevelopment musings. Surely we won't fall for it twice ? And sadly the same thing may well apply with other staff because a little research will show that our Head of Medical actually still has his own private practise in Mangotsfield and I believe other members of his team may be self employed as well. There is nothing wrong with this, it may make perfect business sense, but the heavy implication has been that these people are "our people" and there is long term investment taking place whereas that doesn't seem to be entirely the case. The announcement of a 5 year contract for DC was intended to give the impression of a serious commitment to the club by the owners and most fans see it that way. Although details are not disclosed I think it should be obvious to anyone who has ever offered or accepted an employment contract that there will be get out clauses for both sides. So by trying to gain goodwill by implying that Rovers are making a large financial commitment in guaranteeing DC his salary for 5 years the club are, IMO, being less than candid with us. I can't criticise the club for signing player for undisclosed fees because everyone does that but I think we have been carried away by wishful thinking and want to believe the upper figures which were speculated over in the press. Likewise the improvement to the development squad are to be applauded although that is something, the emphasis on youth, which we all agreed Nick Higgs got right. But whether a long term programme like this should be using up resources when there are so many other important priorities to address I'm not sure. And don't get me started on the training ground land .... I might go into a trance ! But, seriously, the question which bugs me most about this is whether the £1.18 million needed to finance the reported purchase price came from Rovers £10 million credit facility ? If it did then it will have significantly reduced Rovers available working capital which is not good for the club's business and is bound to impact on funding for the team. And why would a company which is already losing money make a loan to another related company to buy an unproductive piece of land ? Hopefully we will learn at some point that Dwane Colony Ltd funded the purchase without relying on the credit facility of their associated company. on the balance of probabilities I don't think I agree with you there swiss. The reasons for giving the impression of strategic thinking without actually doing seem to me to be to dress things up for sale, or to curry favour (eg with fans) in the short term - but its an awful lot of fash to go to without very good reason your points about the consultant contracts are interesting, but I think bringing the right people in (which in itself demonstrates some vision) is more important than the contractual basis under which they operate (which you maybe agree with based on the above) so I think they strategic approach is very much there, its the finance which is a concern the Cunnah/Atkins/Dubey thing is very much unexplained though. I thought Will Dubey is 'probably' still with us? When I courted controversy a month or so ago by comparing the present owners with Nick Higgs it wasn't intended just to stir things up, as some suggested at the time, it was because I had started to see similarities in the approach. In some ways, in both cases, it's the approach a fan would take to owning a football club as opposed to that of an owner wanting to achieve the same things but who realised a serious business strategy was needed. Nick Higgs couldn't be faulted for the consultants he used, which were all credible, and I remember Pan Leisure were hired to do some of the work on income streams which, when it all collapsed, resulted in "Rovers 2" coming up with the classic line "down the pan leisure". But what many of us asked during the supposed formulation of plans for both the original Mem regeneration and the UWE Stadium project was to see some basic outlines of what was going to be done and how it was to be financed. We wanted to know these things because we were interested, we were fans of the club, it was a natural desire to have. But nothing was revealed and it was only later discovered, as many of us suspected, that the business strategy plans hardly existed and the finance was badly lacking. I think some of us are dreading that the exact same thing is happening now
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Aug 24, 2017 15:56:39 GMT
tis a good insight IMO swiss. I'm just hoping it isn't completely accurate!
|
|
|
Post by CountyGroundHotel on Aug 24, 2017 16:45:10 GMT
Yes but the last set of accounts showed that we are already owing approx £7m under the facility. As it's a Revolving Credit Facility you can only then borrow thst £7m again if you've first repaid it. Di you believe we've repaid anything since the last set if accounts? As you point out many companies have these facilities available but not many companies that have consistently negative cadhflow have them. Of course not many companies are spending the proceeds of there only asset in that situation luckily for us our owners are happy to lend us that money knowing it's covered by the security they have arranged. What a great wheeze that is Presumably that credit is only borrowed as its paid out, so would never show as cash in the bank (or only fleetingly). It would be shown as borrowings and expenditure in the year end accounts. Or have I got that wrong?
Totally agree your last paragraph, and it worries me. Why are the fans directors not enquiring as to the future financial security of the club? I'd want to know the answer to the above question before buying a tenner's worth of shares in a business, let alone the amount that the supporter's club has put in. I've invested in loss-making companies before, but I want to know the turnaround plan and short, medium and long term cashflow and credit situation first and be comfortable with it.
I'd imagine in a cashflow negative business like this it'll only touch the bank account briefly. The only evidence will be the growing liability on the balance sheet, certainly not an asset in the bank account
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 19:00:44 GMT
Reasoned analysis? wael hypnotised by the deal which bankers are prone to according to swiss,pure supposition and make believe. Nobody on the forum knows the truth,simple as that. Maybe that part is just the opinion of Swiss, but he was right about the charge on the stadium, and I'm open to sensible suggestions about why that's needed. ' 'Just in case' isn't a sensible suggestion No but im not sure speculative mind reading with a negative slant helps. If billy bodin has a poor game on saturday some clown will say it was "because his mind was on move to a bigger club" thats what the "hypnotised" and "bankers are prone to" comments remind me of.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2017 20:15:06 GMT
Maybe that part is just the opinion of Swiss, but he was right about the charge on the stadium, and I'm open to sensible suggestions about why that's needed. ' 'Just in case' isn't a sensible suggestion No but im not sure speculative mind reading with a negative slant helps. If billy bodin has a poor game on saturday some clown will say it was "because his mind was on move to a bigger club" thats what the "hypnotised" and "bankers are prone to" comments remind me of. I have no idea what's going on, but Swiss speaks as if he's got experience of dealing with these people, so he's either full of it, or he's on to something, your guess is as good as mine. The problem is, Hamer sounded like he was shell shocked and didn't know all of the details, Wael was far from convincing, after that, people are going to get concerned. They must have known that at some point they would have to field those questions, the lack of preparation and the fact that Plan B doesn't appear to even be on the drawing board yet is hugely disappointing, I honestly thought this level of organisation was behind us when Higgs packed up his Newton's Cradle and left Box 1. I can't remember exactly what Wael said about the charge on the stadium, something along the lines of 'in business you never know what can happen'', shame he didn't think ahead about the possibility of the UWE deal not being done on his terms and getting something else in place Had they said 'The King is dead, long live the King' here are the plans for the next stadium, this time it's our project, not something we have inherited, and we are jolly well going to deliver it, then Swiss would sound like a bit of a moaney old bloke having a dig from a safe distance, but they didn't, so he doesn't, unfortunately.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Aug 24, 2017 23:08:51 GMT
Wael can't really say too much about Plan B when he's probably still got no idea why Hani pulled the plug on Plan A. In some ways it might be better all round if Wael moved on and Hani took direct control, as he's clearly no longer in control.
What is baffling is why the Academy are still signing players but DC still hasn't even replaced Monty, do we really need a full squad of Academy players at our level, is Wael living in the real world?
|
|
Captain Jayho
Andy Tillson
Straight outta burrington...
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 472
|
Post by Captain Jayho on Aug 25, 2017 9:50:07 GMT
Yes, there is a weird disconnect between the theories that the owners want out, some contractors may not have been paid and the fact that at the same time the powers that be are sanctioning our backroom staff and development squads to multiply like rabbits.
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 25, 2017 13:23:23 GMT
out of interest I tweeted BSS Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 6h6 hours ago
@bristolroverssc @briseymoursmith Did the SC ever have a comment on the collapse of UWE stadium project?
Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith · 1h1 hour ago
Hi SImon yes . Please refer to jim Chappell programme notes in the last programme v Peterborough. Best wishes Bri
Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 1h1 hour ago
There are lots of rumours bout at Mo. Would be nice to know Q's are being asked and/or positive reassurance from our Fans reps Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith
Replying to @im_sprouticus @bristolroverssc
It would be for the CLub to comment on issues involving the Mem Simon. Best wishes Bri
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2017 13:53:58 GMT
out of interest I tweeted BSS Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 6h6 hours ago
@bristolroverssc @briseymoursmith Did the SC ever have a comment on the collapse of UWE stadium project?
Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith · 1h1 hour ago
Hi SImon yes . Please refer to jim Chappell programme notes in the last programme v Peterborough. Best wishes Bri
Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 1h1 hour ago
There are lots of rumours bout at Mo. Would be nice to know Q's are being asked and/or positive reassurance from our Fans reps Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith
Replying to @im_sprouticus @bristolroverssc
It would be for the CLub to comment on issues involving the Mem Simon. Best wishes Bri
I really shouldn't go there because this has been done to death, but: 1. He's a Director, so he is the club. That's the point of having Directors. 2. What does he think it's for him to do, then, because he's replied to two general enquiries by referring you elsewhere? What has long bugged me is that he seemingly abdicates or denies all responsibility or obligation, but stays in post as if he readily accepts there's nothing else to it except to 'look important' - and he's the very man for that. Insight into all the rumours doubts and speculation on this thread is exactly what he's there for. There's a huge difference between a response and a reply, and he's not replied. All he ever says is the equivalent of 'That would be an ecumenical matter'. So what does he think he's there for? Is it really just an ego stroke? I'd love to know (but wouldn't get a reply).
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Aug 25, 2017 14:03:48 GMT
out of interest I tweeted BSS Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 6h6 hours ago
@bristolroverssc @briseymoursmith Did the SC ever have a comment on the collapse of UWE stadium project?
Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith · 1h1 hour ago
Hi SImon yes . Please refer to jim Chappell programme notes in the last programme v Peterborough. Best wishes Bri
Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 1h1 hour ago
There are lots of rumours bout at Mo. Would be nice to know Q's are being asked and/or positive reassurance from our Fans reps Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith
Replying to @im_sprouticus @bristolroverssc
It would be for the CLub to comment on issues involving the Mem Simon. Best wishes Bri
I really shouldn't go there because this has been done to death, but: 1. He's a Director, so he is the club. That's the point of having Directors. 2. What does he think it's for him to do, then, because he's replied to two general enquiries by referring you elsewhere? What has long bugged me is that he seemingly abdicates or denies all responsibility or obligation, but stays in post as if he readily accepts there's nothing else to it except to 'look important' - and he's the very man for that. Insight into all the rumours doubts and speculation on this thread is exactly what he's there for. There's a huge difference between a response and a reply, and he's not replied. All he ever says is the equivalent of 'That would be an ecumenical matter'. So what does he think he's there for? Is it really just an ego stroke? I'd love to know (but wouldn't get a reply). That just gave me an image of what all the board meetings must be like
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2017 14:11:35 GMT
out of interest I tweeted BSS Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 6h6 hours ago
@bristolroverssc @briseymoursmith Did the SC ever have a comment on the collapse of UWE stadium project?
Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith · 1h1 hour ago
Hi SImon yes . Please refer to jim Chappell programme notes in the last programme v Peterborough. Best wishes Bri
Simon Phillips @im_sprouticus · 1h1 hour ago
There are lots of rumours bout at Mo. Would be nice to know Q's are being asked and/or positive reassurance from our Fans reps Brian Seymour-Smith @briseymoursmith
Replying to @im_sprouticus @bristolroverssc
It would be for the CLub to comment on issues involving the Mem Simon. Best wishes Bri
I really shouldn't go there because this has been done to death, but: 1. He's a Director, so he is the club. That's the point of having Directors. 2. What does he think it's for him to do, then, because he's replied to two general enquiries by referring you elsewhere? What has long bugged me is that he seemingly abdicates or denies all responsibility or obligation, but stays in post as if he readily accepts there's nothing else to it except to 'look important' - and he's the very man for that. Insight into all the rumours doubts and speculation on this thread is exactly what he's there for. There's a huge difference between a response and a reply, and he's not replied. All he ever says is the equivalent of 'That would be an ecumenical matter'. So what does he think he's there for? Is it really just an ego stroke? I'd love to know (but wouldn't get a reply). Sounds like him and Comedy Ken have been shut out of board meetings, at least when anything meaningful is being discussed. That probably says as much about the owners' perception of the 2 than about their intention to run closed meetings though. If this is the case (and if they've worked it out yet) they should say so, they represent over a million quid of our money!
|
|