|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 24, 2020 8:22:42 GMT
Having completed the purchase of a majority stake in Dwane Sports, Rovers are unquestionably under his control, with older brother Hani – often acting as a consultary financial regulator for the club with no discernible interest in football – no longer part of the direct decision-making. That’s been against the departure of Steve Hamer as chairman, and suspension and resignation of Ken Masters as Supporters’ Club representative on the board, and if you’re still in any doubt as to why they left the club, his interview with BBC Points West Sports Editor Alistair Durden essentially revealed why. When asked the rationale behind the elevation of the immensely-popular Tom Gorringe and Karim Mardam-Bey to the board, Wael Al-Qadi said: "I believe in order for any organisation to be successful you need to surround yourself with the right people; with the most important attribute being people you can trust." And that lack of trust was also locked in an issue that has lurked in the background of Bristol Rovers Football Club ever since the UWE deal collapsed – the search for a new stadium. Until his departure Hani Al-Qadi, who also stepped down as director of Dwane Developments in March, held a preference for a complete sale of the club with countless speculators, investors and third parties holding loose interest. Around 18 months ago it was established that a consortium, with a background in large-scale commercial and property development, were the most credible bidders out there. That was tied in with Hani Al-Qadi’s desire for a sale, due to the financial black holes that needed to be plugged and his own apathy towards football in general; unlike Wael, whose love of the game is what, at base level, maintains his connection. There had been long-running concerns, however, that Hamer – who was the first point of contact in the early days of talks – and Masters had grown too close to the idea of what Rovers would look like after a takeover, rather than the present status of the club, and that caused obvious friction within the boardroom. if Hamer was always Hani's man (which has been said on here I think, even if it wasn't formally the case), these bits did put him in a tricky position It reads as much as though the conflict was between WAQ and Hani, with club/SC staff lining up behind one or the other, at least at the beginning (after which maybe SH and KM got a bit carried away)
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 24, 2020 8:36:21 GMT
Having completed the purchase of a majority stake in Dwane Sports, Rovers are unquestionably under his control, with older brother Hani – often acting as a consultary financial regulator for the club with no discernible interest in football – no longer part of the direct decision-making. That’s been against the departure of Steve Hamer as chairman, and suspension and resignation of Ken Masters as Supporters’ Club representative on the board, and if you’re still in any doubt as to why they left the club, his interview with BBC Points West Sports Editor Alistair Durden essentially revealed why. When asked the rationale behind the elevation of the immensely-popular Tom Gorringe and Karim Mardam-Bey to the board, Wael Al-Qadi said: "I believe in order for any organisation to be successful you need to surround yourself with the right people; with the most important attribute being people you can trust." And that lack of trust was also locked in an issue that has lurked in the background of Bristol Rovers Football Club ever since the UWE deal collapsed – the search for a new stadium. Until his departure Hani Al-Qadi, who also stepped down as director of Dwane Developments in March, held a preference for a complete sale of the club with countless speculators, investors and third parties holding loose interest. Around 18 months ago it was established that a consortium, with a background in large-scale commercial and property development, were the most credible bidders out there. That was tied in with Hani Al-Qadi’s desire for a sale, due to the financial black holes that needed to be plugged and his own apathy towards football in general; unlike Wael, whose love of the game is what, at base level, maintains his connection. There had been long-running concerns, however, that Hamer – who was the first point of contact in the early days of talks – and Masters had grown too close to the idea of what Rovers would look like after a takeover, rather than the present status of the club, and that caused obvious friction within the boardroom. this also all seems to explain the delay on the training ground - Hani didn't want to spend any money as he wanted out, Wael wanted to progress things, the stadium plan was the key to Hani getting out/Wael staying in anyway, I'm still thrilled about the training ground situation - agree with BG, it's the keystone
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 24, 2020 8:37:57 GMT
this also all seems to explain the delay on the training ground - Hani didn't want to spend any money as he wanted out, Wael wanted to progress things, the stadium plan was the key to Hani getting out/Wael staying in anyway, I'm still thrilled about the training ground situation - agree with BG, it's the keystone and, looking at it that way, Wael really didn't hang around. He really wants to move things forward...
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Jun 24, 2020 8:45:44 GMT
Having completed the purchase of a majority stake in Dwane Sports, Rovers are unquestionably under his control, with older brother Hani – often acting as a consultary financial regulator for the club with no discernible interest in football – no longer part of the direct decision-making. That’s been against the departure of Steve Hamer as chairman, and suspension and resignation of Ken Masters as Supporters’ Club representative on the board, and if you’re still in any doubt as to why they left the club, his interview with BBC Points West Sports Editor Alistair Durden essentially revealed why. When asked the rationale behind the elevation of the immensely-popular Tom Gorringe and Karim Mardam-Bey to the board, Wael Al-Qadi said: "I believe in order for any organisation to be successful you need to surround yourself with the right people; with the most important attribute being people you can trust." And that lack of trust was also locked in an issue that has lurked in the background of Bristol Rovers Football Club ever since the UWE deal collapsed – the search for a new stadium. Until his departure Hani Al-Qadi, who also stepped down as director of Dwane Developments in March, held a preference for a complete sale of the club with countless speculators, investors and third parties holding loose interest. Around 18 months ago it was established that a consortium, with a background in large-scale commercial and property development, were the most credible bidders out there. That was tied in with Hani Al-Qadi’s desire for a sale, due to the financial black holes that needed to be plugged and his own apathy towards football in general; unlike Wael, whose love of the game is what, at base level, maintains his connection. There had been long-running concerns, however, that Hamer – who was the first point of contact in the early days of talks – and Masters had grown too close to the idea of what Rovers would look like after a takeover, rather than the present status of the club, and that caused obvious friction within the boardroom. if Hamer was always Hani's man (which has been said on here I think, even if it wasn't formally the case), these bits did put him in a tricky position It reads as much as though the conflict was between WAQ and Hani, with club/SC staff lining up behind one or the other, at least at the beginning (after which maybe SH and KM got a bit carried away) Hamer may have been Hani's man, but I suspect Hamer was more Hamer's man
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jun 24, 2020 9:27:39 GMT
if Hamer was always Hani's man (which has been said on here I think, even if it wasn't formally the case), these bits did put him in a tricky position It reads as much as though the conflict was between WAQ and Hani, with club/SC staff lining up behind one or the other, at least at the beginning (after which maybe SH and KM got a bit carried away) Hamer may have been Hani's man, but I suspect Hamer was more Hamer's man There is no proof of that. I only ever had any connection with SH via email but he did help, each time and replied each time. He never ever ignored. It’s just speculation and without substantiated evidence. That’s the nature of any forum. I’m hoping we get much better with communication to the fanbase
|
|
|
Post by rowdenhill on Jun 24, 2020 17:49:36 GMT
If you were a 17-year-old commercial traveller driving a Jaguar E-Type in Belfast in 1972 it was quite difficult to find motor insurance.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2020 18:00:11 GMT
If you were a 17-year-old commercial traveller driving a Jaguar E-Type in Belfast in 1972 it was quite difficult to find motor insurance. REAL lads drove hillman imps
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jun 24, 2020 19:11:21 GMT
Having completed the purchase of a majority stake in Dwane Sports, Rovers are unquestionably under his control, with older brother Hani – often acting as a consultary financial regulator for the club with no discernible interest in football – no longer part of the direct decision-making. That’s been against the departure of Steve Hamer as chairman, and suspension and resignation of Ken Masters as Supporters’ Club representative on the board, and if you’re still in any doubt as to why they left the club, his interview with BBC Points West Sports Editor Alistair Durden essentially revealed why. When asked the rationale behind the elevation of the immensely-popular Tom Gorringe and Karim Mardam-Bey to the board, Wael Al-Qadi said: "I believe in order for any organisation to be successful you need to surround yourself with the right people; with the most important attribute being people you can trust." And that lack of trust was also locked in an issue that has lurked in the background of Bristol Rovers Football Club ever since the UWE deal collapsed – the search for a new stadium. Until his departure Hani Al-Qadi, who also stepped down as director of Dwane Developments in March, held a preference for a complete sale of the club with countless speculators, investors and third parties holding loose interest. Around 18 months ago it was established that a consortium, with a background in large-scale commercial and property development, were the most credible bidders out there. That was tied in with Hani Al-Qadi’s desire for a sale, due to the financial black holes that needed to be plugged and his own apathy towards football in general; unlike Wael, whose love of the game is what, at base level, maintains his connection. There had been long-running concerns, however, that Hamer – who was the first point of contact in the early days of talks – and Masters had grown too close to the idea of what Rovers would look like after a takeover, rather than the present status of the club, and that caused obvious friction within the boardroom. if Hamer was always Hani's man (which has been said on here I think, even if it wasn't formally the case), these bits did put him in a tricky position It reads as much as though the conflict was between WAQ and Hani, with club/SC staff lining up behind one or the other, at least at the beginning (after which maybe SH and KM got a bit carried away) Some time ago I learned that to save the club embarrassment Steve Hamer had, on a number occasions, paid creditors from his personal resources when monies were not forthcoming from the family. For a long period he was owed a six figure sum which was only repaid when a player was sold. During his Chairmanship I remained ambivalent about Steve but now I believe he has been badly maligned and as the story unfolds you can see why.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 24, 2020 19:25:43 GMT
if Hamer was always Hani's man (which has been said on here I think, even if it wasn't formally the case), these bits did put him in a tricky position It reads as much as though the conflict was between WAQ and Hani, with club/SC staff lining up behind one or the other, at least at the beginning (after which maybe SH and KM got a bit carried away) Some time ago I learned that to save the club embarrassment Steve Hamer had, on a number occasions, paid creditors from his personal resources when monies were not forthcoming from the family. For a long period he was owed a six figure sum which was only repaid when a player was sold. During his Chairmanship I remained ambivalent about Steve but now I believe he has been badly maligned and as the story unfolds you can see why. if true, that's outrageous. So Wael is happy to settle, say, £10m on the club's behalf, but I'm surmising that the previous ownership combo made trouble over settling day-to-day trade debts? and, just to check - six figure sum = more than £100k? Whatever was that made up of - it's way too much for fencegate?
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jun 24, 2020 19:55:50 GMT
Some time ago I learned that to save the club embarrassment Steve Hamer had, on a number occasions, paid creditors from his personal resources when monies were not forthcoming from the family. For a long period he was owed a six figure sum which was only repaid when a player was sold. During his Chairmanship I remained ambivalent about Steve but now I believe he has been badly maligned and as the story unfolds you can see why. if true, that's outrageous. So Wael is happy to settle, say, £10m on the club's behalf, but I'm surmising that the previous ownership combo made trouble over settling day-to-day trade debts? and, just to check - six figure sum = more than £100k? Whatever was that made up of - it's way too much for fencegate? I understand that one of the items was wages due to a club which was loaning us a player and which were overdue to a point where Rovers were facing a possible transfer ban. This is something I had no reason to bring up before but the piece by James Piercy clearly includes a great deal of input from the club and it seems intended to provide Gasheads with a list of those we should treat as good guys and a list of those we should treat as bad guys. So in the interest of fairness I think what Steve Hamer did for the club should be made known.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2020 20:53:14 GMT
Some time ago I learned that to save the club embarrassment Steve Hamer had, on a number occasions, paid creditors from his personal resources when monies were not forthcoming from the family. For a long period he was owed a six figure sum which was only repaid when a player was sold. During his Chairmanship I remained ambivalent about Steve but now I believe he has been badly maligned and as the story unfolds you can see why. if true, that's outrageous. So Wael is happy to settle, say, £10m on the club's behalf, but I'm surmising that the previous ownership combo made trouble over settling day-to-day trade debts? and, just to check - six figure sum = more than £100k? Whatever was that made up of - it's way too much for fencegate? Can we just be clear about what Wael's investment actually represents. He hasn't, as far as I can tell, paid creditors for nothing in return. In simplistic terms, he, Hani and their Father each owned 1/3rd each, Wael appears to now own those other 2/3rds. With that he now also owns all of the stadium. It's not a gift.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jun 24, 2020 21:02:47 GMT
Plus he's cleared the club debts and wrote off the interest, so he's now the owner of a debt free football club which owns a stadium worth £25m plus, not sure what this mean for the developers of the FM as I assume if they want to buy Wael out now it won't come cheap, rather than the FM deal being close to be agreed it could be we as far as ever from getting a new stadium.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2020 21:47:37 GMT
Plus he's cleared the club debts and wrote off the interest, so he's now the owner of a debt free football club which owns a stadium worth £25m plus, not sure what this mean for the developers of the FM as I assume if they want to buy Wael out now it won't come cheap, rather than the FM deal being close to be agreed it could be we as far as ever from getting a new stadium. It's all a technicality. The interest was being recorded in the accounts, but they were awarding it to themselves, the only practical purpose I could see for that was that it could maybe help if the company ever made a profit. Previously 3 people owned the stadium and had X invested, now 1 person owns the stadium and has X invested but the charge against the stadium is gone. Why were we calling it 'debt' when 3 people had put the money in but 'investment' when it's just Wael? He said in the written statement that the small level of external debt remains. 2 questions outstanding; 1. How much more money does he have available to invest? 2. He's already talked about new people arriving, so the question is, how much money do they bring? Questions 1 and 2 could feed in to each other as Wael isn't going to accept a level of new investment that takes away control of the club. And it does sound as if it's all happening within the existing company framework as I think he said that new shares would be issued to facilitate incoming investment.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2020 22:18:31 GMT
Some time ago I learned that to save the club embarrassment Steve Hamer had, on a number occasions, paid creditors from his personal resources when monies were not forthcoming from the family. For a long period he was owed a six figure sum which was only repaid when a player was sold. During his Chairmanship I remained ambivalent about Steve but now I believe he has been badly maligned and as the story unfolds you can see why. if true, that's outrageous. So Wael is happy to settle, say, £10m on the club's behalf, but I'm surmising that the previous ownership combo made trouble over settling day-to-day trade debts? and, just to check - six figure sum = more than £100k? Whatever was that made up of - it's way too much for fencegate? A large chunk was the trip to Portugal that Steve Hamer allegedly paid for.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 24, 2020 22:27:54 GMT
if true, that's outrageous. So Wael is happy to settle, say, £10m on the club's behalf, but I'm surmising that the previous ownership combo made trouble over settling day-to-day trade debts? and, just to check - six figure sum = more than £100k? Whatever was that made up of - it's way too much for fencegate? A large chunk was the trip to Portugal that Steve Hamer allegedly paid for. All this would seem to give a bit of context to the previous tensions at the club It's all very odd
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jun 24, 2020 23:58:16 GMT
A large chunk was the trip to Portugal that Steve Hamer allegedly paid for. All this would seem to give a bit of context to the previous tensions at the club It's all very odd It is very odd that this piece by James Piercy was put out at a time when most fans are feeling positive and we are supposed to be looking forward not backwards. What was the point in giving James the ammunition to bring up all the old grievances again and even put Wael’s brother on the new list of bogey men ? The interest write off, loan capitalization, new board members and well written statement/letter should have signaled a clean slate, a fresh start and a putting of people and events from the past well behind us. I reacted because I think the polarization and the attitude of “you are either with us or against us” has failed at Rovers before and we don’t want to go back to that. Wael should see that pursuing vendettas against colleagues from the past is counter productive and that fans now want leadership not score settling.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 25, 2020 0:09:22 GMT
All this would seem to give a bit of context to the previous tensions at the club It's all very odd It is very odd that this piece by James Piercy was put out at a time when most fans are feeling positive and we are supposed to be looking forward not backwards. What was the point in giving James the ammunition to bring up all the old grievances again and even put Wael’s brother on the new list of bogey men ? The interest write off, loan capitalization, new board members and well written statement/letter should have signaled a clean slate, a fresh start and a putting of people and events from the past well behind us. I reacted because I think the polarization and the attitude of “you are either with us or against us” has failed at Rovers before and we don’t want to go back to that. Wael should see that pursuing vendettas against colleagues from the past is counter productive and that fans now want leadership not score settling. I think that's only a little bit odd compared with the rest And it might just be Mr Piercy fluffing his feathers rather than a club briefing. Although your theory does seem plausible
|
|
|
Post by swissgas on Jun 25, 2020 1:03:24 GMT
It is very odd that this piece by James Piercy was put out at a time when most fans are feeling positive and we are supposed to be looking forward not backwards. What was the point in giving James the ammunition to bring up all the old grievances again and even put Wael’s brother on the new list of bogey men ? The interest write off, loan capitalization, new board members and well written statement/letter should have signaled a clean slate, a fresh start and a putting of people and events from the past well behind us. I reacted because I think the polarization and the attitude of “you are either with us or against us” has failed at Rovers before and we don’t want to go back to that. Wael should see that pursuing vendettas against colleagues from the past is counter productive and that fans now want leadership not score settling. I think that's only a little bit odd compared with the rest And it might just be Mr Piercy fluffing his feathers rather than a club briefing. Although your theory does seem plausible Do you mean Steve Hamer paying bills on behalf of Rovers is very odd ? We probably differ on that because although unusual I don’t find it outrageous. There have been times when extreme circumstances dictated that people paid bills on my behalf although admittedly nowhere near the amounts involved here. But there was mutual trust so they were always confident of getting their cash back. I think with the unpredictable nature of football and with the distance from Jordan there might occasionally be a reason for a senior figure to step in to save embarrassment as Steve Hamer did. But what I find very odd is that after being close colleagues seemingly working together with mutual trust that Wael should turn so much against Steve. We used to think it was because Steve had betrayed Rovers by conducting stadium negotiations behind the back of the family. But now, apparently with the approval of the club, it has been revealed that Steve was actually working under instructions from Hani, the main man in Dwane Sports who gave the financial guarantees listed in the accounts. So the only reason for the vendetta against Steve appears to be that he chose to take orders from Hani instead of Wael which to any reasonable person would be quite understandable. IMO it would be better for the club if Wael forgot about the Rovers figure he’s clashed with in the past and concentrated on making sure we have a viable business going forward.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 25, 2020 8:12:36 GMT
I think that's only a little bit odd compared with the rest And it might just be Mr Piercy fluffing his feathers rather than a club briefing. Although your theory does seem plausible Do you mean Steve Hamer paying bills on behalf of Rovers is very odd ? We probably differ on that because although unusual I don’t find it outrageous. There have been times when extreme circumstances dictated that people paid bills on my behalf although admittedly nowhere near the amounts involved here. But there was mutual trust so they were always confident of getting their cash back. I think with the unpredictable nature of football and with the distance from Jordan there might occasionally be a reason for a senior figure to step in to save embarrassment as Steve Hamer did. But what I find very odd is that after being close colleagues seemingly working together with mutual trust that Wael should turn so much against Steve. We used to think it was because Steve had betrayed Rovers by conducting stadium negotiations behind the back of the family. But now, apparently with the approval of the club, it has been revealed that Steve was actually working under instructions from Hani, the main man in Dwane Sports who gave the financial guarantees listed in the accounts. So the only reason for the vendetta against Steve appears to be that he chose to take orders from Hani instead of Wael which to any reasonable person would be quite understandable. IMO it would be better for the club if Wael forgot about the Rovers figure he’s clashed with in the past and concentrated on making sure we have a viable business going forward. It's very much about quantum, but also because the family are bankers and so experts in 'money' I didn't think of SH as wealthy, although clearly he had over £100k in readies to loan. According to the gospel that is this forum Rovers paid him £70k a year, so that all the above suggests he loaned 2 years' net money to his very much wealthier employers who had the cash to pump £10m+ into Rovers over 3 years or so It's well known that he and Starnes were very distant for months, I think
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Jun 25, 2020 8:16:14 GMT
Also, if he had been Hani's man and things were very very difficult, Wael would have to get rid to change the mood, and take away fear of a lingering 5th columnist or leaker
|
|