Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 11:55:02 GMT
Would need to be a big win. Not sure what the buy in price would be, but it's going to be north of £15m. If accounts were drawn up to today, and liabilities over and above projected income for the next 2 years were factored in, I wouldn't be one bit surprised if it went over £20m. Obviously I don't have that money, or access to it, but even if I did I would point blank refuse to allow these reckless owners to walk away unscathed at my expense after 4 years of madness. If the football club is valued as a going concern then there is no asset of worth other than a licence to play in the football league and perhaps kudos of owning a football club. In fact DS may need to even offer an incentive to someone to take on the liabilities of the club assuming they will liquidate the stadium asset as part of a sale. What frustrates me is the ease at which our current owners just shovel further debt onto the club. They seem to have little regard for the future of the 137 year old club or it’s supporters if all their primary aim is to now escape without incurring financial loss. I hope this isn’t true but the absence of communication leads us to form our own conclusions on here say and instinct. The writing was on the wall the moment a charge was put on the stadium.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 12:01:44 GMT
Without the Memorial Ground, BRFC aren't worth a dime, are they? A business losing £2,000,000/year, remember. The economics of this is truly baffling. Correct. Bristol Rovers FC will be sold for £1. I'm not buying it, not even for £1, mostly because I don't want to lose £4m over the next 2 years sorting out the mess you would inherit.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 12:04:54 GMT
Correct. Bristol Rovers FC will be sold for £1. I'm not buying it, not even for £1, mostly because I don't want to lose £4m over the next 2 years sorting out the mess you would inherit. That is also a consideration for whoever takes on the football club as well as having to find rent for the new owners of The Mem in the short term and any ground share in the mid term if all goes to plan.
|
|
TaiwanGas
Paul Bannon
Tom Ramasuts Left Foot.
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,353
|
Post by TaiwanGas on Jan 19, 2020 12:30:23 GMT
As our gates plummet, when the day of reckoning finally arrives, the ALQ's will level the blame squarely on the supporters, it's going to be very hard to take!.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 12:31:10 GMT
I'm not buying it, not even for £1, mostly because I don't want to lose £4m over the next 2 years sorting out the mess you would inherit. That is also a consideration for whoever takes on the football club as well as having to find rent for the new owners of The Mem in the short term and any ground share in the mid term if all goes to plan. So, we've gone from, what was it, a £2.1m mortgage and £10k to own the entire stadium, to losing everything. And still the majority are backing Wael on that survey. Are they totally insane?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 12:47:59 GMT
Without the Memorial Ground, BRFC aren't worth a dime, are they? A business losing £2,000,000/year, remember. The economics of this is truly baffling. Correct. Bristol Rovers FC will be sold for £1. Who would take it on, even at that price? The current running costs are not sustainable with the club's level of income. If we operate in a sustainable manner surely we would be a league 2 club, at best. How happy would fans be then. We would also be relatively ambition free, as the same financial constraints would pour cold water on any such ideas. Add into the equation a club down the road who have an owner who is willing to pour £tens of millions into it and are competing at the right end of the championship, where is the appeal for the next generation? To dig this club out of this mire is going to take an extraordinary amount of capital, which will most likely be frozen in an asset, at best, or written off, at worse. Who is going to do this? In the annuls of history I think the period since 2004 will go down as a rank disaster for the club, quite possibly leading to its demise. It's no point just pointing a finger at the current owners, the rot set in well before them. All they have done is exacerbated the underlying issues with childish hubris and rank operational and financial incompetence.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 12:57:31 GMT
Correct. Bristol Rovers FC will be sold for £1. Who would take it on, even at that price? The current running costs are not sustainable with the club's level of income. If we operate in a sustainable manner surely we would be a league 2 club, at best. How happy would fans be then. We would also be relatively ambition free, as the same financial constraints would pour cold water on any such ideas. Add into the equation a club down the road who have an owner who is willing to pour £tens of millions into it and are competing at the right end of the championship, where is the appeal for the next generation? To dig this club out of this mire is going to take an extraordinary amount of capital, which will most likely be frozen in an asset, at best, or written off, at worse. Who is going to do this? In the annuls of history I think the period since 2004 will go down as a rank disaster for the club, quite possibly leading to its demise. It's no point just pointing a finger at the current owners, the rot set in well before them. All they have done is exacerbated the underlying issues with childish hubris and rank operational and financial incompetence. How can you make that assessment without knowing what actually happened with UWE? At one point in time these owners thought that it was looked viable.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 13:46:53 GMT
Who would take it on, even at that price? The current running costs are not sustainable with the club's level of income. If we operate in a sustainable manner surely we would be a league 2 club, at best. How happy would fans be then. We would also be relatively ambition free, as the same financial constraints would pour cold water on any such ideas. Add into the equation a club down the road who have an owner who is willing to pour £tens of millions into it and are competing at the right end of the championship, where is the appeal for the next generation? To dig this club out of this mire is going to take an extraordinary amount of capital, which will most likely be frozen in an asset, at best, or written off, at worse. Who is going to do this? In the annuls of history I think the period since 2004 will go down as a rank disaster for the club, quite possibly leading to its demise. It's no point just pointing a finger at the current owners, the rot set in well before them. All they have done is exacerbated the underlying issues with childish hubris and rank operational and financial incompetence. How can you make that assessment without knowing what actually happened with UWE? At one point in time these owners thought that it was looked viable. All the circumstantial evidence suggests they did not undertake proper due diligence. To many, including you as I recall, could not see how the Higg's plan for UWE added up. Not in capital terms nor how the potential revenues would accrue to BRFC under that capital plan. If those questions were being asked from afar, how the f did they miss it? The fact that they pulled out suggests our instincts were correct.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 13:59:15 GMT
How can you make that assessment without knowing what actually happened with UWE? At one point in time these owners thought that it was looked viable. All the circumstantial evidence suggests they did not undertake proper due diligence. To many, including you as I recall, could not see how the Higg's plan for UWE added up. Not in capital terms nor how the potential revenues would accrue to BRFC under that capital plan. If those questions were being asked from afar, how the f did they miss it? The fact that they pulled out suggests our instincts were correct. I presumed that, as they had access to the money to fill the funding gap and presumably deliver an upscaled plan, that the thing would actually happen. I honestly don't know why it didn't. What we could all see clearly was a problem for Nick was that Sainsbury's weren't paying £45m, so he was at least £15m short. As I've said several times, I honestly don't know what would have happened had we won the Sainsbury's case, my suspicion is that UWE wouldn't have happened, but we would have gone after Sainsbury's for damages.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:04:49 GMT
All the circumstantial evidence suggests they did not undertake proper due diligence. To many, including you as I recall, could not see how the Higg's plan for UWE added up. Not in capital terms nor how the potential revenues would accrue to BRFC under that capital plan. If those questions were being asked from afar, how the f did they miss it? The fact that they pulled out suggests our instincts were correct. I presumed that, as they had access to the money to fill the funding gap and presumably deliver an upscaled plan, that the thing would actually happen. I honestly don't know why it didn't. What we could all see clearly was a problem for Nick was that Sainsbury's weren't paying £45m, so he was at least £15m short. As I've said several times, I honestly don't know what would have happened had we won the Sainsbury's case, my suspicion is that UWE wouldn't have happened, but we would have gone after Sainsbury's for damages. I would suggest because the working capital required to fulfill their vision for the development if the club, combined with the shortfall in capital required to complete the build was greater than either their capacity or will to commit to that degree. My question always has been, how the eff did they miss that hole at the outset? It's so poor I don't want to believe it, but everything since has pointed to this.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,278
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Jan 19, 2020 14:12:27 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:13:54 GMT
I presumed that, as they had access to the money to fill the funding gap and presumably deliver an upscaled plan, that the thing would actually happen. I honestly don't know why it didn't. What we could all see clearly was a problem for Nick was that Sainsbury's weren't paying £45m, so he was at least £15m short. As I've said several times, I honestly don't know what would have happened had we won the Sainsbury's case, my suspicion is that UWE wouldn't have happened, but we would have gone after Sainsbury's for damages. I would suggest because the working capital required to fulfill their vision for the development if the club, combined with the shortfall in capital required to complete the build was greater than either their capacity or will to commit to that degree. My question always has been, how the eff did they miss that hole at the outset? It's so poor I don't want to believe it, but everything since has pointed to this. We know that they met with external investors in London. I presumed these people would fund aspects of the build?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:22:38 GMT
I would suggest because the working capital required to fulfill their vision for the development if the club, combined with the shortfall in capital required to complete the build was greater than either their capacity or will to commit to that degree. My question always has been, how the eff did they miss that hole at the outset? It's so poor I don't want to believe it, but everything since has pointed to this. We know that they met with external investors in London. I presumed these people would fund aspects of the build? I would absolutely think they would. IF the numbers added up. I never could see how they did, and clearly that was the ultimate conclusion.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 14:30:36 GMT
We know that they met with external investors in London. I presumed these people would fund aspects of the build? I would absolutely think they would. IF the numbers added up. I never could see how they did, and clearly that was the ultimate conclusion. Again, we don't know what the final plans looked like, or what our owners' demands were to 'allow' people to invest in their wonderful project.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,210
|
Post by eppinggas on Jan 19, 2020 18:44:06 GMT
I presumed that, as they had access to the money to fill the funding gap and presumably deliver an upscaled plan, that the thing would actually happen. I honestly don't know why it didn't. What we could all see clearly was a problem for Nick was that Sainsbury's weren't paying £45m, so he was at least £15m short. As I've said several times, I honestly don't know what would have happened had we won the Sainsbury's case, my suspicion is that UWE wouldn't have happened, but we would have gone after Sainsbury's for damages. I would suggest because the working capital required to fulfill their vision for the development if the club, combined with the shortfall in capital required to complete the build was greater than either their capacity or will to commit to that degree. My question always has been, how the eff did they miss that hole at the outset?It's so poor I don't want to believe it, but everything since has pointed to this. Fear and greed + an understanding that even given a worst case scenario (hello! here we are!) - that Dwane Sports will get their money back. Higgs may not have been a very good owner - but he did a great job of selling BRFC with the potential of UWE, and he got out without a loss. The bluff from Nick Higgs that "around 10 other interested parties are interested in buying BRFC". Really? LOL. I bet Nick Higgs would love to play poker with Wael Al-Qadi. Dwane Sports must have rushed due diligence. I think Wael persuaded his family against their better nature to dive in because the deal looked too good to be true. It wasn't. I thought that long BBC or ITV news item / interview (back in mid-2016?) "at home with the Al-Qadi's" was revealing. I paraphrase (from what I remember) from a small part of it: Interviewer: Are the rest of the family as enthusiastic as you (Wael) about gaining control of BRFC? Wael: (nervous laugh). No, not so much. Camera pans to Senior Al-Qadi and Hani. They say nothing. Non-committal at best. Awkward silence. Maybe someone can find it - I have tried and failed. (Definitely not BRFC Official TV). It's just my memory, and I will apologise if what I have referred to is materially incorrect.
|
|
Angas
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,068
|
Post by Angas on Jan 19, 2020 19:34:26 GMT
It was Andy Howard for Points West I believe. Doubt it's findable now, though G20man could probably locate it from the vaults. Does anyone really want to re-watch it though ... I don't recall the other two being there, just his wife and kids. I've had a quick google, only found this little bit though. The preamble. The rest may be out there but I'll leave it to others to find if they feel inclined. www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1085450891550053
|
|
|
Post by prideofbristol on Jan 19, 2020 19:52:12 GMT
Listened to the interview. Starnes is quite clearly responding to GT, not to the question that he is asking. Just prior to asking the question, GT basically tells Starnes that he hasn't been sufficiently forthcoming. Starnes is reacting to this, not the question about communication with the supporters. So to state that Starnes is showing disrespect for the club or its supporters is wide of the mark and unfair. The reason why he wasn't keen to answer your question Geoff, is because he isn't in a position to. No, he isn't willing to discuss a Ben Garner's situation, as it is a personal matter; he isn't in a position to discuss transfer negotiations that are ongoing and he can't discuss Ken Masters in great detail because this is now subject to a legal process.
|
|
|
Post by droitwichgas on Jan 19, 2020 20:32:22 GMT
Listened to the interview. Starnes is quite clearly responding to GT, not to the question that he is asking. Just prior to asking the question, GT basically tells Starnes that he hasn't been sufficiently forthcoming. Starnes is reacting to this, not the question about communication with the supporters. So to state that Starnes is showing disrespect for the club or its supporters is wide of the mark and unfair. The reason why he wasn't keen to answer your question Geoff, is because he isn't in a position to. No, he isn't willing to discuss a Ben Garner's situation, as it is a personal matter; he isn't in a position to discuss transfer negotiations that are ongoing and he can't discuss Ken Masters in great detail because this is now subject to a legal process. Which begs the question why agree to appear on the show, we're on a 9 game losing streak and we needed some good news and all we get is "no comment", why not agree with GT before they went live what he could discuss, or if nothing could be discussed leave the interview until the BG situation was resloved/the transfer window closed.
|
|
|
Post by prideofbristol on Jan 19, 2020 21:06:57 GMT
If he had refused to appear, then he would have got exactly the same response. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Most journalists would either refuse to do the interview or would ask the question anyway.
This is an obligation that he didn't have to fulfil and GT should be grateful that he put aside time to speak to him.
As for good news, that will probably follow when half the team returns from injury, the new signings bed in and the manager is able to return to work.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2020 21:20:11 GMT
If he had refused to appear, then he would have got exactly the same response. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. Most journalists would either refuse to do the interview or would ask the question anyway. This is an obligation that he didn't have to fulfil and GT should be grateful that he put aside time to speak to him. As for good news, that will probably follow when half the team returns from injury, the new signings bed in and the manager is able to return to work. We couldn’t have found out less if Geoff had empty chaired him. It.’a amazing how some can still defend that car crash of an interview. The least he could have done seeing as he agreed to go on was have an appreciation for Geoff’s job as the interviewer to ask those questions and treat the interview with respect and humility. His supercilious tone had me reaching for an industrial strength bottle of shower gel after only a minute. I’m not surprised Geoff got wound up by him, his sneering laugh was the icing on the cake. A horrible man indeed if that is the way he chooses to come across.
|
|