Interested Parties

[nzlatic]

4 minutes ago, maximus1267 said:

Perhaps ALs only offer to sell would be to retain a percentage of ownership, this may mean he will get a return at a later date if the club prospered. He may have no involvement in the running of the club. 

Maybe the investors whoever they are have agreed to this because it may be the only way for others to take control of the club.

People might not like some of those involved but if they get Al and his pratt of a brother out of the way thats got to be a good thing.

Any new owner or investor will be a gamble, whether they are the Royles and clan or Halliwell etc.

All depends what the investment is and long term plan.

But we are hearing about this possible scenario and the Royle scenario, better than hearing nothing,  but we have to agree that fans wont agree whatever the next move will be.

The lesson that should be learned from when Corney sold is that "anyone but" is not a good attitude to have.

[maximus1267]

Just now, nzlatic said:

The lesson that should be learned from when Corney sold is that "anyone but" is not a good attitude to have.

Im saying he may only agree to sell a percentage so that he may cash in later and recoup some of what he has lost or wasted.

If this is the case then is that a better scenario than Almo having full control and remaining in situ. 

Not saying its right, just saying it may be the case.

[LaticMark]

2 hours ago, PeteG said:

I might have got this bit wrong actually, i've been told just an hour ago that Barry also went out to Germany so must be something going on.

 

Maybe Priti Patel won't let him back in the UK!

[Worcester Owl]

5 hours ago, Dave_Og said:

 

What on earth would his motivation be for wanting that status?  Makes zero sense.

You’re right of course, but let’s face it, zero sense and ALMOBO fit together very well.

[peanuts2]

3 hours ago, LaticMark said:

 

Maybe Priti Patel won't let him back in the UK!

or deport him to rwanda 

 

[basilrobbie]

On 4/18/2022 at 11:41 AM, deyres42 said:

Bury was a carcrash with their debts and whatnot, our circumstances are different, we have high profile MP's in the area, the EFL took huge criticism for the way they handled Bury and Macclesfield, there's no way they are going to let another one go bump on their watch.

 

In a couple of weeks time you might no longer be the EFL's problem. I really wouldn't put much faith in them suddenly taking a keen interest in the club's welfare at this late stage.  I'm also sure your local MPs are being diligent but you only have to look at Derby to see that they have only a marginal impact.

 

I agree with you that Bury isn't all that analogous. But don't kid yourself that this isn't a car crash - it's just a different kind of carnage, that's all. At the moment there are too many moving parts for comfort, and too many people who might have money, but don't look like they are capable of changing the paradigm. No wonder the Foundation want a war chest. 

 

If you go down the club is worth almost nothing. Unfortunately the owner doesn't seem to understand that.

[ddot_m]

25 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

If you go down the club is worth almost nothing. Unfortunately the owner doesn't seem to understand that.

The man is an idiot.

[deyres42]

20 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

 

In a couple of weeks time you might no longer be the EFL's problem. I really wouldn't put much faith in them suddenly taking a keen interest in the club's welfare at this late stage.  I'm also sure your local MPs are being diligent but you only have to look at Derby to see that they have only a marginal impact.

 

I agree with you that Bury isn't all that analogous. But don't kid yourself that this isn't a car crash - it's just a different kind of carnage, that's all. At the moment there are too many moving parts for comfort, and too many people who might have money, but don't look like they are capable of changing the paradigm. No wonder the Foundation want a war chest. 

 

If you go down the club is worth almost nothing. Unfortunately the owner doesn't seem to understand that.

Our problem is that our problems don't amount to much compared to what other clubs have faced.

 

We don't have huge debts, we aren't at immediate risk of being homeless and our owner, whilst inept, isn't crooked as far as we know.

 

The club and ground are also available to buy, not at a price anybody seemingly wants to pay currently unfortunately but none of our issues are insurmountable.

[Ritchierich]

8 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

none of our issues are insurmountable.

I really disagree here eyresey! …the apparent asking price of each of our owners is ludicrously high and one of them won’t change it because of pride and apparent insanity whereas the other asset stripping owner is valuing it as potential development land which happens to currently have a football stadium on it!

 

Blitz may actually want us to go bust on the playing side because that accelerates his path to development……and anyone who thinks MPs or the local council will save us has clearly been in a coma for the last 30 years

[Chaddyexile84]

46 minutes ago, basilrobbie said:

 

In a couple of weeks time you might no longer be the EFL's problem. I really wouldn't put much faith in them suddenly taking a keen interest in the club's welfare at this late stage.  I'm also sure your local MPs are being diligent but you only have to look at Derby to see that they have only a marginal impact.

 

I agree with you that Bury isn't all that analogous. But don't kid yourself that this isn't a car crash - it's just a different kind of carnage, that's all. At the moment there are too many moving parts for comfort, and too many people who might have money, but don't look like they are capable of changing the paradigm. No wonder the Foundation want a war chest. 

 

If you go down the club is worth almost nothing. Unfortunately the owner doesn't seem to understand that.

 

I take no pleasure in "liking" that post 

[GlossopLatic]

5 hours ago, maximus1267 said:

Perhaps ALs only offer to sell would be to retain a percentage of ownership, this may mean he will get a return at a later date if the club prospered. He may have no involvement in the running of the club. 

Maybe the investors whoever they are have agreed to this because it may be the only way for others to take control of the club.

People might not like some of those involved but if they get Al and his pratt of a brother out of the way thats got to be a good thing.

Any new owner or investor will be a gamble, whether they are the Royles and clan or Halliwell etc.

All depends what the investment is and long term plan.

But we are hearing about this possible scenario and the Royle scenario, better than hearing nothing,  but we have to agree that fans wont agree whatever the next move will be.

 

We know very little about the situation at this moment in time. The information we are dealing with here is second hand but it shows a number of red flags. These being Abdallah wanting all his money back for a football club that is worthless that Abdallah may still be around. That failed director Barry Owen is lurking in the background, and that this new potential owner would be happy to work in that situation.

 

No owner worth their salt would pay 3-4 million for this football club and have the people who have taken it to a 126 year low anywhere near the football club. 

 

Now in fairness Barry could just be the broker here to new competent owners if that's the case I'll live with it in the short term. We need competent owners in the long run.

 

But the swamp needs draining and all the people who have not put the clubs best interests at heart over the last 10-12 years and used the club to pursue their own agendas have to go before we have a chance of being successful Abdallah, Mo, Owen, and Blitz. Leave the club don't collect your wages as you pass go and fuck off out the town forever. Only then does this club have a chance of going forwards.

[basilrobbie]

20 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

Our problem is that our problems don't amount to much compared to what other clubs have faced.

 

We don't have huge debts, we aren't at immediate risk of being homeless and our owner, whilst inept, isn't crooked as far as we know.

 

The club and ground are also available to buy, not at a price anybody seemingly wants to pay currently unfortunately but none of our issues are insurmountable.

 Each individual issue isn't huge in itself. But as I said above, there are quite a lot of them :

 

• inept/unrealistic owners
• uncertainty about league status
• multiple ownership of key assets
• caveated nature of at least one of those assets
• the embargo
• poor and ongoing financial management
• worries about internal managerial capacity
• Sheridan's future
• lack of value in the squad

 

Tackling all that lot requires energy and ability, and there isn't much evidence to suggest that the current people in the mix have what is needed. Which is why I think PTB and the Foundation are setting such store by acquiring up some leverage of their own, and looking outside the current motley crew for long term partners who they can actually work with..

 

 

[Clifford]

13 hours ago, deyres42 said:

Our problem is that our problems don't amount to much compared to what other clubs have faced.

 

We don't have huge debts, we aren't at immediate risk of being homeless and our owner, whilst inept, isn't crooked as far as we know.

 

Really? We're about 900k in debt to the taxman according to them. Last financial data states 4 million in liabilities. We've no assets and long term if we go down we are going to lose 1.25 mill a year in income.

 

I'm not sure where you get the idea that we don't have huge debts. They are huge given there is no assets to balance them off against. 

 

The club is technically insolvent according to Kieran Maguire from what he can see. The idea that we don't have club killing finance problems is way off IMO.

 

Also if we don't pay our rent there is no saying we won't be made homeless......

[deyres42]

19 minutes ago, Clifford said:

 

Really? We're about 900k in debt to the taxman according to them. Last financial data states 4 million in liabilities. We've no assets and long term if we go down we are going to lose 1.25 mill a year in income.

 

I'm not sure where you get the idea that we don't have huge debts. They are huge given there is no assets to balance them off against. 

 

The club is technically insolvent according to Kieran Maguire from what he can see. The idea that we don't have club killing finance problems is way off IMO.

 

Also if we don't pay our rent there is no saying we won't be made homeless......

All these interested parties we keep being told are out there will presumably be aware of all this, if they can't clear a 900k bill then they've got no business taking over anyway.

[Clifford]

12 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

All these interested parties we keep being told are out there will presumably be aware of all this, if they can't clear a 900k bill then they've got no business taking over anyway.

 

Ignoring the £4mill liabilities and no doubt other debts not disclosed?

 

The finances are fucked

[deyres42]

13 hours ago, basilrobbie said:

 Each individual issue isn't huge in itself. But as I said above, there are quite a lot of them :

 

• inept/unrealistic owners
• uncertainty about league status
• multiple ownership of key assets
• caveated nature of at least one of those assets
• the embargo
• poor and ongoing financial management
• worries about internal managerial capacity
• Sheridan's future
• lack of value in the squad

 

Tackling all that lot requires energy and ability, and there isn't much evidence to suggest that the current people in the mix have what is needed. Which is why I think PTB and the Foundation are setting such store by acquiring up some leverage of their own, and looking outside the current motley crew for long term partners who they can actually work with..

 

 

I'd argue a lot of those things are either things fans shouldn't be concerning themselves with or they are beyond our control. That's not to say we shouldn't be vigilant but 20 grand in the war chest says we are a long way away from having a real say in what happens.

[deyres42]

1 minute ago, Clifford said:

 

Ignoring the £4mill liabilities and no doubt other debts not disclosed?

 

The finances are fucked

To whom are the liabilities due? Look if it is more of a mess than appears on the surface then of course it is going to go one way.

[Clifford]

13 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

To whom are the liabilities due? Look if it is more of a mess than appears on the surface then of course it is going to go one way.

 

Those liabilities are March 21, no reason to think they haven't grown. 

 

Either way being a million or more in debt when you've no assets and are losing more than that in income each year.... that says to me our financial picture is as bad as those who have struggled (and died) before. There is no protection for any investment in the way of land or even income. Brave man to spend millions on a loss making asset free entity

[Dave_Og]

41 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

All these interested parties we keep being told are out there will presumably be aware of all this, if they can't clear a 900k bill then they've got no business taking over anyway.

The first clear indication of Lemsagam's business acumen was that according to reports he paid Corney c. £3m despite the fact that their weren't many more assets then than their are now. There's a very limited supply of people who are prepared to do likewise and an even smaller list of those who are prepared to do likewise and then go on to demonstrate competence. 

[underdog]

As posted above. There is stuff we can affect/can't affect.

 

OASF/PTB have arranged a fans forum on 12th May. Maybe they can provide us with some direction/progress. Update on the strategy.

 

We will know by then our EFL fate and potential knock on affect to clubs off field stuff like OACT and staffing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[deyres42]

21 minutes ago, Dave_Og said:

The first clear indication of Lemsagam's business acumen was that according to reports he paid Corney c. £3m despite the fact that their weren't many more assets then than their are now. There's a very limited supply of people who are prepared to do likewise and an even smaller list of those who are prepared to do likewise and then go on to demonstrate competence. 

So what are we saying Dave? We go under and if we are lucky someone might come and pick at the carcass? Is that the type of owner we really want?

[nzlatic]

9 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

So what are we saying Dave? We go under and if we are lucky someone might come and pick at the carcass? Is that the type of owner we really want?

Or just the current owner to sell what he owns for what it's actually worth?

[maximus1267]

6 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

So what are we saying Dave? We go under and if we are lucky someone might come and pick at the carcass? Is that the type of owner we really want?

Why do you think any sound minded business person or group of them will just see the numbers as you do and think feck it we should just pay whatever they want and owe, otherwise we're not serious investors.

I dont get you logic, as much as I try to respect peoples opinions, I just dont understand your stance on your expectations of would be investors.

[Dave_Og]

16 minutes ago, deyres42 said:

So what are we saying Dave? We go under and if we are lucky someone might come and pick at the carcass? Is that the type of owner we really want?

The only way that this club has a future in any meaningful way is for it to be sustainable.  Sustainability comes in many different forms; it may well involve a wealthy owner who does not see it as an investment in the traditional sense.  But unless there is such an investor with almost unlimited funds I would see an act of spending, say, £4m to buy a club of negligible value as an act of such financial stupidity and recklessness that it would simply be a matter of time, and not very long, before it all turned to shit again.  For any new owner to have a chance they need to have a sound business plan (yes, it can be a subsidised one) and if the first act of that plan would be to pay an outlandish purchase price I think it's fair to say that it would throw belief in their ability to execute the rest of a plan into doubt.

[deyres42]

31 minutes ago, maximus1267 said:

Why do you think any sound minded business person or group of them will just see the numbers as you do and think feck it we should just pay whatever they want and owe, otherwise we're not serious investors.

I dont get you logic, as much as I try to respect peoples opinions, I just dont understand your stance on your expectations of would be investors.

My point is whoever takes over is going to have to spend many more millions than the takeover cost to try and make a success of it so if a million or two is such an issue at this stage then what's the point?