What a surprise........

[rushwickdon]

.....that there is no mention of the upcoming EGM on the official site. Only a link to the Worcester News story (the link being broken)

[wh]

The official word so far from the club is that "they are taking legal advice" I could be wrong but this is presumably to see if the correct due process has been followed as the company secretary has dismissed the previous applications for the EGM as not being legal.

I'm sure when they have something to say the chairman will inform me and I will update the official site.

The link to the Worcester news works fine for me, please give it another go and let me know if it still doesn't work.

[ac]

It's not exactly good news for the current board so it's unlikely that they'll want to publicise it any more than they have to.

[rushwickdon]

Didn't mean to cast any aspersions- must have been reading the AFCW "website" for too long!!

And the Worcester News link now works for me too.

Cheers

[Deleted]

I'm sure the Board are taken legal advice (again) but the problem they've got is that the process is clearly laid down in the constitutional documents (isn't it? unfortunately the Chairman was unable to provide me with the documents), and the shareholders have followed the due process, which was given to them by......the Board!! A lot has gone on behind the scenes prior to this announcement, including options to avoid this having to happen. As usual the Board have decided that they'd prefer to keep their heads stuck firmly in the warmth and comfort of their arses.
So, has Rich Widd's 100% risk free offer to raise money via the Social Club been given the time and attention it deserves? Yeah right!!!
Have the Board energised the internal PR machine to ensure that it IS good news for the Board. Surely they should be coming out saying "We welcome this challenge by shareholders, it shows that we have an active number of shareholders who only want the best for the club, it is our job as the Board of Directors to listen to the shareholders, and to act upon their concerns, and to answer any criticisms and take on board the positive suggestions from the Shareholders in order to safeguard and further the progress of Worcester City Football Club!"
There you go, it took five minutes to spin it. I'm now going to copyright that statement, so the board can't use it!!! More legal advice - it don't come cheap!!

[Tony is not to despondent now.]

Stonewalling again Brookie, aint they!!!

[Deleted]

Yep - they do themselves no favours at all, just because they've managed to get away with impersonating ostriches in the past, they think they can do it again. They still seem to be oblivious of whats going on around them.
This is the time when you'd admire them for showing great strength, but sadly it just follows all the other times when they looked powerless and weak. Just like the Preece/ Morrison debacles where they showed a total lack of leadership, or the Social Club debacle where they've constantly shown a lack of any planning or business acumen.
One of the funniest things I've seen in a long time was when I happened to oversee a copy of the club budgets for last year, or it might have been this year. Put it this way, I just hope the proposed business plan for the ground move is more than a single sheet of paper!!

[B*ue dragonstander]

Were'nt professional outside consultants employed to prepare a business plan for the ground redevelopment? IMHO the chances of external consultants produces a realistic - as opposed to plausible - business plan with adequate emphasis on risk analysis and a plan B without having experts who have worked in the real world (& been successful) on their team is NIL. I guess it was a process that had to be gone throught to satisfy third parties but as a practical document is it of any value? If we are relying on it as a blueprint to guide us through financially then I expect it is already out of date!.

The real state of the residential property market is as grim as it was wonderful 18 months ago. The planning delays and the inability to secure the Nunnery Way site at an earlier stage have cost the club dear I'm afraid. Nevertheless we are where we are and the Nunnery Way / St Modwens link up was a great result in terms of moving the new ground / relocation / debt clearance forward.

The only people who are able to buy and develop residential land today are essentially cash rich investors. There are some private housebuilders who are able to finance development in certain parts of the UK e g Scotland but these are few and far between. There is demand for new homes but the the return to normal mortgage lending criteria and the increased cost of funding is choking actual deals today as sure as overpriced homes were a year ago. In the circumstances it is getting towards a good time to buy residential land (perhaps 2009 might be the nadir?)but it is a poor time to achieve a straight sale. I wonder if Careys really have the appetite for residential land banking today? No-one else has. The deals that can be done - apart from having a "fire-sale" - are joint ventures with profit shares where cash is liberated as homes are sold. These deals do not anticipate cash flows until 2010 at the earliest. If we are looking at valuations then today residential land is worth 50 - 75% of what it was a year ago.

All this leaves the ground move in choppy waters - whatever deals have been done. The only deal that is secure is one that is completed with the cash firmly in the bank.

All this to me implies a further period of treading water and a delay in opening of the new ground unless some bridging finance is available (and what a risk that might be). In the interim we are left with the debt and the need to generate new revenues to try to keep the debt at existing levels and no more. In the current market banks are supporting existing customers - provided that the customers are behaving themselves. This is likely to change to a position where defaults - such as not providing audited accounts - could lead to the risk of "events of default" being triggered and the imposition of penal costs and charges and the possible reduction of banking facilities. Why would a bank lend £1M to a business who cant even produce accounts on time in a period of restricted credit? Why not charge in and get your money back and lend it at lower risk at a better margin elsewhere? It is a possibility and not a pleasant one.

In short there are a number of serious financial issues that need to be addressed sooner rather than later by whichever group ends up in the boardroom.

[Deleted]

BDS, the board know you are a specialist in this area. Have they ever approached you for advice - even on a casual basis?

[B*ue dragonstander]

I approached them the best part of two years ago to see if there was anything I could do. I had a number of positive discussions with the chairman with a suggestion as to how the development density at, and thus the value of , the Lane could be driven upwards. I met Brian Lancaster and made the same suggestions but everything ended there. I got the impression that he didnt really understand what was being suggested. I think we can rely on the developer to maximise value of the site and as long as City have adequate safeguards by way way of "top up " or "overage " agreements then they should receive a fair value. I thought that Millers might play a game of obtaining approval for a reduced number of dwellings and - after the sale was complete - reapply for increased density and thus attempt to pay a lower price for the land. Davde Boddy was well aware of the risks and I felt comfortable that from a commercial viewpoint the Club was being decently advised.

I did some work on the potential at Nunnery Way and was satisfied that the site would generate a commercial return as a whole and that a commercial developer could make it work alongside a football stadium. I did put forward a tentative proposal to my own Board but the proposal for the redevlopment of both sites was to "vanilla" flavoured for us but it was obviously good enough for St Mods.

Dave Boddy has my details and knows that I would do anything within my powers to assist but I suspect other than possibly assiting in the preparation of business plans and forecasts or validating any numbers the developer puts forward in relation to fixing the price of the land deal then there really is little more that I could achieve.

[Deleted]

"I met Brian Lancaster and made the same suggestions but everything ended there. I got the impression that he didnt really understand what was being suggested."

[Tony is not to despondent now.]

Ealing. I think that says it all!!!!

[wh]

if you only ever do what you did then you will only ever get what you got.

[Deleted]

Shakespeare?

[Deleted]

Jun 24, 2008 7:46:39 GMT wh said:

if you only ever do what you did then you will only ever get what you got.

mmmmm however much you do, you can never do more than what you did!!! So paradoxically you can never get more than what you got!!

Its like when managers say that their players gave 110% - they didn't, the most they can give is everything, which is 100%.