|
Post by skippy on Dec 4, 2009 10:44:42 GMT
Nasty listening but at least the rose tinted spectacles have been consigned to the bin. I think if people sought to re-engage with the club after the xmas break, they might get a pleasant surprise at the change of attitude. Sorry manc but it looks like the rose tinted glasses didn't make it as far as the bin. So the plan is that we all muck in and bail the club out while the people who got us into this mess roll up on match days F.O.C and sit smuggley in the directors box and enjoy the privileges that go with the title whilst everyone who has tried to make people wake up to the total incompetence of these fools are expected to roll up their sleeves and turn the club around! These people need to know they are no longer welcome! If Boddy is so reluctant to budge when he is obviously in the wrong then even if he does get voted out of office at the agm do you really think it will stop him lingering around like all the other hangers on? Ban the lot of them.. then you may get more interest. The trust is in the same boat, they may theoretically have the power and some know how but with out fan backing they have no power at all. Its all about community involvement and apart from a link up with the council once a year for one event we have nothing. Other successful trusts have had either pots of money or 1000's of shares and our trust has none of these. Its even debatable how many members will re sign. Sorry but the leap of faith it too large for any of us on lookers to believe and this latest saga is as unlikely of succeeding in its current guise as NW. The club is banking on 2 good pay days in the coming weeks but we all know how unpredictable the weather is and what if these bumper games get postponed as has happened before? Sorry for sounding so negative but waiting isnt an option any longer, if there is good news coming out (which I doubt just how good it will be) then why isnt it available now! We already know they are selling pies in the burger bar now so what else can they tempt us with? Its all relative. rant over, sorry
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2009 13:12:12 GMT
The days of asking awkward questions to get to the truth are long gone, we've known the truth for more than a year. I can show you third party documented evidence which says exactly the same as Hampson and Panter are saying now, dated back in May 2008! What is most disturbing though, and I'm sorry but Hampson and Panter get no sympathy for this one, is that they are now saying that due to the contracts negotiated by the previous board, we are probably unable to look at alternatives. Well how come I've told them that at the previous two forums, I've known the terms for a long time, yet they, as Directors hadnt even looked at the very contracts which are killing this football club!! That is wholly unacceptable! Sorry Tony, but people like me and rich Widd, and Derek, and Paul Curtis, and Barry Ward, and Wayne Henley, and Niels and many others have been dismissed as mere troublemakers, and many of us have been attacked verbally by "supporters" saying that we are trying to ruin the club, when all we ever presented were the very same facts as Hampson and Panter are presenting now - the only difference is that when we did it, there was a years less debt, and a years more time!!! I do agree with Niels, it would be far better to have rugby type business people, although those people do need to have the football club at heart too, they dont need to understand football, but they do need to understand the importance of a football club to the community - its no different to the importance of Bath Rugby to the city of Bath!! The trouble is, that the ones we have now didnt even bother to ask the most basic of questions "Can I see all the paperwork surrounding the sale of SGL and the purchase of NW, including all contracts negotiated?" That basic mistake has cost so much. So, the bank is holding on until they get the money from Careys - Can people now see that WCFC Ltd. has no say in how this is being carved up? Thank you Mr Boddy, another club to add to your hit list!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2009 13:29:21 GMT
Well let's face it, when the dust settles on the demolished SGL - it'll be our fault.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2009 14:31:09 GMT
Nasty listening but at least the rose tinted spectacles have been consigned to the bin. I think if people sought to re-engage with the club after the xmas break, they might get a pleasant surprise at the change of attitude. Sorry manc but it looks like the rose tinted glasses didn't make it as far as the bin. So the plan is that we all muck in and bail the club out while the people who got us into this mess roll up on match days F.O.C and sit smuggley in the directors box and enjoy the privileges that go with the title whilst everyone who has tried to make people wake up to the total incompetence of these fools are expected to roll up their sleeves and turn the club around! These people need to know they are no longer welcome! If Boddy is so reluctant to budge when he is obviously in the wrong then even if he does get voted out of office at the agm do you really think it will stop him lingering around like all the other hangers on? Ban the lot of them.. then you may get more interest. The trust is in the same boat, they may theoretically have the power and some know how but with out fan backing they have no power at all. Its all about community involvement and apart from a link up with the council once a year for one event we have nothing. Other successful trusts have had either pots of money or 1000's of shares and our trust has none of these. Its even debatable how many members will re sign. Sorry but the leap of faith it too large for any of us on lookers to believe and this latest saga is as unlikely of succeeding in its current guise as NW. The club is banking on 2 good pay days in the coming weeks but we all know how unpredictable the weather is and what if these bumper games get postponed as has happened before? Sorry for sounding so negative but waiting isnt an option any longer, if there is good news coming out (which I doubt just how good it will be) then why isnt it available now! We already know they are selling pies in the burger bar now so what else can they tempt us with? Its all relative. rant over, sorry Skippy is right, its just not possible for there to be any change, regardless of what the Board say. The debt is out of control and growing, the bank want payment, Careys want SGL as cheap as chips and NW is dead - these are facts which cant be changed. Add to that, SMD will want settlement on any outstanding loans from the sale of SGL if we don't go to NW, there is no cash in the club (which is why there is a desperation over the two holiday games - they don't secure the future of the club, they just pay the bills till the end of the year!) and there is no hope of getting additional cash into the club. Even a change in attitude cant make a difference now. Think of it in business terms - who in their right mind would invest in a business which doesnt allow you to invest in??? Its just not possible to run any football club with a maximum investment of £3000. Fleetwood Town, which is being used as an example of how to build a meccano ground has been financed to the tune of £4-5 million by their Chairman! So without a change in the company constitution, there is little or no point at all in investing, and without investment, there is no money, and without money there is no hope for the football club.
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Dec 4, 2009 17:17:56 GMT
I wonder if the Careys and /or St Modwen contract is/ are voidable on the basis that they are not (and were never) in the bona fide interest of the Company?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2009 19:24:24 GMT
Good question, who knows. You reckon anyone is looking into that? me neither!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2009 12:57:57 GMT
This is where good legal advice is needed - and that's something the club hasn't had up to now. If the same lawyers, as used for the ground sale/purchase, are used to look into this then it will be a waste of time. They won't want to, and are probably incapable, of unravelling the mess they've landed WCFC in. Of course I'm assuming Boddy and Co, did have legal advice? Other than Hallmark that is.
It's a good point raised by Blue Dragonstander - someone who knows these ropes very well - but can the club afford/have the will to, get proper legal representation?
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Dec 5, 2009 13:34:35 GMT
I was told that a former board member had an independent view from their own solicitor, who advised that they were making the right decision. Maybe just hearsay I suppose !!!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2009 13:53:30 GMT
I have seen independent advice which was ignored totally by the Board. Those at the cricket ground in July 2008 heard it too. It doesnt take a genius to figure out the pitfalls in the contractual arrangements, blimey, I figured it out having read the doucument just a couple of times, it really is that obvious. BDS, are we in a financial position to take on a legal battle with SMD over whether a contract is voidable?
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Dec 5, 2009 13:56:04 GMT
That's more like it Jem, fighting talk.......... Well done
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2009 14:27:37 GMT
the question Jimbo was rhetoric.......I sincerely wish that it wasnt
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2009 14:57:39 GMT
Can we un-rhetoricalize the question? As the answer may be crucial to the future of the club. There are other issues that might also come into the equation like the fact there was no shareholder involvement in any of the decisions.
|
|
dg
Youth Teamer
Posts: 47
|
Post by dg on Dec 5, 2009 16:01:28 GMT
I for one will be Sixways meeting up with old friends who once upon a time would have been at "The Lane"on Boxing Day, Worcester City FC is dead, we used to go week in week out, 4 of us spending on average £30/40 every game, well no more will the blood suckers bleed me dry, a part of my football history has been murdered, when people like Widdie have been forced out after raising loads of money via the big match which I took part in all but the last one in protest, not to mention the HK lounge so goodbye and good luck, Dave Green a football nut.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2009 19:11:23 GMT
Take note Board, even the good guys like DG won't be coming back.
|
|
|
Post by skippy on Dec 6, 2009 9:27:27 GMT
also there is no point questioning the contracts. even if they were ripped up there is still a very substantial sum of money owed to SMD & Careys for loans and services rendered to date.
Jimbo: I think you will find that Boddy was one of the main stumbling blocks along with Hallmark but it wasnt a which hunt as you suggest. It was based around TIME. SAG wanted to get in and investigate the contracts and other finances to see if there was any room left to manoeuvre.
Since then the club has borrowed even more £1000's and taken the club to the edge of extinction.
You were one of the people who castigated SAG at every opportunity, whilst voicing your undying loyalty to the board, I'm sure you even poked fun at the suggestion of the Cinderella ground as a new base.
So quit the attempted emotional blackmail and tell us what you are doing to help the situation and not what you want others to do?
If you and people like you would have opened your eyes a year ago things could have been very different but unfortunately you and your cronies have got what you wanted/deserve.. didn't Boddy say that SAG and their type should just fade away?
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Dec 7, 2009 9:48:05 GMT
I have seen independent advice which was ignored totally by the Board. Those at the cricket ground in July 2008 heard it too. It doesnt take a genius to figure out the pitfalls in the contractual arrangements, blimey, I figured it out having read the doucument just a couple of times, it really is that obvious. BDS, are we in a financial position to take on a legal battle with SMD over whether a contract is voidable? In short Jem I doubt it. I wouldnt know where to start but it could be a useful opener for some renegotiation possibly (I admit that is a very easy thing to say..)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2009 11:27:31 GMT
The negotiation position is just so weak now. I doubt SMD really care at all about development at Nunnery Way. Hallmark did say to me that they werent at the cricket ground because they had more important project concerns elsewhere. As the leading brownfield developer, with sites as massive as Longbridge, a tiny greenfield site in Worcester is insignificant, especially with the inconvenience of a football ground on 25% of it! But they're no charity, so they're not going to walk away without payment for their investment in "The Project"
I wonder what the overall payments to third parties involved in"The Project" is so far.
|
|
|
Post by skippy on Dec 7, 2009 13:30:36 GMT
I wonder what the overall payments to third parties involved in"The Project" is so far. and to the former project leader in particular!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2009 14:15:15 GMT
Well he (or his practice) won't have been paid a penny will they? He told us at the AGM that he was not being paid for his services. It was a direct question to him whilst he was holding court, I know, I asked it!!
|
|
|
Post by skippy on Dec 7, 2009 19:07:07 GMT
Well he (or his practice) won't have been paid a penny will they? He told us at the AGM that he was not being paid for his services. It was a direct question to him whilst he was holding court, I know, I asked it!! A friend of a friend told me there was a settlement. Didn't Hampo mention this at the forum?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2009 19:29:33 GMT
So why did he say at the AGM that he'd done the work pro bono??
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Dec 7, 2009 22:34:35 GMT
So why did he say at the AGM that he'd done the work pro bono?? He wanted to gauge the reaction of Neils and yourself - see how U2 would take it. Saying that - he's been sailing close to The Edge for a while now
|
|
|
Post by creaner on Dec 8, 2009 7:14:41 GMT
So why did he say at the AGM that he'd done the work pro bono?? He wanted to gauge the reaction of Neils and yourself - see how U2 would take it. Saying that - he's been sailing close to The Edge for a while now Interesting point; it was raised as a topic layt on. I've been mullen over this for some time but still no answer.
|
|
cogg
Squad Member
Posts: 208
|
Post by cogg on Dec 8, 2009 12:20:09 GMT
He said he would get paid if there was something other than a line on the horizon at Nunnery Way by 2012 I believe.....
Sorry, best I could think of in limited time; I'm too busy stalking some woman just now .....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2009 13:19:55 GMT
Cogg, you'll chase her till she catches you!! Then what will you do? She likes the beard - I'm worried!
|
|
|
Post by Tony is not to despondent now. on Dec 11, 2009 8:46:28 GMT
Well he (or his practice) won't have been paid a penny will they? He told us at the AGM that he was not being paid for his services. It was a direct question to him whilst he was holding court, I know, I asked it!! The latest I heard was that he or his firm had been paid!!!
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Dec 15, 2009 9:07:10 GMT
You don't know me or my views very well skippy
|
|