|
Post by The Verner on Jul 9, 2016 7:33:04 GMT
One thing to note from the EGM was that a certain ex city manager was in the audience - anyone know if he's free to manage a new born club? Were you even born when he was manager ? I was a young lad when the legend Roo was in charge, i didnt recognise him for a while the other night, absolute legend and he made it clear which way he was voting !
|
|
|
Post by richwidd on Jul 9, 2016 9:29:21 GMT
George is a Scout for Hull City FC. He wants Worcester City FC to thrive and prosper just like we all do, that's why he voted for change.
Our Chairman isn't making the same mistakes as the past, where he made predictions and promises, none of which he has achieved or kept, instead he is going to do absolutely nothing. He won't even speak to Fans, he doesn't like you, you are annoying asking all of these probing questions. He wants your cash.
I would love to hear from one of his supporters and which of his particular plans you are supporting. You are still going to get your Free Cups of Tea at half-time, you will still get your free rides on the Team Coach - you can give those reasons if you wish or my favourite, "I'm backing him because he's my friend."
After the last EGM for a call to change in 2008 (which was also defeated) a new Board to take the Club into a "NEW FUTURE" at Nunnery Way was paraded in front of the shareholders steered by David Hallmark - the very man who put Hampo in place and who was entirely responsible for the contracts at Nunnery Way and St Georges Lane. The same very contracts that an independent Solicitor (Harrison Clark) who looked at them and gave a detailed warning which basically said, "avoid at all cost". We did not and never opposed Nunnery Way, we opposed the signing of the contracts which gave absolutely no protection to this Football Club.
YOU will love this bit, so much so that I will make it bold:
At the 2008 EGM you may remember the name Barry Ward, who was one of the people who stood at that EGM. Barry was a local who had previously been involved in turning around the fortunes of Luton Town and Northampton Town and was head hunted by the Board for Several Years. He was on David Hallmarks list of people to take the Club forward. Barry eventually gave in and spoke to the Board and Hallmark and he took a detailed look at the Club and most notably the contracts. None of the shareholders or people involved in the Trust knew Barry at the time. The Board introduced us to him as one of their new key people. Barry didn't like the way the Club was run. Barry didn't like the contracts. Barry thought they gave no protection to the Club. Barry was well thought of by Supporters Direct. Barry was now on the naughty list (along with me and many other people)
As we stated back in 2007, 2008 this has always been about Land. 1. The J6 - J7 Corridor of the M5, 2. St Georges Lane 3. Gregory's Bank
The combined Number 1 and Number 2 was the key of the door to significant developments. It has always been about land despite the warnings repeated many times by a few
Since the late 1990's it has always followed the same path. 1. Make lots of promises 2. Try to shut up those that ask questions 3. Make lots of promises . 4. Try to shut up those.............you get the idea.
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Jul 9, 2016 9:46:06 GMT
One thing to note from the EGM was that a certain ex city manager was in the audience - anyone know if he's free to manage a new born club? Were you even born when he was manager ? I was a young lad when the legend Roo was in charge, i didnt recognise him for a while the other night, absolute legend and he made it clear which way he was voting ! For his second stint, yes, but not the first. My good looks have obviously deceived you on my age! I didn't recognise him either. My first game watching City sadly would have been one of Georges last managing City.
|
|
|
Post by thatloudbloke on Jul 9, 2016 10:16:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Jul 9, 2016 10:38:28 GMT
Richwidd is spot on. It's always been about developing the land, and trying to move the football club was the conduit to appear to make it happen. All it needed was the right people in the right places at the time. As I've said on many an occasion, the Nunnery Way site constraints that related to WCFC, appear not to apply to St Modwen and Spetchley Estates. Strange that !
Some people have got very rich on the back of the WCFC demise.
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Jul 9, 2016 10:51:45 GMT
I would love to hear from one of his supporters and which of his particular plans you are supporting. You are still going to get your Free Cups of Tea at half-time, you will still get your free rides on the Team Coach - you can give those reasons if you wish or my favourite, "I'm backing him because he's my friend." I think it's fair to say that no-one will say that about me. I've probably lost more friends than I've gained through Worcester City, I lost another good friend over this a couple of weeks ago, but hey that's life! if people don't want to keep to commitments and keep up woth me, so be it. And if at the end of the day we are able to deliver a sustainable football club for the City that I love so much, then who cares about a losing a few friends along the way? You can't make an omelette without breaking eggs, and some eggs you find out aren't worth keeping! Real friends aren't the ones who back you when you're wrong, real friends are the ones who have the balls to tell you you're wrong, and if a friend says "You're wrong Jem!" then believe me, I listen!! We must never let WCFC Ltd. become a cosy little mates club again, or you end up right back in this mess!
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jul 9, 2016 11:28:36 GMT
I see the team manager has got mixed up in the row with HOW. With a mammoth job to keep the team in their present division ahead, why oh why is he acting like a General Manager ?
|
|
|
Post by Brooksiders Return!! on Jul 9, 2016 11:34:43 GMT
Because no-one else in the boardroom has the capability or the will to be doing it. Therein lies an issue with the business, no general manager or chief executive.
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Jul 9, 2016 11:43:13 GMT
I believe that Carl wants the club to survive, and to do well, so he wants to help as much as he can, but he's spreading himself too thinly.
|
|
|
Post by Croc on Jul 9, 2016 12:19:24 GMT
Richwidd is spot on. It's always been about developing the land, and trying to move the football club was the conduit to appear to make it happen. All it needed was the right people in the right places at the time. As I've said on many an occasion, the Nunnery Way site constraints that related to WCFC, appear not to apply to St Modwen and Spetchley Estates. Strange that ! Some people have got very rich on the back of the WCFC demise. It was an open secret that one certain local solicitor represented a lot of landowners along that corridor and would stand to benefit if the land was unlocked. The same name keeps cropping up - a case of more pies than Darrell Butler and Steve Goode popping into Greggs for a "spot of lunch"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2016 12:24:08 GMT
Let's not be shy about naming Hallmark.
|
|
|
Post by kentenigmawcfc on Jul 9, 2016 13:07:07 GMT
Well if Mr Hampson was a friend of Mr Hallmark he is tainted with the same smell I am sorry to say and is obviously the planted observver in the nest, namely a cuckoo, to thwart anyone else knowing the truth about what went on in the past while continuing to do his lord and masters bidding in the present. No wonder he was grinning like a hyena on Thursday at times! If you trust this man now more fool you!
|
|
|
Post by kentenigmawcfc on Jul 9, 2016 13:13:23 GMT
If you question my analogy think what a cuckoo does. It is planted in the nest of another bird, gets fat on the food the smaller foster parent birds bring in then starves and forces the parents real chicks out of the nest. This is the world in which Mr Hampson now operates. He doesn't give a damn about shareholders and fans just his mates the charlatans!
|
|
|
Post by greenman on Jul 9, 2016 14:41:57 GMT
Having read the Chairman's statement I find it incredible that he accepts shareholders have expressed their view but ignores the fact that the vast majority of shareholders who truly support the club by attending the EGM and with a show of hands supported the Trust proposals. The very people who are the lifeblood of the Club and provide much needed income and help on a weekly basis.
The short term plan he refers to and I presume the one illustrated by Carl Healey was not a detailed plan at all just a few hopes but no detail how the objectives would be achieved. As an example £10000 from the Supporters Trust, not a chance of this forthcoming. £10000 from the Board, the same people who have not raised a penny as far as I can see during their tenure. A golf day, thats a laugh as the last time one was advertised it was cancelled one week beforehand. I cannot see Sapey Golf Club being happy to accept another booking.
I believe the best option is to wind the Club up now Mr Hampson rather than drag it out to its slow demise, if it is done now no doubt many of the invisible shareholders would be glad of a refund. For myself and I am sure this applies to many shareholders who are true supporters I would donate anything I receive to the Supporters Trust and the formation of AFC Worcester. This is always assuming that after the solicitors and administrators have been paid their fees there is anything left.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2016 17:49:00 GMT
Hampson will cling on for as long as possible. There are too many skeletons/contracts locked in the club's closet to allow others in.
|
|
|
Post by kentenigmawcfc on Jul 9, 2016 20:31:47 GMT
As part of the 'Resistance isn't futile'/'Hit them where it hurts in the pocket' campaign, apart from boycotting home games and stopping 'Gold Bond' and '200 Club' donations and anything that helps the Club raise money while this current impasse with the 'Current Board' continues I have another suggestion. Could any of you who might be in touch with fans from the other clubs in our league see if you can spread the word that we need their help with the current crisis and would or could they boycott their respective away games at 'Bromsgrove' to help support our cause and further hit the Board where it hurts in the pocket. I don't enjoy suggesting these things but it seems about the most powerful lever we have to let the Board and their backers appreciate just how strong the strength of feeling is against them and what happened on Thursday. Mr Hampson might now suggest he wants to talk to the Trust and I am sure they will be gracious enough to listen but unless he agrees to radical change of the Club constitution things will never change so we need to support the Trust in anyway we can. This campaign is not a Trust ideaI hasten to add but mine and a couple of shareholder friends who were very angry too after last Thursday. I have informed the Trust of my intentions which they have neither approved or disapproved as I am a free agent Club shareholder and it is my prerogative to take what ever actions I see fit to achieve the change this Club badly needs. If in so making the threat of rallying a financial boycott has made Hampson reappraise his view and now want to talk the Trust, maybe it is having an effect. So lets get as much in place as possible to hammer things home to the Board, so could someone volunteer to co-ordinate a group of you to contact each of the other clubs fans to see if they will help us by staying away from Bromsgrove as I don't think it would look too good to bombard another clubs fan comment zone with lots of contradictory messages from WCFC fans. So if someone out there would be willing to do that I would appreciate it, of course if we manage to overturn Thursdays result and change the Club by changing the constitution to a more democratic and accountable format that will be a step forward and one the Trust could work with in a spirit of open transparency for all to see from both sides then we can call this campaign to a rapid halt. It's up to Hampson and those ex-Board members now working behind the scenes who have to change to the modern world, so I don't want to hear any more platitudes and promises of we will consider or look into this as they will stall matters till all the Club money runs out. We need an immediate commitment to changes such as those I have outlined on another post on here and that to be completed, lets be generous and give them till the end of this calendar year and that boycott remains in place till that is signed on the dotted line and the new constitution issued to shareholders.
|
|
|
Post by alwaysnextyear on Jul 10, 2016 10:10:58 GMT
Whether anyone likes it or not, democracy as per the club's constitution has spoken. The Trust has tried, and can now go and think about it all, regroup and will no doubt think about the best way forward.
More importantly, what it has done is given nothing else for Hampson and the Board to hide behind. They now have to reveal what their plans are ( most suspect not a lot, but let's all be surprised ? ).
The spotlight is now on them to justify by their immediate actions, why they opposed the Trust plans. The stage is theirs. We all await.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2016 10:46:42 GMT
Hampson and the the board don't need to reveal anything. They haven't in the past. They won't feel a need to justify a thing.
As far as democracy goes - after the last few weeks I've given up on that. Tell enough lies and you will win the day.
|
|
|
Post by kentenigmawcfc on Jul 10, 2016 10:53:52 GMT
Whether anyone likes it or not, democracy as per the club's constitution has spoken. The Trust has tried, and can now go and think about it all, regroup and will no doubt think about the best way forward. More importantly, what it has done is given nothing else for Hampson and the Board to hide behind. They now have to reveal what their plans are ( most suspect not a lot, but let's all be surprised ? ). The spotlight is now on them to justify by their immediate actions, why they opposed the Trust plans. The stage is theirs. We all await. Hi There my friend. I agree with everything you say in that last post. I though too have long memories of the past and think placidly waiting for Christmas like fans and shareholders have done in the past cannot be allowed to happen again. The Board needs to come clean over it's objections to the Trust plan and must reveal what they, the Board, have looked at and/or dismissed over the years since Mr Hampson has been at the helm and what they are looking into now. I don't need to hear who or what companies, much though I would prefer that, so shareholders can research these persons or companies suitability and past track records, that they are making enquiries with if the have something up their sleeve but we need to hear something. The glib of the cuff replies are just not good enough and this could all slide on for another year and even more money drained from that dwindling chest. So I hear what you are saying and in an ideal world where we had bags of time to save the Club I would heed your thoughts. However time is short and until some solid facts or evidence from the Board on either subject are placed before ALL shareholders, I remain committed to putting the financial pressure on the Club as this has all dragged on for far to long with nothing else on the table presented by the Board and they and the old Board thwarting the Trust proposals over bitter arguments of the past rather than giving it a fair hearing and yielding to the wishes of the majority of shareholders and fans alike and the chance of some sort of future for the Club.
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jul 10, 2016 16:40:32 GMT
Like it or lump it, it is totally normal for key polls on company constitutions to be determined on the basis of one vote per share held. Otherwise well organised but small caucuses can gain control - only a good thing if YOU happen to belong to that caucus !
Unless a way can be found to `convert` the holders of the majority of shares to the Trust`s way of thinking, I fail to see how `we` can ever hope to prevail in this issue as the Chair can obviously call on his ex-colleagues` shares to block the Trusts proposals ad infinitum.
It therefore seems that those set on seeing the Club be wound up in time to repay holders their share capital are firmly in the driving seat. Comment, please !
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jul 10, 2016 22:38:32 GMT
You are quite right on this dragon. Any of us, including most of the trust board would have known that Thursday would go in favour of the board....... It has done for years !! The point has been firmly made though, that the trust are not going away & that the supporters want change.
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Jul 11, 2016 9:31:20 GMT
And that ladies and gentlemen is why I have stayed away since the 2008 AGM. I vowed then that whilst AH was chair I would not attend matches or assist in any way. The whole things stinks as high as it did back then.
I feel sorry for those Trust members on the Board who have put ceaseless toil in trying to move the Club forward in the right direction. AFC Worcester City should have happened years ago but seems the only solution.
It is patently obvious that a new stadium can not be funded without City being a Community club and at the current rate of depeletion funds will run out. One has to ask the question why the Club is not operating a balanced budget whatever the on field consequences. That is sheer bloody irresponsible.....but I suppose that should be expected.
|
|
|
Post by kentenigmawcfc on Jul 11, 2016 9:56:16 GMT
And that ladies and gentlemen is why I have stayed away since the 2008 AGM. I vowed then that whilst AH was chair I would not attend matches or assist in any way. The whole things stinks as high as it did back then. I feel sorry for those Trust members on the Board who have put ceaseless toil in trying to move the Club forward in the right direction. AFC Worcester City should have happened years ago but seems the only solution. It is patently obvious that a new stadium can not be funded without City being a Community club and at the current rate of depeletion funds will run out. One has to ask the question why the Club is not operating a balanced budget whatever the on field consequences. That is sheer bloody irresponsible.....but I suppose that should be expected. Well said Sir and thoroughly agree.
|
|
|
Post by B*ue dragonstander on Jul 11, 2016 10:02:53 GMT
As far as recall regarding the sale of SGL, and correct me if I'm wrong: The club were offered £8million+ for the ground, but Hallmark turned this down because he wanted to deal with Careys. (We have witnesses to this.) Why he did this we can only guess. Surely there were no backhanders involved? Then the deal is struck with Careys for £7 million+, but with a clause that if the number of houses Careys planned to build was lowered, the price would also drop. Guess what? That's exactly what happened. I've talked to property lawyers since then and they all said that such a clause is NEVER included in land deals. Sometimes one is included if the number of houses built increases - then the price rises, but it NEVER falls. Unless, of course, it's a contract overseen by Boddy and Hallmark. So the sale price plummeted to £3.5 million i.e. £4.5 million lower than the original offer. The "purchase" of the Nunnery Way site is another, equally distressing, story - and even more twisted and crazy. I'm sure others can correct my story if I'm wrong. I believe you to be 100% accurate. The contract with Careys was ridiculous. Shareholders were promised a vote on it but that never happened....not that it would have mattered...
|
|
dragon
First Teamer
Posts: 355
|
Post by dragon on Jul 11, 2016 10:10:39 GMT
Agreed, fellow dragon. The Trust has to decide whether to continue to court the board of WCFC Ltd in the hope that a `Damascus Moment` will occur or move towards planning for a Phoenix club to replace this failed and creaking institution. I am sure the Trust`s leaders will be aware of the need to have AFC plans in place well before the old club implodes and whether or not Perdiswell gets the nod.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2016 11:04:56 GMT
Mr Dragonstander is right. Hampson was installed by Hallmark to protect the previous "activity". Until the current board are wiped away and replaced by real fans nothing will change. And the current board won't walk away.
|
|
|
Post by thesecondjack on Jul 11, 2016 11:29:22 GMT
I've heard and/or seen bad things from Hampson, Wilcox and Layland - I'd be interested to hear what people make of Joe Murphy, because although he's perceived to be a Hampson supporter, he comes over well to me.
|
|
|
Post by Dodger on Jul 11, 2016 16:54:50 GMT
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Jul 11, 2016 17:23:36 GMT
To become a director 'proper', he needs to be elected !!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2016 17:26:32 GMT
Every time I switch on the news it seems someone's resigned. Come on Messieurs Hampson and Layland, join the trend.
|
|