|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 3, 2016 14:19:16 GMT
I am only posing a question and I only have one vote.
It is for the other shareholders to vote how they want too, after a discussion about the Resolution.
In the long run it could well be the case that we will have to vote in favour of it, as we are not aware of the alternatives and other legal requirements.
I will still feel unhappy that an ex director is ........ BRFC. Just think how many 50/50 tickets have to be sold to make up the figure.
With you on that.
I still don't understand why it can't be sold to Rovers at Market value (as a dwelling) or at the price Ed paid for it to BRFC
Yep, simple. They could even make it into a shared house for development squaddies, or loanees, or something like that. |
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Mar 3, 2016 14:57:02 GMT
I am only posing a question and I only have one vote.
It is for the other shareholders to vote how they want too, after a discussion about the Resolution.
In the long run it could well be the case that we will have to vote in favour of it, as we are not aware of the alternatives and other legal requirements.
I will still feel unhappy that an ex director is ........ BRFC. Just think how many 50/50 tickets have to be sold to make up the figure.
With you on that.
I still don't understand why it can't be sold to Rovers at Market value (as a dwelling) or at the price Ed paid for it to BRFC
Exactly.
I have a few other questions to be answered which may uncover some more "payments" made to ex directors as the takeover was taking place.
None of this has anything to do with the new owners but may shed some light on what was going on in the last few months of the old regime.
|
|
|
|
Post by supergas on Mar 3, 2016 15:11:24 GMT
I am only posing a question and I only have one vote.
It is for the other shareholders to vote how they want too, after a discussion about the Resolution.
In the long run it could well be the case that we will have to vote in favour of it, as we are not aware of the alternatives and other legal requirements.
I will still feel unhappy that an ex director is ........ BRFC. Just think how many 50/50 tickets have to be sold to make up the figure.
With you on that.
I still don't understand why it can't be sold to Rovers at Market value (as a dwelling) or at the price Ed paid for it to BRFC
Since we know the market value (as it was only bought in Jan 2016) I would assume there was a nod and a wink between some random people who may or may not have previously been members of the Bristol Rovers board for the 'club' (again, owned by some random people who may or may not have been members of the Bristol Rovers board) to pay the money to a person may or may not have previously been a member of the Bristol Rovers board to sell them the property that the Bristol Rovers board may have needed in the unlikely event we had won the Sainsbury's appeal. I'm not saying it's all going to be smelling of roses under our new owners but I can smell the manure that nurtured the roses..... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 15:13:18 GMT
Apparently NH asked the supporters club to help fund this purchase. They agreed with the proviso that they would have first charge on the property to ensure they got their money back. This was declined so EW then bought the property. So my question is, if the supporters club could not ensure they would get their money back, why was EW allowed to put such a ridiculous option in place together with a bloody ridiculous sale price attached. One for the boys on the face of it. Thank god we have now rid ourselves of that motley crew that used to run this great club of ours. They also offered it to an ex director on similar terms. Do you think that Nick Higgs had actually run out of his own cash if he had to borrow from a loan company and ask all and sundry to buy a house at inflated costs to the club? |
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Mar 3, 2016 15:13:58 GMT
With you on that.
I still don't understand why it can't be sold to Rovers at Market value (as a dwelling) or at the price Ed paid for it to BRFC
Since we know the market value (as it was only bought in Jan 2016) I would assume there was a nod and a wink between some random people who may or may not have previously been members of the Bristol Rovers board for the 'club' (again, owned by some random people who may or may not have been members of the Bristol Rovers board) to pay the money to a person may or may not have previously been a member of the Bristol Rovers board to sell them the property that the Bristol Rovers board may have needed in the unlikely event we had won the Sainsbury's appeal. I'm not saying it's all going to be smelling of roses under our new owners but I can smell the manure that nurtured the roses.....  |
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Mar 3, 2016 15:21:06 GMT
I know for a fact that some members of this forum are reporting back to a certain individual, still in a position of some authority, on what is being said on social media and he has "questioned" some people on what has been said.
Hopefully, all those from the old regime, will shortly have no influence on BRFC and I and a few others will feel a lot more comfortable on what info is released on what was going on.
I believe that this is a start of a new era and some of the practices that went on previously will be consigned to history.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2016 15:23:41 GMT
I know for a fact that some members of this forum are reporting back to a certain individual, still in a position of some authority, on what is being said on social media and he has "questioned" some people on what has been said. Hopefully, all those from the old regime, will shortly have no influence on BRFC and I and a few others will feel a lot more comfortable on what info is released on what was going on. I believe that this is a start of a new era and some of the practices that went on previously will be consigned to history. The paranoia still exists then? |
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Mar 3, 2016 15:25:25 GMT
I know for a fact that some members of this forum are reporting back to a certain individual, still in a position of some authority, on what is being said on social media and he has "questioned" some people on what has been said. Hopefully, all those from the old regime, will shortly have no influence on BRFC and I and a few others will feel a lot more comfortable on what info is released on what was going on. I believe that this is a start of a new era and some of the practices that went on previously will be consigned to history. So Toni then?  |
|
|
|
Post by knowall on Mar 3, 2016 15:44:41 GMT
I never wanted EW anywhere near our club so couldn't be happier he's gone. Hopefully he won't profit further from our club. Thanks for raising this. but as a vice president he will be able to watch in comfort for free for the rest of his life |
|
|
|
Post by countygroundhotel on Mar 3, 2016 15:49:36 GMT
I know for a fact that some members of this forum are reporting back to a certain individual, still in a position of some authority, on what is being said on social media and he has "questioned" some people on what has been said. Hopefully, all those from the old regime, will shortly have no influence on BRFC and I and a few others will feel a lot more comfortable on what info is released on what was going on. I believe that this is a start of a new era and some of the practices that went on previously will be consigned to history. The paranoia still exists then? Seems so but why Severncider needs to be paranoid is beyond but it's beyond me why anyone thinks someone would need reports on the contents of a public forum .... |
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Mar 3, 2016 15:54:14 GMT
With you on that.
I still don't understand why it can't be sold to Rovers at Market value (as a dwelling) or at the price Ed paid for it to BRFC
Exactly.
I have a few other questions to be answered which may uncover some more "payments" made to ex directors as the takeover was taking place.
None of this has anything to do with the new owners but may shed some light on what was going on in the last few months of the old regime.
Why ? |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 3, 2016 16:07:13 GMT
Just think we need to be careful what's been alleged here given it's a public forum, I also wonder if our new owners really want all this brought up at their first AGM?
|
|
|
|
Post by Severncider on Mar 3, 2016 16:13:56 GMT
The paranoia still exists then? Seems so but why Severncider needs to be paranoid is beyond but it's beyond me why anyone thinks someone would need reports on the contents of a public forum .... I do not work for BRFC so have nothing to fear. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 3, 2016 16:15:44 GMT
I never wanted EW anywhere near our club so couldn't be happier he's gone. Hopefully he won't profit further from our club. Thanks for raising this. but as a vice president he will be able to watch in comfort for free for the rest of his life Well, that's watered me off. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Mar 3, 2016 20:02:39 GMT
Seems so but why Severncider needs to be paranoid is beyond but it's beyond me why anyone thinks someone would need reports on the contents of a public forum .... I do not work for BRFC so have nothing to fear. But you seem to be making allegations that something untoward has taken place by the previous BoD before the sale, you can still be sued for liable regardless of whether your a club employee or not. I personally feel we should just move on and support the new BoD not keep trying to dig up dirt on the old BoD, after all without them we wouldn't have the new owners. If the new owners want to dish the dirt in the future then that's their prerogative. |
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Mar 3, 2016 21:00:13 GMT
Sure, but my point is, if it hasn't been passed yet, then it isn't a liability yet, therefore there's no way they could/should/would have known about it, and they don't need to have known about it coz, presumably, they can just vote not to pay it. I think we are missing the point. Due diligence is done on the business you are buying. We are not buying the University, so therefore no due diligence. I would imagine, and it was the impression I got, that the info provided by NH and co re the stadium did not cover everything. The true value of our club was having obtained planning permission. If it's not a viable project, then that really does devalue us ongoing. |
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Mar 3, 2016 21:06:44 GMT
surely the new board can just not vote for the resolution. I doubt now the previous board are no longer there we won't find out what the case was. Perhaps Ed Ware can sell it on the open market now We have to be careful here about what is being voted on. As I see it, we will only be voting yes or no with regard to establishing the option to buy, I.e. We agree to pay him £125k now, to establish the option. If we win the court case EW sells us the house for £520k. If we lose, as I believe we will, EW is left with the house to sell as he wishes. But of course, by then he has already pocketed the £125k. Its a a win win for him, and another disgraceful episode in the history of our club. So my question is, why were the supporters club not given the same option? That way all profits would have remained in the club. Another bloody disgrace from supposed gasheads on the board. Good riddance to the lot of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Antonio Fargas on Mar 3, 2016 21:25:17 GMT
Sure, but my point is, if it hasn't been passed yet, then it isn't a liability yet, therefore there's no way they could/should/would have known about it, and they don't need to have known about it coz, presumably, they can just vote not to pay it. I think we are missing the point. Due diligence is done on the business you are buying. We are not buying the University, so therefore no due diligence. I would imagine, and it was the impression I got, that the info provided by NH and co re the stadium did not cover everything. The true value of our club was having obtained planning permission. If it's not a viable project, then that really does devalue us ongoing. Sorry, I was talking about 31 Filton Avenue not the stadium. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Mar 3, 2016 21:50:23 GMT
Exactly.
I have a few other questions to be answered which may uncover some more "payments" made to ex directors as the takeover was taking place.
None of this has anything to do with the new owners but may shed some light on what was going on in the last few months of the old regime.
Why ? I'm told that some "people" sneaked into the Mem at dead of night under orders to steal the trophy cabinet and sell the contents on the black market. Having discovered the trophy cabinet was in fact empty, they sold the cabinet on Ebay for £25. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Mar 3, 2016 21:55:00 GMT
I'm told that some "people" sneaked into the Mem at dead of night under orders to steal the trophy cabinet and sell the contents on the black market. Having discovered the trophy cabinet was in fact empty, they sold the cabinet on Ebay for £25. Not true! I have a pic of HTY holding the Conference play offs winners trophy as the screen saver on my phone!! |
|
