|
Post by LJG on Jun 10, 2021 11:15:19 GMT
Wael very possibly saved the club from extinction but has achieved very little from the money he has put into the club. There did seem to be a strategy with the Garner era of develop young players but it certainly did not work, primarily because there was no balance in the squad (age and positionally) and possibly the youngsters signed had been released for a reason. A seemingly good idea that proved a disaster. I'm not sure I know the strategy now but it looks a lot more short term with signings so far directed at competing in the bottom tier of league football. They can probably do a job in league 2 but not much prospect of adding value in the transfer market. I guess the Barton aim is a promotion and an improved CV and few will grumble if indeed a promotion is won next season. As for a long term strategy for taking the club forward unfortunately there is little to see. Agree with this. Everything Wael has tried to date hasn’t worked and he’s flushed a whole load of his money down the toilet to achieve nothing. A lot of his calls in that time have left me worried about his judgement and where the club is going to. Perfectly legitimate concerns that some are determine to shout down and claim are made up at every term. Perhaps they are worried that their unmitigated faith in Wael is misplaced? Strategy now is basically Wael has been starstruck into giving a name he’s heard before full control over most aspects of the club which is really going to damage us down the line. As I said like JB, and want him to win us promotion but can see it all ending in tears sooner rather than later. I agree with you that I have some strong skepticism about transforming the club into Barton Rovers. Nothing to do with it being Joey Barton I would be saying the same whoever it was. What is the average life span for a league manager? I can't be bothered to check but three yearsish? It's inevitable that Joey will leave whether that's because we ask him to or he decides himself. When that happens we will have another complete reset.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 10, 2021 8:31:16 GMT
How many million/billionaires are lining up to pour money into a loss making League Two team? For all of Waels faults, he's passionate about Rovers and is putting his money where his mouth is. I can't ask for more than that Has he put money where his mouth is? The debt was converted into equity not removed. He is passionate alright, but also incredibly naive and that makes me severely worried going forwards. Well as we've already discussed the new shares that are issued do not retain their value so it's wrong to say that the debt was not removed because it has been converted to shares. If I sell a company with a million pounds of debt the buyer has to pay one million pounds because the person to whom that debt is owed has a right to receive it. If I convert that debt into shares that obligation to pay the money to the person is gone because they have got something in return for their million pounds- the new shares issued to them. As we explored above those shares will not retain any inherent value so if I buy a company with one million £1 shares that used to be one million pounds of debt - I won't be paying £1M for the company. Like I said, the number of shares in issue is irrelevant to what a purchaser will pay. So it is wrong to say the debt has not been removed. Again, I hope you can feel more relaxed about things on that basis.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 9, 2021 18:41:18 GMT
You mention in one post "equity and equity that no prospective owner will want to take on" and here "an enormous amount of equity". To help allay your fears - equity is not debt so it makes absolutely no odds to any prospective owner how much there is. None whatsoever. I can have 100,000,000 £1 shares in a company and those shares might be worth only a penny. A prospective owner will only pay one penny in that case. I can have 100 £1 shares in a company and those shares might be worth £100,000,000. A prospective owner would have to pay the hundred million. In both cases the nominal value of the shares - what you're calling the equity - is irrelevant to the purchase price. Bristol Rovers Football Club Ltd have 17,887,339 10p shares. That means nothing when it comes to the valuation a prospective purchaser will pay. You and I both well know, that Wael’s intentions are unknown. Nowhere have I seen a change in share price, indeed it stayed the same in the deal to buy more shares from the share scheme. The money that Wael has converted to equity, he’s going to want back. Hence the reason why he didn’t resort to a cash injection and converted to equity instead. It’s in his interest to accumulate shares but not change the share price. Sorry - you seem to be talking about something different now. There isn't a "share price" because it is an unlisted private company not a PLC. So you won't ever see a "share price" which will change. Annual accounts will show the nominal value of the shares and a share premium account if any have been issued above their nominal value. You made the point a couple of times that there is "an enormous amount of equity" which I took to mean a large number of issued shares. The number of shares in issue is meaningless when considering what a potential purchase price may be. I hope that helps with your concerns.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 9, 2021 18:15:29 GMT
Less debt. In league 2 (we were in league 2, so no change there then) Training ground (we didn’t have one then) The Mem is still the Mem, but we have two extra tents, refreshed tarmac behind the Thatchers, and we have two new stands, even if they’re tents. We’ve not become Man City over night but things aren’t any worse than in February 2016. Not much better, granted, but there has been progress. If you want to compare the last 5 years however, to the five years that preceded them. Well, it’s night and day isn’t it. More debt than what Wael took over with. And an enormous amount of equity to boot. We were all but in league one as I said, Wael takes no credit for that promotion. The mem is still the mem, exactly the problem. Don’t see any progress, regression mainly. Is it night and day, previous 5 years under Higgs, one relegation, bit of debt accrued chasing credible stadium plans, two promotions. Last 5 years under Wael, 1 relegation, lots of debt racked up, underdeveloped training ground. You mention in one post "equity and equity that no prospective owner will want to take on" and here "an enormous amount of equity". To help allay your fears - equity is not debt so it makes absolutely no odds to any prospective owner how much there is. None whatsoever. I can have 100,000,000 £1 shares in a company and those shares might be worth only a penny. A prospective owner will only pay one penny in that case. I can have 100 £1 shares in a company and those shares might be worth £100,000,000. A prospective owner would have to pay the hundred million. In both cases the nominal value of the shares - what you're calling the equity - is irrelevant to the purchase price. Bristol Rovers Football Club Ltd have 17,887,339 10p shares. That means nothing when it comes to the valuation a prospective purchaser will pay. Hopefully that makes you feel a bit better.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 9, 2021 11:33:55 GMT
No Hugo is correct. He is on trial for assault. The assault is alleged and has been charged. So now he is on trial to answer that charge. He is on trial for assault. Charged with is not the same as convicted of - the court will decide that and until then surely is innocent ? I haven't said it is the same and I haven't said he isn't innocent until proven guilty. Hugo said he is on trial for assault. You corrected him, it appeared, to say on trial for alleged assault. The allegation is implied because he is on trial. But he is on trial for assault. The assault is the issue being tried.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 9, 2021 9:09:05 GMT
This seems like absolutely crazy timing. Employing one of Joey's mates right in the middle of his trial for assault?? Jesus wept. Alleged assault No Hugo is correct. He is on trial for assault. The assault is alleged and has been charged. So now he is on trial to answer that charge. He is on trial for assault.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 8, 2021 19:48:48 GMT
So it’s ok for one to say the sooner fans like me, who question fxxx off is ok then ? Nope. Please pm me. He means this: I genuinely don't understand how you and they don't realise how much more effective you could be in the cause of bettering the club by honest inquiry. But the fact is you don't want what's best for the club you want to live out some Walter Mitty daydream of "being" the club so instead of honest inquiry you go with idiot fairy stories, fantasies and early 90s nostalgia. The sooner people like that f**k off, the better. I stand by it.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 7, 2021 20:49:59 GMT
You haven't said anything in response to the questions I asked. You've just repeated the same stuff that doesn't make any sense. You haven't made it any clearer what this "blind loyalty" is to. You seem to have a problem with me calling out the endless bullshit spouted by a select few. You ask me to prove that its bullshit and I do. Then you seem to have reverted back to saying that my proving that the bullshit is bullshit is whatever this "blind loyalty" bollocks is. You talk about wanting people to question the level of the debt but your little gang can't even be honest about that. Swiss was going on and on and on about the level of debt being £25m. Again that's a provable lie. If you want I'll do the same thing to show you how you too can prove that that is a lie. And now the debt is written off all your mates can do is lie that it hasn't been (remember earlier when I proved that)? If you and your gang want people to have serious discussions about those issues then have serious discussions; don't make some sh** up then when you get called out say some bollocks catchphrase like "blind loyalty claps us into the Conference". I genuinely don't understand how you and they don't realise how much more effective you could be in the cause of bettering the club by honest inquiry. But the fact is you don't want what's best for the club you want to live out some Walter Mitty daydream of "being" the club so instead of honest inquiry you go with idiot fairy stories, fantasies and early 90s nostalgia. The sooner people like that f**k off, the better. WOW, just WOW. Can you read that back and not hear the venom within you ? I can hardly believe the level of hatred in this post but, when I think of who it comes from then it’s no surprise. Those of us who don’t just blindly believe all that comes from the owner and club best FO to Ashton gate, the default position of anyone who sees someone post something they do not agree with. If you truly believe that what I think would make any difference then I have to wonder if we share the same species let alone support the same club. I will now give an example of just one thing and thank you for bringing my attention to the debt situation Wael said that he had capitalised all external debt, 8th July of the previous year and your post about companies house, reminded me to have a look at that. Blind faith people believed that, as of July 8th the club were debt free, they had no reason to question it as they have a total and unwavering belief in every word that comes out of the club. My own search that the capitalisation had not been registered and that the club were still in debt, to the tune of 18.4 million. The actual capitalisation was not acted upon until September 28 and only registered, at companies house in December 8th. Wael’s statement was totally unambiguous and so the majority of fans believed the club to be debt free as from the date of that statement. The actual capitalisation came in the form of a loan, from Dwane sports, to Bristol Rovers 1883 ltd and on December 7th there was no sign of it. So, do you think it would have been better to say nothing until this was actually done or do you think it was the right way to go about this . There was Wael, I think at Blackpool, telling the media about the fruit market but we are still waiting on that. Once again, if you think that my lil old me highlighting this, makes one iota of difference then I have to question your thinking as I think it’s obvious that there are a large number of posters, here, that believe every single word that comes out of the club and not because they are bad or wrong but because they have not said anything that they have not already acted upon, if anything they are innocents. We could go into how Wael, suddenly, changed tac and got rid of or pushed GC to the point where he felt he couldn’t take the club any further and he was fully aware that a certain Ben Garner was amongst those who had watched the previous couple of games. This would feel very undermining to any manager and it was no surprise, not to me, that GC chose to take the route he did, the rest has been done to death so I won’t bore you nor other posters by talking further about it. Our extremely loyal, tolerant and generally good egg fans did their bit and ifollow passes were very good and , even with a totally unnecessary relegation, is still showing incredible support and resilience. Just imagine what could be if we were truly being led, by someone with an astute feel for football and who didn’t keep moving the markers and employing people with no emotional tie to the club. We have true potential and I’d suggest that it’s not the likes of me who are dividing the fanbase but rather those who, meekly accept every utterance from El presidente and the clubs non gas employees. In closing, I have to say that I have really tried to get along with you, I have liked many of your posts and because I agree with them but I can hardly believe the bile in this last post & it has made me feel pity for you. If this club made me feel the level of anger that you have shown, I’d walk away and never look back. When younger and at Eastville, I used to think that I was amongst extended family but I no longer feel that way. One thing that I am very glad of and that is the majority do not take part in any forum activity nor even know of them. I am not going to apologise for the fact that I check some things out before I take them at face value. The club is, even now, blessed to have a fantastic fanbase, that is something that is fantastic. I just hope that there is some success for that incredible loyalty. I am done with this now. Regards Julian S Pirog I don't feel any hate and have no venom. I don't really know what "when I think of where it comes from then it's no surprise" means - you don't know anything about me. I'm somewhat tired of a small group of people continually pressing untruths. Doesn't mean I'm a fan of anyone nor a hater of anyone else. I just like the truth better than make believe. Last summer and again in March this year same day incorporations at Companies House were taking three working days. The Office of the Public Guardian were taking 5 months to register Lasting Powers of Attorney which are normally done within 10 weeks. The Probate registry of the High Court was taking seven months to process Grants of Probate which usually take 4 - 6 weeks. During a global pandemic governmental departments were working somewhat slower than should normally be expected. I don't really see why that's justification for people like Fanatical to lie about things now and I don't understand why you take it so personally that I refuse to accept something which is objectively provable to be untrue.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 6, 2021 20:45:18 GMT
Classic. I was going to end my last post by saying "The play book normally dictates that you now don't respond directly but make some sort of, again vague and ill defined, accusation against me as justification for not responding". But I thought that I should give you a chance. Can you tell me what it is that I've done to "provoke" you please? I merely asked you to clarify your point about how questioning lies was "blind loyalty" and how "blind loyalty" leads to whatever bad thing you say it leads to. You then asked me to prove that what I said were lies and I did. I'm genuinely lost as to why you think it's inappropriate to do me the courtesy of giving a reply. I could write an elaborate and very long reply but I genuinely CBA. There are those who will just blindly support the owner and board, regardless of how much the debts were increased since the takeover and how many errors have been made. There is faithful and true then there is blind loyalty. I will never understand those that do not question and my own view is that, if we do not get out of the basement league at first go then I genuinely fear we have not seen the worst of things. Small wonder the 💩 call us the gift. That’s all I will say as I really do have other things to do You haven't said anything in response to the questions I asked. You've just repeated the same stuff that doesn't make any sense. You haven't made it any clearer what this "blind loyalty" is to. You seem to have a problem with me calling out the endless bullshit spouted by a select few. You ask me to prove that its bullshit and I do. Then you seem to have reverted back to saying that my proving that the bullshit is bullshit is whatever this "blind loyalty" bollocks is. You talk about wanting people to question the level of the debt but your little gang can't even be honest about that. Swiss was going on and on and on about the level of debt being £25m. Again that's a provable lie. If you want I'll do the same thing to show you how you too can prove that that is a lie. And now the debt is written off all your mates can do is lie that it hasn't been (remember earlier when I proved that)? If you and your gang want people to have serious discussions about those issues then have serious discussions; don't make some sh** up then when you get called out say some bollocks catchphrase like "blind loyalty claps us into the Conference". I genuinely don't understand how you and they don't realise how much more effective you could be in the cause of bettering the club by honest inquiry. But the fact is you don't want what's best for the club you want to live out some Walter Mitty daydream of "being" the club so instead of honest inquiry you go with idiot fairy stories, fantasies and early 90s nostalgia. The sooner people like that f**k off, the better.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 6, 2021 12:54:13 GMT
The problem isn't necessarily with KP, but the originators of the bullshit. Unfortunately LJG likes to try to provoke me but , in this aim, is unsuccessful. I just do not rise to his posts. Classic. I was going to end my last post by saying "The play book normally dictates that you now don't respond directly but make some sort of, again vague and ill defined, accusation against me as justification for not responding". But I thought that I should give you a chance. Can you tell me what it is that I've done to "provoke" you please? I merely asked you to clarify your point about how questioning lies was "blind loyalty" and how "blind loyalty" leads to whatever bad thing you say it leads to. You then asked me to prove that what I said were lies and I did. I'm genuinely lost as to why you think it's inappropriate to do me the courtesy of giving a reply.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 6, 2021 12:46:13 GMT
Worst he would get is a suspended sentence, he won't go down for that. I would hazard a guess that LJG would know the possibilities of a guilty verdict and what the sentencing guidelines would be. Paging LJGI'm not a criminal lawyer though I do have a pretty good grasp of that side of things, but really I haven't paid enough attention to any of this to know.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 6, 2021 12:32:27 GMT
Ok, just dealing with each issue in turn: 1.I notice that you have chosen to ignore both of the questions I've asked. You've offered no explanation for your complete nonsequiturs that a) asking for evidence of something is "blind loyalty" ... to what? The truth maybe? And b) "blind loyalty" somehow makes things go bad. How? This is exactly what people like you do - come out with some jibbering nonsense that is accusatory of some vague ill defined thing, then when asked to prove it push the onus of proof onto the person asking the question. 2. But ok I'll play you at your game to call out your bullshit. Here's a really really easy one to start with. Call this low hanging fruit - there are plenty more - the debt. Fanatical (I believe he's a member of both forums) stated on here the other day that Wael hasn't written off the debt. Now, by following this process I can prove that that is a lie: Google- Companies House Click - Find information about a company Search - Bristol Rovers Click - Bristol Rovers Football Club Limited Click - Filing history Click - Statement of capital following allotment of shares. Took about three minutes. Took no effort. Didn't cost me anything. I've proven that Fanatical is lying. Now Fanatical and Swissgas both like to think they're preaching some mystery to people who don't know what they're talking about and say that a debt/equity swap is not a writing off of debt. That too is so disingenuous as to be tantamount to a lie. I know that because 1. I've got a long career requiring a sound grasp of basic principles of corporate finance; and 2. Fanatical agrees with me because when Steve Lansdown cleared debt owed to him by City via exactly the same method he started a thread titled "Bristol City owner Steve Lansdown writes of £14m of debt". So, now that I've smashed your bullshit strawman out of the way can you answer my reasonable questions please? The problem isn't necessarily with KP, but the originators of the bullshit. Well sure but KP, as far as I can tell, appears to be saying that questioning the bullshit is "blind loyalty" which, somehow, has caused, something bad.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 6, 2021 11:46:15 GMT
Why should he have to disprove that he is blindly loyal to someone he’s never met? There seems to be an attitude on there that no-one on here ever questions WAQ or the running of the club, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. I am just asking a simple question, if LJG spots something that he knows to be untrue then why not just post to disprove it ? I am not asking much for him to do that. I use gasheads more but have a rummage here, I don’t see why many don’t use both places. Done. Your move.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 6, 2021 11:44:07 GMT
That's just a bullshit dichotomy. We shouldn't be demanding that the people who make up twisted lies about Wael provide evidence or even any basis in reality for their claims because that's blind loyalty and blind loyalty makes things go bad? There are at least two missing links there. What has asking people to prove the things they say got to do with "blind loyalty"? What has "blind loyalty" got to do with the state of anything? This is exactly the sort of nonsense I was talking about. There are people who genuinely believe that continually making up, easily disproven, lies are somehow doing something good because ... ? I see you still have an active account, why don’t you disprove these “ lies” ? Ok, just dealing with each issue in turn: 1.I notice that you have chosen to ignore both of the questions I've asked. You've offered no explanation for your complete nonsequiturs that a) asking for evidence of something is "blind loyalty" ... to what? The truth maybe? And b) "blind loyalty" somehow makes things go bad. How? This is exactly what people like you do - come out with some jibbering nonsense that is accusatory of some vague ill defined thing, then when asked to prove it push the onus of proof onto the person asking the question. 2. But ok I'll play you at your game to call out your bullshit. Here's a really really easy one to start with. Call this low hanging fruit - there are plenty more - the debt. Fanatical (I believe he's a member of both forums) stated on here the other day that Wael hasn't written off the debt. Now, by following this process I can prove that that is a lie: Google- Companies House Click - Find information about a company Search - Bristol Rovers Click - Bristol Rovers Football Club Limited Click - Filing history Click - Statement of capital following allotment of shares. Took about three minutes. Took no effort. Didn't cost me anything. I've proven that Fanatical is lying. Now Fanatical and Swissgas both like to think they're preaching some mystery to people who don't know what they're talking about and say that a debt/equity swap is not a writing off of debt. That too is so disingenuous as to be tantamount to a lie. I know that because 1. I've got a long career requiring a sound grasp of basic principles of corporate finance; and 2. Fanatical agrees with me because when Steve Lansdown cleared debt owed to him by City via exactly the same method he started a thread titled "Bristol City owner Steve Lansdown writes of £14m of debt". So, now that I've smashed your bullshit strawman out of the way can you answer my reasonable questions please?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 5, 2021 20:45:36 GMT
The problem with the other forum is not enough people challenge the garbage and sh*t stirring that is spouted by some of them. You can't blame people for not botherring mind, because its such hard work. Its hard work because some of them are so set in their views of being anti WAQ come what may, but if you challenge them long enough and hard enough on facts and evidence you eventually find that there is actually little evidence there and they are then exposed. That goes down like a lead baloon with some of them.
Conversely there are those, such as your good self, who are just blindly loyal, regardless of money spent and a totally unnecessary relegation. Blind loyalty never ends well That's just a bullshit dichotomy. We shouldn't be demanding that the people who make up twisted lies about Wael provide evidence or even any basis in reality for their claims because that's blind loyalty and blind loyalty makes things go bad? There are at least two missing links there. What has asking people to prove the things they say got to do with "blind loyalty"? What has "blind loyalty" got to do with the state of anything? This is exactly the sort of nonsense I was talking about. There are people who genuinely believe that continually making up, easily disproven, lies are somehow doing something good because ... ?
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 5, 2021 9:01:48 GMT
If we were to be top of the table and playing really well after 10 games I can quite easily see us getting home crowds of 10k . If we’re 8-4th about 7k , below that and we’d be down to 6k or even lower. The point being , if we have sustained success and really looked like winning the league Gasheads will come out in numbers. A bit like the need for a new stadium argument, again *if* we got promoted, were doing really well again the following season we’d be near sell outs . It’s all about getting this club on a roll , fans genuinely thinking we’re going places ( a new stadium) and thinking we could survive in the championship. Lots of ‘ifs’ but it could happen . Considering the Mem has a capacity of 12,011 I'm pretty confident we won't be seeing crowds of 12,500 any time soon.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 5, 2021 8:59:49 GMT
From various estimates and well known fact that Joey attended the Liverpool v Bristol Rovers FA Cup match when we took 7-8000.The home figure is wrong but hardly that far out IF we are being successful. Hardly worth criticising. So how often will we play Liverpool? When was the last time we had 12.5k at the mem? They talk like it’s a regular occurrence. You won't get any criticism of the scouse housemates (scousemates?) past Steve - no matter how mild, he won't hear it.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 4, 2021 15:10:52 GMT
That forum is a grotesque dungeon of paranoid conspiracy theories - read that for long enough and you'll be convinced Wael is a lizard in a mask who has brainwashed your granny. The truly dark web. Eh you’ve got to remember we’re all Gasheads. It’s true that there are those over there with a more cynical outlook than most, but there are some good posters and ultimately we all want the best for the football club but just have different ways of expressing it. I think it’s fair to say that most Gasheads have developed a healthy dose of cynicism considering the shenanigans we’ve had to put up with over the years. I’m sure you could find things to fault about this forum too, nothing is ever perfect. I don't really think cynicism has anything to do with it. I'm talking about outright lies and conspiracy theories. That the debt hasn't been capitalised, that Wael doesn't actually own Dwayne Sports. And honestly I genuinely don't believe the people posting them want the best for the club at all. They want to own the club. That's different.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 4, 2021 14:08:36 GMT
On the other forum they are lauded as heroes. There is a clique of posters on there who are no longer in the know or have had favours stopped have nothing good to say about the club. That forum is a grotesque dungeon of paranoid conspiracy theories - read that for long enough and you'll be convinced Wael is a lizard in a mask who has brainwashed your granny. The truly dark web.
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Jun 4, 2021 12:34:39 GMT
You went past the line of being a bitter old bore quite some time ago. Move on. Better still, move away. He has as much right to an opinion as the rest of us. Just because he is not joining the crowd shouldn’t mean he should leave this forum. Wael has some form in talking of things that don’t then happen. The problem is not that he has an opinion. Nor is it that his opinion is a negative one towards Wael. The problem is that all of his posting is in bad faith and disingenuous. The Steve Lansdown debt thread is a perfect example - Fanatical has long held that Wael has not written off our debt because it has been converted to share equity, yet he pushes the story that Steve Lansdown has written off City's debt by doing the same thing. Both of those things can't be true and Fanatical knows it. It may be his opinion that he doesn't consider a debt - equity swap to be a write off, that's fine. But there's no way he can believe that it is a write off when SL does it but not a write off when Wael does it. That's disingenuous sh**-housery. Swissgas and Horfield are proponents of all the same bullshit and my comments above apply equally to them. Swissgas's method is generally more successful because he pretends to be a corporate finance expert - despite the fact he misunderstands or misrepresents fundamental concepts. Whether he does that deliberately or because he's lying about his background is less clear.
|
|