Joe
TFF member
Posts: 36 
|
Post by Joe on Sept 29, 2016 17:56:07 GMT
we should not give money to MASTERS tust is the way for all of us.
|
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Sept 29, 2016 20:33:41 GMT
I think there is a lot of suspicion about community ownership and importantly about the ability to consistently find the necessary funds to finance the club, hence the anti sentiment. I don't think anyone would disagree that this option comes a poor second to a type of Bristow backed takeover that occurred in 2007. However, it does provide an alternative to a Gaming International style of takeover whose motives are development led which may ultimately conflict with the well being of the club. So therefore it does set a bar for the owners to get over when deciding on transfer of ownership. Hopefully, therefore, TUOSC will complement TUST as opposed to weaken it and the distinction between the two will be made clear. Of course TUST operates on a one share one vote members basis and therefore should reflect the majority view of its members. It does not seem at present that this new organization will be run on similar lines which to be fair it doesn't need to be but hopefully we will not end up with a bunch of "useful idiots" at loggerheads with the critical friends of TUST as at the end of the day all fans want the same thing. Rjggull described my doubts about community ownership better than I can myself. I have yet to hear of any plan for the future of TUFC if and when it becomes a community owned club. Let me list some of my thoughts on the matter. 1) if the club carries on as it is now it will not make it through to next summer, I feel certain of that. 2) it is possible that TUST could raise the funds to take over the club through a community share issue, the events at Newport and Bath show that this can happen. But where will TUST find the funds to transform the club's fortunes. The original Bath City scheme was to try and raise £750,000 but fell short at £300,000.The scheme was then relauched with the aim of raising £300,000 which they have just successfully completed, and from what I understand this is the money that is needed to buy the shares in Bath City. I would guess the original figure of £750,000 included funding to regenerate the club. It makes me wonder if the general public are prepared to pay to own the club, but are more reluctant to cough up for anything beyond that. 3) contrary to what you say I do not think a white knight is the long term answer. The problem with individuals is that they are unreliable, some of them lose interest (eg Mike Bateson), some of them die or get sick (eg Paul Bristow, aso see Gretna FC and rushden and diamonds) and sometimes their finances are adversrely affected (as was the fate of Weymouth). However we are are desperate for the cash. 4) what we need are alternative revenue streams not directly linked to the performance and fortunes of the first team. This is why David Philips keeps advocating a new stadium with extra facilities. Unfortunately the club cannot afford to do this without outside help and finance. If TUST do take over I sincerely hope they will be open to exploring partnerships with outside parties. And before Hector bites my head off I don't mean getting back into bed with GI. 5) although Plainmoor does not boast the extra facilities we need, what is there is not fully exploited. Given that the club has only three full time and two part time staff outside of the playing staff this is hardly surprising. So if TUST can take on the club there is going to be a very real need to attract extra voluntary labour during the very difficult early years. But I don't mean they should be treated like the volunteers at Truro City who get no benefits in return, not even free entry on match days. 6) I think a lot of the antipathy towards TUST from the board stems from the board doubting that community ownership can result in a football club that is both full time and capable of returning to the EFL. It is up to TUST to try and convince them otherwise. Time is running out fast. TUST will always be the buyer of last resort (that also applies at any other football club). But just as importantly this will be a test of the will of the supporters. Will they be prepared to donate extra funds above their admission to tide the fledging TUST owned club over, will they be prepared to roll up their sleeves and get stuck in where needed. Or will they just sink into negativity and turn on the club via the message boards. After all it will be your club. |
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Sept 30, 2016 0:38:36 GMT
I think there is a lot of suspicion about community ownership and importantly about the ability to consistently find the necessary funds to finance the club, hence the anti sentiment. I don't think anyone would disagree that this option comes a poor second to a type of Bristow backed takeover that occurred in 2007. However, it does provide an alternative to a Gaming International style of takeover whose motives are development led which may ultimately conflict with the well being of the club. So therefore it does set a bar for the owners to get over when deciding on transfer of ownership. Hopefully, therefore, TUOSC will complement TUST as opposed to weaken it and the distinction between the two will be made clear. Of course TUST operates on a one share one vote members basis and therefore should reflect the majority view of its members. It does not seem at present that this new organization will be run on similar lines which to be fair it doesn't need to be but hopefully we will not end up with a bunch of "useful idiots" at loggerheads with the critical friends of TUST as at the end of the day all fans want the same thing. 3) contrary to what you say I do not think a white knight is the long term answer. The problem with individuals is that they are unreliable, some of them lose interest (eg Mike Bateson), some of them die or get sick (eg Paul Bristow, aso see Gretna FC and rushden and diamonds) and sometimes their finances are adversrely affected (as was the fate of Weymouth). However we are are desperate for the cash. 4) what we need are alternative revenue streams not directly linked to the performance and fortunes of the first team. This is why David Philips keeps advocating a new stadium with extra facilities. Unfortunately the club cannot afford to do this without outside help and finance. If TUST do take over I sincerely hope they will be open to exploring partnerships with outside parties. And before Hector bites my head off I don't mean getting back into bed with GI. 5) although Plainmoor does not boast the extra facilities we need, what is there is not fully exploited. Given that the club has only three full time and two part time staff outside of the playing staff this is hardly surprising. So if TUST can take on the club there is going to be a very real need to attract extra voluntary labour during the very difficult early years. But I don't mean they should be treated like the volunteers at Truro City who get no benefits in return, not even free entry on match days. 6) I think a lot of the antipathy towards TUST from the board stems from the board doubting that community ownership can result in a football club that is both full time and capable of returning to the EFL. It is up to TUST to try and convince them otherwise. Time is running out fast. TUST will always be the buyer of last resort (that also applies at any other football club). But just as importantly this will be a test of the will of the supporters. Will they be prepared to donate extra funds above their admission to tide the fledging TUST owned club over, will they be prepared to roll up their sleeves and get stuck in where needed. After all it will be your club. I think a great many members of TUST would want the same from a TUST owned club as you highlight from halfway down 4) and at 5). The more members that desire it, the more likely it would happen. I am happy that the potential for community or part community ownership is being explored so that we have a better picture as to whether a safety net does indeed exist to prevent the concern you raise at your point 1). If the upshot is yes, then I would expect we would hear and be asked to consider the "why and how" as the next step. |
|
Joe
TFF member
Posts: 36
|
Post by Joe on Oct 3, 2016 17:31:07 GMT
|
|
Joe
TFF member
Posts: 36
|
Post by Joe on Oct 16, 2016 19:11:30 GMT
D/ F AND G/I/P/m. WILL GET THE CULB IN JANUARY . through non payment of there loans by way of
DEFAULT THAY WILL GET THE SHARES OF PLAYMORE LTD. bye bye tufc ltd club thay got it the way thay
wanted to . or have thay we can stop them,
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,225
|
Post by rjdgull on Oct 16, 2016 22:08:58 GMT
Hopefully the financial report into the club commissioned by TUST will reveal where we are this week!
|
|
midlandstufc
TFF member
Posts: 945
Favourite Player: Dawkins lol
|
Post by midlandstufc on Oct 17, 2016 12:42:58 GMT
Hello! What's this? A new badly-spelt post. Can't make head nor tail of it.
As for the Report, I seriously doubt this will be published to ordinary members, which is probably only right.
|
|
|
|
Post by plainmoorpete on Oct 17, 2016 15:10:05 GMT
Didn't Joe used to post as bay52, and wasn't it him who revealed that the GI period of exclusivity was to be extended by another month back in July, so he does know something. It has also been hinted on BTPIR that GI would acquire the club if the loan was defaulted upon. Now the question becomes do TUST have enough time to save the club?
|
|
Joe
TFF member
Posts: 36
|
Post by Joe on Oct 17, 2016 17:32:36 GMT
yes? were is bay 52. hackers did the club no favours.
still tust will know more tomorrow and we might to.
if the bored is honest. and tell all the truth and ask for help.
get your money ready. about 200000.
|
|
Joe
TFF member
Posts: 36
|
Post by Joe on Oct 17, 2016 19:38:27 GMT
U SHOULD KONW IT IS U
|
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Oct 18, 2016 8:36:21 GMT
D/ F AND G/I/P/m. WILL GET THE CULB IN JANUARY . through non payment of there loans by way of DEFAULT THAY WILL GET THE SHARES OF PLAYMORE LTD. bye bye tufc ltd club thay got it the way thay wanted to . or have thay we can stop them, Who's D/F? You neglected to mention if the scenario that you describe is true then strictly speaking the club will be insolvent and will receive a ten-point deduction for entering Administration. A similar thing happened at Darlington post-George Reynolds. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stewart_Davies |
|
|
|
Post by tqriviera on Oct 18, 2016 17:19:56 GMT
You neglected to mention if the scenario that you describe is true then strictly speaking the club will be insolvent and will receive a ten-point deduction for entering Administration.
I think, in the National League, it is more probable that we would be automatically relegated by at least one division if we go anywhere near administration!
|
|
Joe
TFF member
Posts: 36
|
Post by Joe on Oct 18, 2016 19:17:50 GMT
WHO WILL PAY GI THE RENT HAS THAY WILL HAVE PLAY MORE LTD
AND NOT TUFC LTD .WE HOPE THAT THIS WILL NOT BE THE CASE.
LET AS WIN THE FA CUP. WELL WE CAN DREAM CANT WE.
|
|
|
|
Post by bomber on Oct 19, 2016 11:24:01 GMT
You neglected to mention if the scenario that you describe is true then strictly speaking the club will be insolvent and will receive a ten-point deduction for entering Administration. I think, in the National League, it is more probable that we would be automatically relegated by at least one division if we go anywhere near administration! From the National League rules and regulations: 14.A.1 If an Insolvency Event shall occur in relation to any Club that Club shall be deducted 10 (ten) points. In the
event of the Insolvency Event occurring during a Playing Season then the deduction shall be made forthwith
unless the Club shall already be relegated in which case the provisions of 14.A.2.3 shall apply. |
|
|
|
Post by tqriviera on Oct 19, 2016 13:20:33 GMT
Thanks for that bomber.
I must have been thinking about the "worst case scenario" (which I have now researched):
14.B. GENERAL INSOLVENCY
14.B.1 In the event of a Club entering an Insolvency Event between the end of the AGM and start of the AGM
immediately following thereafter (‘the next AGM’) then it shall automatically be relegated by one Step at the next
AGM, unless one of the following requirements has been met, namely:
(i) Prior to the next AGM it has Paid in Full all its creditors (including but not limited to Football Creditors); or
(ii) Prior to the next AGM it has Paid in Full its Football Creditors and entered a compliant CVA.
Anyway, let us hope that we never get anywhere near either "event"!
|
|
