What Would They Be Buying?

[Melton Fox]

Can we just point out you are also calling 3,200 fans who joined the Trust in it's first year muppets - many of who post on here!

But was I wrong , if that was the level of return on my point, then I suspect you agree with me and that was the only comment you were able to construct.

I would hope you would pick up on my point about the board not being able to take the club any further, I also said that I thanked everybody for saving my club, likewise that was ignored in exchange for a petty reply.

Does the Foxes Trust believe the current board as the ability to move this club forward again into a thriving business challenging in the top level of English football whilst avoiding relegation and any serious financial threat.

 

[OldGit]

I wouldn't consider it a Glib statment, look at this board. People are pinning all their hopes on MM coming to us. If he doesn't then lots and lots of people will be massivley dissapointed. And at this time I see absolutly no reason why we he shouldn't come to us, especially as he seems to be making positive noises about it.

I know the board arn't sitting on their arses, and I know this because one of the methods they are trying to employ is asking people who are involved in the club at some level 'do you know anyone who would like to invest?'.

The people who were attempting to buy Villa and failed, why not approach them? They were not (as far as im aware) Villa fans, and they had money. Im sure we could be as big as Villa in less than 10 years given the right investment, surely it would be worth putting that to them?

I don't even see a majority of people on this board "pinning all their hopes on MM". That hardly extrapolates to 95% of all fans. I'm sure the overwhelming majority would welcome him if he made an approach, but there are many, many reasons why he might not.

 

[Real Sharapova]

MM is not coming, and as for the glib statements saying the board should find some other rich individual/consortium -who's to say they haven't tried. I don't think such people are out there in droves, and if there were, there are 90-odd other clubs who would be after them as well. Some people have short memories, we were minutes away from not having a football club to support. I for one welcome a period of financial stability, recognising the only real way forward for a club like ours is to concentrate on bringing young players through, which is why our training facilities/academy are so important to us. Flogging off the training ground and using Loughborough would in the long term be disaterous for us. But then again many people are only interested in the short term.

 

[bocadillo]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff
The FT didn't say the same thing. They said "not sure the current shareholders would agree to that", which I took at face value, ie they don't know if they will or not.



As there are 2 interpretations of what we said, to clarify Jeff is correct.

It isn't a topic that has been discussed, hence we don't know the outcome

Thank you for that clarification. I remain convinced that the situatiion would be most unlikely.

 

[Chrysalis]

Employing Rob Kelly didn't save us from relegation, sacking Levein did. We could have been managerless for the remainder of the season and got the same outcome

So, no, the change of manager didn't work, just getting rid did

Whatever spin you put on it the result was positive.

 

[Chrysalis]

Nice one Webbo, that puts that one to bed as far as I am concerned

It doesnt write off the debt if thats what you thinking.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Don't know the outcome of those discussions though, so I don't know the details of the current arrangement, but I suspect it's a lease and buy-back type arrangement.

It's basically a hire purchase agreement - we own the ground, but Teachers' have a charge over the ground until the loan is paid off. Obivously, we are been charged interest on the capital, and whilst we are in the Championship we are not paying all of the interest back and are paying none of the capital back, so the debt is increasing, hopefully by a small amount, year on year.

 

[Boy Genius]

It doesnt write off the debt if thats what you thinking.

Of course it doesn't! All I am saying is while we "rent" the stadium there is no interest growing is there?
To be honest as I have said before the financial worry of the club is not mine and I could not care less if they owned the ground or not, I cannot see what advantage there is to owning it outright apart from saving a few quid on rent.
The feckers went into admin owing me money, money I will never see again so my sympathy towards their debt problem is near to nil.

 

[Real Sharapova]

Of course it doesn't! All I am saying is while we "rent" the stadium there is no interest growing is there?

While we are in the Championship the agreement is that we don't pay all the interest back, so the debt/interest is growing.

 

[Boy Genius]

It's basically a hire purchase agreement - we own the ground, but Teachers' have a charge over the ground until the loan is paid off. Obivously, we are been charged interest on the capital, and whilst we are in the Championship we are not paying all of the interest back and are paying none of the capital back, so the debt is increasing, hopefully by a small amount, year on year.

That is not what was said at the creditors meetings way back. The old PLC company owns half the ground not the new company

 

[Boy Genius]

While we are in the Championship the agreement is that we don't pay all the interest back, so the debt/interest is growing.

you must have been at a different meeting to me then, because I cannot remember that being said

 

[Real Sharapova]

you must have been at a different meeting to me then, because I cannot remember that being said

Ah, I looked at the accounts.

 

[Durham Fox]

you must have been at a different meeting to me then, because I cannot remember that being said

Thats the situation BG, the debt grows whilst we are outside the Premiership.