Shrimpsvoices

The simple question for the Fans Forum is where has the money come from / coming from? Paying off the club’s debts means paying out well over £1 million and then making a substantial injection means another say £1 million. None of the companies owned solely or jointly by Whittingham and Goldring have any money (combined assets of £50,000). From the evidence they don’t have the assets so is there someone else behind the scenes pulling the strings?

Still baffled. Crossing fingers “the Bond Group Investments” actually can do as they say. We can’t do anything about it if they dont.

.... and there is the big question to be asked, anyone think there will be an answer.

Outside investors
Mayfair Finance
Abdul
Diego reincarnated
PMG sold Leisure Company for £10M
Cala has an underwater treasure chest
Burnard put £100K on Gold Cup Winner
G50 found some Euros
Christie Cat cashed in appearance money
AJ secretly sold for £5M

Meanwhile, Abdul is the sole director of Newco 2017 Ltd who have just taken significant control of G50.

It's very puzzling where the finance is coming from as the new owners seem to have very limited funds but it must be okay for we have been told once more by PMG that we have stability!!

Maybe before some start passing judgement about the new owners we should give them the opportunity to explain about where the finances are coming from which the up coming forum will be the ideal place to ask the relevant questions. Certainly individuals are only too quick to cast aspersions without knowing the facts behind the deal despite giving the impression that they continue to be privy to all that should remain confidential.

redrobo wrote:Certainly individuals are only too quick to cast aspersions without knowing the facts behind the deal despite giving the impression that they continue to be privy to all that should remain confidential.

Quite the opposite. Certain individuals cast aspersions because they're *not* privy to all that remains confidential. They're using what little information is in the public domain and guessing the rest, and they'll continue to guess until they know the detail which I would not expect to be made public. I reckon, with no privy information, they're good guessers and that's just my opinion, to which I am entitled.

Bare Grills wrote:

redrobo wrote:Certainly individuals are only too quick to cast aspersions without knowing the facts behind the deal despite giving the impression that they continue to be privy to all that should remain confidential.

Quite the opposite. Certain individuals cast aspersions because they're *not* privy to all that remains confidential. They're using what little information is in the public domain and guessing the rest, and they'll continue to guess until they know the detail which I would not expect to be made public. I reckon, with no privy information, they're good guessers and that's just my opinion, to which I am entitled.

Well said Mr Grills.

With Andy Holt at Accy there is no need to speculate. The turnover and performance of his companies is all there to see in black and white in company documents and press releases. Also every plan, strategy and action is spelt out in detail and then actioned in the timeframe originally proposed. With that certainty local businesss join in and slowly people do too.

Yet we have two people with unproven resources from Essex buying a financially struggling club in a place they don’t know with dubious documents at a time that makes no sense. And we supposedly cast aspersions? No we just ask questions about a football club we don’t want to lose.

I don't expect any details of the financing of our club to be made public at the AGM unlike the situation at Stanley. We seem to operate very secretively. My worry is the club debts have been paid by another loan which basically at best leaves us in the situation we were in previously!

however we do seem to have a few players who have signed 2 year contracts over past couple of week with one being Old.

would be nice to know what they have been told for them to sign up for 2 years.

I think that either way the club surely can't be in any worse posistion than we have found ourselves over past 2 years and hopefully more will be revealed when the fans forum takes place, at least hopefully the right questions can be asked and the owners given oppotunity to answer them.

would be nice for us to hit the ground running start of the season and get some wins under our belts and hopefully some momentum then hopefully get some more fans back into the ground and following the lads.

[quote="fulwoodshrimp"]I don't expect any details of the financing of our club to be made public at the AGM unlike the situation at Stanley. We seem to operate very secretively. My worry is the club debts have been paid by another loan which basically at best leaves us in the situation we were in previously![/quote]
The boardroom statement says Equity Cash Injection.

Equity. Difference between assets & liabilities.

Not even hiding the fact the club survives on its worth, not it's merit.

I have no inside knowledge and if it is borrowed money it's a worry, as barring a minor miracle like an FA cup run ,we will carry on incurring debt, the jury is out on the new people and it would appear that cynicism is rife about them, which is hardly surprising given the previous shoddy characters we were being served up with as new owners, the only thing that seems certain to me is that good or bad, if they hadn't turned up, the club would have been stuffed anyway.

Posh wrote:Well said Mr Grills.

Mr?

Bare Grills wrote:

Posh wrote:Well said Mr Grills.

Mr?

I thought I knew who you were but clearly not.

Dame Grills of Bare it is then.

The two year deals are interesting and makes we wonder even more why we didn't tie Kenyon down for two years or was it just his choice to have one year.

P/T Indie wrote:The two year deals are interesting and makes we wonder even more why we didn't tie Kenyon down for two years or was it just his choice to have one year.

Maybe the ones who would be attractive to rival clubs and who are first team regulars are given 2 year deals , hence Old , Lavelle etc

Players who are more likely to be squad players are just given 1 year deals.

Posh wrote:

Bare Grills wrote:

Posh wrote:Well said Mr Grills.

Mr?

I thought I knew who you were but clearly not.

Dame Grills of Bare it is then.

Doctor?

Gone_Shrimping wrote:

P/T Indie wrote:The two year deals are interesting and makes we wonder even more why we didn't tie Kenyon down for two years or was it just his choice to have one year.

Maybe the ones who would be attractive to rival clubs and who are first team regulars are given 2 year deals , hence Old , Lavelle etc

Players who are more likely to be squad players are just given 1 year deals.

Surley Kenyon will be one of the first names on the team sheet this season and probably captain.

marky No.1 wrote:

Posh wrote:I thought I knew who you were but clearly not.
Dame Grills of Bare it is then.

Doctor?

I prefer Dame

P/T Indie wrote:

Gone_Shrimping wrote:

P/T Indie wrote:The two year deals are interesting and makes we wonder even more why we didn't tie Kenyon down for two years or was it just his choice to have one year.

Maybe the ones who would be attractive to rival clubs and who are first team regulars are given 2 year deals , hence Old , Lavelle etc

Players who are more likely to be squad players are just given 1 year deals.

Surley Kenyon will be one of the first names on the team sheet this season and probably captain.

I've never thought Kenyon was particularly surly. Aggressive in the tackle maybe, but generally quite a happy chappy.

Phil Anderer wrote:

P/T Indie wrote:

Gone_Shrimping wrote:
Maybe the ones who would be attractive to rival clubs and who are first team regulars are given 2 year deals , hence Old , Lavelle etc

Players who are more likely to be squad players are just given 1 year deals.

Surley Kenyon will be one of the first names on the team sheet this season and probably captain.

I've never thought Kenyon was particularly surly. Aggressive in the tackle maybe, but generally quite a happy chappy.

Shirley?

redrobo wrote:Maybe before some start passing judgement about the new owners we should give them the opportunity to explain about where the finances are coming from which the up coming forum will be the ideal place to ask the relevant questions. Certainly individuals are only too quick to cast aspersions without knowing the facts behind the deal despite giving the impression that they continue to be privy to all that should remain confidential.

This post from myself is purely my point of view. The less information we have been given or been allowed to know 'because we aren't important enough', has driven me further away than ever from a local family Club I used to love going to watch at Christie Park. Quite simply, this is the biggest fuck up, built on an even bigger fuck up. It will all end in tears. The new owners have had plenty of opportunities to explain - we as fans shouldn't have to ask! - 'All that should remain confidential'? Bollocks pal. 'Certain individuals' would like to know the facts. How our Club has changed eh?

Do you think some SVs were a bit harsh on PMG, red Robb?

Moose wrote:

redrobo wrote:Maybe before some start passing judgement about the new owners we should give them the opportunity to explain about where the finances are coming from which the up coming forum will be the ideal place to ask the relevant questions. Certainly individuals are only too quick to cast aspersions without knowing the facts behind the deal despite giving the impression that they continue to be privy to all that should remain confidential.

This post from myself is purely my point of view. The less information we have been given or been allowed to know 'because we aren't important enough', has driven me further away than ever from a local family Club I used to love going to watch at Christie Park. Quite simply, this is the biggest fuck up, built on an even bigger fuck up. It will all end in tears. The new owners have had plenty of opportunities to explain - we as fans shouldn't have to ask! - 'All that should remain confidential'? Bollocks pal. 'Certain individuals' would like to know the facts. How our Club has changed eh?

Purely semantics, but it can't be 'the biggest f**k-up' if it follows 'an even bigger f**k-up'. The earlier 'f**k-up' is, by your own definition, the biggest. As to the general content however, whilst I understand the need for protecting commercially/contractually sensitive information, there's a great deal that could be said without compromising any of that, and that hasn't been said to date.

You're determined to smoke him out aren't you MPH !