Here we go again!

[BerlinWaller]

Perhaps with all this speculation and upheaval going on the team might have an upsurge on the pitch! Pete Johnson for Chairman

Pete who?

[Freez]

Pete two scarves? Donkey jacket? Beer mats on his jeans? NPL stalwart, Conference regular, League Two legend?

[BerlinWaller]

Pete two scarves? Donkey jacket? Beer mats on his jeans? NPL stalwart, Conference regular, League Two legend?

It will hit you in a minute Freez

[Freez]

Sarcasm I fully deserved as I didn't read the other thread, DOH!!
Great pic on that thread, Tamworth dressed as Pete, j
Bless him he bloody loved it!!
Soz Berlin!!

[halftimeresults]

he's now called Bellend waller

[BerlinWaller]

he's now called Bellend waller

Been called worse

[Westgate Wanderer]

Pete two scarves? Donkey jacket? Beer mats on his jeans? NPL stalwart, Conference regular, League Two legend?

Pitch invader at Chorleh?

[Gone_Shrimping]

It will be interesting to find out who the interested parties are.

Who has Mr Burnard found ?

Who are the current Board of Directors talking to ?

Joseph Cala is one apparently

Rod is quoted on the Visitor website today saying that Joseph Cala is NOT one of the interested parties.

[black morse]

Well that's a relief

[Christies Child]

Hopefully whoever is the interested party is not a front man for someone seeking to take the club by the back door.

I doubt it but considering the way Cala went about it last time I wouldn't put anything past that cowboy.

[skyecat]

[quote=Rod is quoted on the Visitor website today saying that Joseph Cala is NOT one of the interested parties.[/quote]

No, he's not one of the interested parties - he's the other one!

[Ntini]

Fascinated to know what these loans and debentures are.

My understanding was that PMG converted all his loans into shares, sold them and then got sharked by Diego. In that scenario, I don’t see how the club is the debtor?

As regards other directors, some will have loans owing but not in the millions like PMG had. I’d imagine the biggest loan was Nigel Adams after that and he’s not on the board.

Who knows? Frankly, the whole thing is a massive shitstorm of money, lawyers and paperwork. If we wrote a book about it, it might be the only thing that would keep us solvent because it would be an epic piece of fiction (no one would believe it was true).

As of the 31 May 2016, £2,389,196 was owed to key management personnel, with £2,220,575 being transferred into shares (presumably all to PMG as part of the 'sale'). That left £168,621 outstanding, albeit about 18 months ago.

My guess would be that with all the issues regarding the lack of funds for wages, that the above figure has increased significantly over the last year where we've struggled financially. If that is the case, then again it's a debt of gratitude to the Directors (and Abdul in a shadow capacity) that they've kept the ship afloat.

I think we're only just entering the choppy waters ahead. I reckon we might have another two owners before we see some stability return to the club. I honestly think that the best we can hope for is that we keep going as a club for the next few years and that we somehow manage to stave off relegation in that time before we're able to rebuild properly.

[KenH]

I suspect that potential buyers (past and present) think they'll be able to refinance the ground to raise funds, i.e. re-mortgage or get loans secured on the land and the buildings etc. When it was reported that a North East firm of finance brokers was part of the Diego purchase, it does look as if Diego/Burnard/Abdul were in some kind of finance raising consortium using asset finance rather than putting their own money in - all speculation, but you do wonder if that's why it all fell apart when they realised that raising finance on the ground wasn't viable.

But, the ground is actually held "in trust" on similar terms to Christie Park, as PMG transferred the ownership under a sale/leaseback agreement to a trust. So MFC Limited only has a lease to use the pitch and Globe buildings, hence it's unable to use as collateral for loans etc.

One the one hand, this was a good move as it effectively stops an "asset stripper" and preserves the pitch/stadium for football use, nor can someone use the land to build houses etc, but on the other hand, MFC itself can't benefit to raise funds for football purposes, so a bit of a double edge sword. Anyway, it was probably a condition of selling Christie Park that a new trust was set up on similar terms for the new ground to preserve it.

The mistake I think which was made back then was not separating the "club", i.e. the L2 football club, from the stadium. In the same way that the all weather pitches were transferred into a separate company, I think perhaps the stadium itself should have been too, leaving the actual football club as just that, the football, paying players and team management as its major expense with it's attendance income and FL payments as it's income, but simply renting the ground from "Globe Stadium Limited", which would have enabled the football club itself to continue if the ground, hospitality, etc failed and went into receivership. Hindsight is wonderful I know!

[Bare Grills]

I still don't fully understand the Trust, the Ltd, the Trustees and the power / control they each have.

I've read a lot of things but struggle to understand the power of the Trust. One of the buildings now in the hands of the Administrator is within what I would call the club walls, the security building which was hastily emptied & bypassed. If the Trustees had any power, could they have stopped the Administrators from entering their property i.e. the football ground, to change the locks on the security building?

[marky No.1]

PMG Leisure went into administration in January the day before the Trust was agreed to be formed

[KenH]

Different "trusts". The newly formed supporters' trust is completely different from the legal trust which owns the stadium. The legal trust is just the stadium itself and the pitch, and doesn't include the car park, surrounding land, etc, which remains owned by MFC Limited. The newly formed supporters trust does not own or have rights over any property.

[marky No.1]

The newly formed supporters trust does not own or have rights over any property.

Except for 5 mugs, 16 keyrings, 56 badges, 3 ties, 4 reams of A4 paper, 7 signs and a noticeboard

[Lloydie]

The newly formed supporters trust does not own or have rights over any property.

Except for 5 mugs, 16 keyrings, 56 badges, 3 ties, 4 reams of A4 paper, 7 signs and a noticeboard

RedRedWine been putting in his expense claims again

[Bare Grills]

Different "trusts". The newly formed supporters' trust is completely different from the legal trust which owns the stadium. The legal trust is just the stadium itself and the pitch, and doesn't include the car park, surrounding land, etc, which remains owned by MFC Limited. The newly formed supporters trust does not own or have rights over any property.

Understand that, it's the legal Trust that own the land I'm not clear about and what powers they have over the property that sits on Trust land.

[Morecambe Jack]

Different "trusts". The newly formed supporters' trust is completely different from the legal trust which owns the stadium. The legal trust is just the stadium itself and the pitch, and doesn't include the car park, surrounding land, etc, which remains owned by MFC Limited. The newly formed supporters trust does not own or have rights over any property.

Understand that, it's the legal Trust that own the land I'm not clear about and what powers they have over the property that sits on Trust land.

The Shrimps Trust have an article making the position as clear as possible, as to the land that is held by the JB Christie Trust.

See here: http://shrimpstrust.co.uk/campaigns/jb-christie-trust

[Bare Grills]

So JB's Trust doesn't cover any of the land that went into Administration (or the Berlin Wall). I get that. But what control do they have, if any, over anything that happens on Trust land? So, for example, a new owner wanted to demolish the main stand and turn it into an entertainment complex? Football remains on Trust land so it doesn't break that rule and at a push, you could say it's a commercial activity whose revenue supports the football. The question is what power does the Trust have to stop that, if any?

This is all hypothetical, I've not heard any rumours about this, but everyone is banking on the Trust and I want to understand how far their powers reach.

[Bare Grills]

Maybe this is a better way of phrasing my question. Does the Trust allow for a Fleetwood scenario? I.e. a completely separate Ltd company, unrelated to football, to be run from property on Trust land?

[marky No.1]

I would think only Stephen Wright and a handful of others will know the answer to that. The deed was written years ago, before the days of fancy lawyers twisting things

[mrpotatohead]

I think if I bought a business for a pound ...and all the other directors forgot their debts and left...and the business was losing half a million a year ....and I had no affinity to the business its local community etc...I might be tempted to close it down and sell it off for social housing.

[Lloydie]

I think if I bought a business for a pound ...and all the other directors forgot their debts and left...and the business was losing half a million a year ....and I had no affinity to the business its local community etc...I might be tempted to close it down and sell it off for social housing.

As long as they build a childrens playpark can they get away with this?