Can Someone Explain ? - Page 5

cashman · 05-09-2009, 11:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by JEFF

Will he decide to sell and make a profit or will he stay and carry on the battle. Only time will tell, but in the next eight weeks we must all pull together to get Stanley (not David O'Niell) out of this mess.

thats just how i see things, also as stated earlier clarification from Ilyas would not go amiss, after much thought on it, seems like a "Gun To The Head" to me, would welcome him telling us differant.

cashman · 05-09-2009, 11:56

Jeff, where n what position would the club be in if the Don had not bought E.W. out?

Revived Red · 05-09-2009, 11:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

More or less what Rob was saying tonight. They have budgeted 18k a month over the next 12 months, plus some extra lump sums in between for the taxman.

Sorry, I don't understand this. I thought we had 2 months to raise £308,000. Isn't that the only possible budget? Or am I missing something?

maccawozzagod · 05-09-2009, 12:02

the budget (weeks ago) was designed with the 18k a month payment set aside. If the debt disappears here and now then there will be a surplus in monthly trading figures

Revived Red · 05-09-2009, 12:05

So what has happened to the loans that were made in order to pay HMRC?

cashman · 05-09-2009, 12:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

So what has happened to the loans that were made in order to pay HMRC?

read uks link of the meeting, that explains

meant listen not read. lol

simon · 05-09-2009, 12:44

Shurm and Jeff are thinking like me.

Take the football passion out of what is a business problem....

Why Do people describe Ilyas as BLACKMAILING the Don ?? He has contributed as much to ASFC as the Don has (word of mouth due to lack of accounts) BUT does not have any say in the running of the club.

We are at a pivotal point in ASFC's future...

ONE man and his ways got us into this mess. I worry that one man could do that again(Nothing personal I dont now the Don personally), but where a share option is BEST is that we have shareholder meetings and ONE man cannot rule to the clubs detriment. And things are a lot more public for the fans to see.

Last night the Don asked us to trust his jugdement in this matter only a few minutes after admitting to buying a club up to its eyes in mess(2 months ago) ???

As an ASFC fan I say bring me the tin bucket to chuck money in !!!!
As a business man I say who are we trying to save ??

cashman · 05-09-2009, 13:01

what i can't get me head around simon is the "Share Option" if it aint a "Power" fight, why is 25% share offer not n option? if it is a Power thing then i aint so sure it IS the best option.

Revived Red · 05-09-2009, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

read uks link of the meeting, that explains

meant listen not read. lol

Sorry - can't open that link. Can anyone tell me what was said about these loans?

The Don has been involved with the club for long enough. He must have known about the debts and overall financial situation. He also knew what his own resources were. There seems to me to be a mismatch. I wonder how he planned to solve this mismatch. Where EXACTLY was the money going to come from?

cashman · 05-09-2009, 13:46

basically i understood, the summer when club had no income coming in, they were used fer day to day running/ outgoings of the club, the money fer the loans is now back in bank as i understood Rob Heys saying, as fer mismatch rightly or wrongly they were working on premise that the tax could be paid oer 12 months, not 8 weeks, i will ask you the question i asked jeff, where would stanley be now if the don had not bought E.W. out?

the possibilty does not fill me with excitement.

Revived Red · 05-09-2009, 14:03

Thanks for that, cashy.

So the money for the loans is now back in the bank. I wonder where that money came from. I have just re-read the item about John Glasson's loan on the fishy site. This is an interesting quotation :
Allaying any fears of the club building up further debt David continued "John will be repaid in full in the next 12 months.

Mmm?

I fear that the answer to your question about where would Stanley be had the Don not bought out EW is that we would be in the same predicament.

Doug · 05-09-2009, 14:10

[quote=simon;742469]Shurm and Jeff are thinking like me.

Why Do people describe Ilyas as BLACKMAILING the Don ?? He has contributed as much to ASFC as the Don has (word of mouth due to lack of accounts) BUT does not have any say in the running of the club/quote]

I have said that I feel that the ASSF/Khan bid feels that way.....But at the end of the day its about the club.....yes O'Neil could prove himself by paying the debt off; but then he would be in the same position as Eric was, it would be his club, his money.........his pockets could be filled to the brim, if the public bail the club out O'Neil won't be able to fill his pockets because the supporters and public wouldn't let him... Mr. Khan could also end this now by paying the debt and proving himself beyond doubt, he also is a major share holder and would also gain.

For me O'Neil put his money down when others wouldn't (apart from Mr. Khan) he should be given our support for the benefit of the club...If he shafts us we can deal with him then, publicly.

What I want to know is why Eric wouldn't and David O'Neil won't touch his money unless it’s the last resort to save the club and why hasn't Mr. Khan expressed himself on this occasion, he was extremely vocal last time…..

cashman · 05-09-2009, 14:12

it was just on 2br about 30 mins ago, that E.W. had a few offers to sell the club, if that was the case then neither ilyas nor the don could do owt about his choice, the owner of owt rules simple as. E.W. felt the Don was the best hands to put club in, right or wrong thats the way it was, so therefore i must accept the owners right, n do me best to support the club through this crisis.

cashman · 05-09-2009, 14:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

I fear that the answer to your question about where would Stanley be had the Don not bought out EW is that we would be in the same predicament.

i doubt that very much revived red, i fer one could not see the new back room team being here, also do not think coley would have been able to get this squad together. think things have started moving in a far more positive way since michelle n these extra bodies have come aboard n given a fair run think the club will benefit greatly from this addition.

Revived Red · 05-09-2009, 14:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by cashman

i doubt that very much revived red, i fer one could not see the new back room team being here, also do not think coley would have been able to get this squad together. think things have started moving in a far more positive way since michelle n these extra bodies have come aboard n given a fair run think the club will benefit greatly from this addition.

I partly agree with that, cashy. But your question was "where would Stanley be now". Emphasis on the now. And I am thinking solely of the financial situation. I agree that the backroom team would not be in place as they are now. But it hardly matters if we have not progressed out of the financial mire.