Re Last nights meeting - Page 2

Outback Ozzy · 07-06-2009, 09:58

Sounds like a constructive meeting. Thanks for the post Macca, won't quote it in reply as I hate people who quote whole long posts to make a little point. Wish I could have been there, but unfortunately it was not to be. However will defo PM you for the mobile number and will definitely supporting the cause. Don't know if I could take up a post because my time is cluttered with work, university degree and health and safety work. However, when you have the next meeting, will try and juggle time and work etc to attend. Once gain thanks.

Revived Red · 07-06-2009, 13:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod

The aims of the company will be to seek a greater control of the club through board representation and/or share issue. We were all under no illusion that EW does not have to sell any shares to us as he will then relinquish his majority shareholding which would force him into greater transparency via shareholders meetings etc. ........

As has been pointed out in various places, his shares are technically worthless at the moment, working with us we can all manoeuvre the club into a healthier position where his shares will be worth something. It is a win win situation but is reliant on EW losing his two handed grip on the club.

Many thanks to all those involved with the meeting and with the proposals. Thanks for passing on all the information, especially to those of us who are prevented by distance from being as involved as we would like.

At the risk of seeming a total idiot, I'm not sure how the proposals are to be aligned with the club's present debts. If the aim of the new company is "to seek a greater control of the club through board representation and/or share issue", what are the mechanics by which this will take place? "Working with us we can all manoeuvre the club into a healthier position where his (Eric's) shares will be worth something" - again, how will this happen?

Apologies if this is obvious to everyone else.

VALAIRIAN · 07-06-2009, 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

Many thanks to all those involved with the meeting and with the proposals. Thanks for passing on all the information, especially to those of us who are prevented by distance from being as involved as we would like.

At the risk of seeming a total idiot, I'm not sure how the proposals are to be aligned with the club's present debts. If the aim of the new company is "to seek a greater control of the club through board representation and/or share issue", what are the mechanics by which this will take place? "Working with us we can all manoeuvre the club into a healthier position where his (Eric's) shares will be worth something" - again, how will this happen?

Apologies if this is obvious to everyone else.

My understanding RR is - and please put me right if I am wrong anybody else who was there - the club is at the moment worthless, therefore so are EW's shares. Having a company set up, with the sole purpose of raising/generating funds/capital for Accrington Stanley should in the future mean that the club has value therefore so do EW's shares!. These funds are to be used for players Etc. Not to buy-out EW. Buying out EW does not put money into the club, which is the aim of the new company. I believe that the club will sort out the HMRC debt with FL2 cash, plus on-going payments, leaving the club OK at the moment, but maybe tight for cash in the coming season, enter the new company funds.. It is hoped that the fact that the club is operating almost debt free that we can attract other sponsorship Etc. Espescially when the club moves out from this cloud, then the betting scandal, Stevie G punch-up and the take over that never was... We know there are a lot of if's, whys and wherefores, but that is the general idea.. Please correct anything that I have gotten wrong

JEFF · 07-06-2009, 14:14

Thanks for the report of the meeting Macca. Sorry I couldn't attend but couldn't get home from work early enough. I will make sure that I attend the next meeting if given enough notice and I am willing to help in any way I can.

Oggy · 07-06-2009, 14:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

.... I'm not sure how the proposals are to be aligned with the club's present debts. If the aim of the new company is "to seek a greater control of the club through board representation and/or share issue", what are the mechanics by which this will take place?

I'll have a go, RR, but am prepared to be corrected by anyone else that was there.(I see Valairian is a quicker typer, but the posts complement each other, I think)

As I understand it the "fighting fund" will be placed with a new company, and this company will buy a controlling interest in Accrington Stanley. Those that put themselves forward at Friday's meeting, plus any others who are interested, will be meeting with a legal firm this week to clarify matters. The response from HMRC will be known by then and this obviously comes into the equation.

From the initial fighting fund committee, 3 or 4 new directors will then sit on the board, David Lloyd would be prepared to act as the public face of Stanley for a year. This in itself would raise Stanley's profile, plus he is a friend of Eric's, as well as Ilyas, as well as a much respected Accy lad.

So, hopefully with a repayment plan agreed with HMRC, and a fresh £0.5 million, and a board that would push the commercial side through, Stanley would be in a stronger position, and hence Eric's shares would become worth something.

I think that's the gist, I wasn't exactly taking minutes.

At the risk of repeating myself, the meeting was conducted in a real spirit of putting the Club first, but as Ilyas stated, this must include being fair to Eric for everything over the years.

It won't be straightforward, but there was a general feeling of optimism, and let's hope it's seen as the way forward.

Revived Red · 07-06-2009, 14:22

Thanks, Valairian. It is becoming a bit clearer.

So it seems that the new company runs in parallel with the club and pumps cash into the club.

There are still some problems for me, though. Does the club simply approach the new company with a request for cash? Let's suppose the club wishes to buy a player and the club does not have the funds to do so, does it then ask the company for those funds?

Can you see where this is leading? What if the new company thinks that the player in question would not be a good investment? Could it then refuse to supply the funds?

Apologies again if I am being stupid. And also apologies if these questions were asked and resolved at Friday's meeting.

Revived Red · 07-06-2009, 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oggy

As I understand it the "fighting fund" will be placed with a new company, and this company will buy a controlling interest in Accrington Stanley.

Thanks also, Oggy. That makes it sound a bit different. You say that the new company is to buy a controlling interest in Accrington Stanley. So I assume that this is a buy-out and means that David O'Neill's takeover is a non-event (if it ever was an event anyway).

shakermaker · 07-06-2009, 14:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bagpuss

One thing I will add IMHO if Whalley refuses to talk then Stanley will go into administration and his shares will be worthless, will people still support Eric the Legend then?

It's highly unlikely that administration is even an option. HMRC will demand that the amount is paid in full. This point has been made in several threads (first brought to our attention by Oggy, I think) but the 'a' word keeps on cropping up.

I suppose if the debt can't be paid, it'll be liquidation - not administration?

VALAIRIAN · 07-06-2009, 14:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

Thanks, Valairian. It is becoming a bit clearer.

So it seems that the new company runs in parallel with the club and pumps cash into the club.

There are still some problems for me, though. Does the club simply approach the new company with a request for cash? Let's suppose the club wishes to buy a player and the club does not have the funds to do so, does it then ask the company for those funds?

Can you see where this is leading? What if the new company thinks that the player in question would not be a good investment? Could it then refuse to supply the funds?

Apologies again if I am being stupid. And also apologies if these questions were asked and resolved at Friday's meeting.

I might have been a little quicker Oggy, but I did forget the David Lloyd bit

As for the question you have just posed, to be honest it was not rasied, but my honest answer is I do not know, and it is a very good question that will need to be asked

I feel personally that the new company will have to entrust Coley (or whoever) in other words the manager is running things, it cannot become a Chelski where the manager does not even know who is in his squad... Have you got any more like that RR because we need all these sort of things ironing out

Nice one RR, just goes to show you do not need to turn up to do your bit, E-mail is a wonderful thing.....

Revived Red · 07-06-2009, 14:49

Thanks again, Valairian. To be honest, the other main issue that has been exercising my brain cell is one arising, strangely enough, from shakermaker's most recent post. If the worst comes to the worst and the current Accrington Stanley Football Club is liquidated, can the proposed new company step in immediately and become let's say Accrington Stanley (2009)?

SamF · 07-06-2009, 15:11

I can't afford to put any money in however more than willing to work

Don't pay for anything such as web site, hosting, logo designs etc before coming to me

VALAIRIAN · 07-06-2009, 15:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamF

I can't afford to put any money in however more than willing to work

Don't pay for anything such as web site, hosting, logo designs etc before coming to me

Thanks for that SamF, as somebody on Friday night did pose the question of keeping tags on what was going on, and the question was asked about a possible "Fighting Fund" website, so we may take you up on that offer... Cheers.

ukcowboy · 07-06-2009, 15:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by SamF

I can't afford to put any money in however more than willing to work

Don't pay for anything such as web site, hosting, logo designs etc before coming to me

Excellent offer SamF, and funnily enough a 'website' was asked about on the night, Ilyas agreed and asked if anyone had experience in that area.If I recall correctly, John Timmins was rather forcibly pushed in that direction! Perhaps the two of you could have a chat and see what you can come up with. The more the merrier!

Oops late again!!

VALAIRIAN · 07-06-2009, 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

Thanks again, Valairian. To be honest, the other main issue that has been exercising my brain cell is one arising, strangely enough, from shakermaker's most recent post. If the worst comes to the worst and the current Accrington Stanley Football Club is liquidated, can the proposed new company step in immediately and become let's say Accrington Stanley (2009)?

From what was said on Friday, mainly from Ilyas and a club director, that will not happen, Eric's meeting went well on Friday and our understanding is that the club is OK at the moment and with the idea's on the table it will be OK in the future... But in answer to your question, not sure.

Oggy · 07-06-2009, 15:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Revived Red

So I assume that this is a buy-out and means that David O'Neill's takeover is a non-event (if it ever was an event anyway).

Don't know about buy-out (terminology?), more wil become evident after representatives from the meeting have had their meeting this week, hosted by a lawyer. It must be frustrating to be so far away, RR and others, but I'm sure all the points you raise on here will be collated and taken to that meeting.

Ilyas made the point, at the outset of the meeting, that to try and put everything in a post on here would be like typing War and Peace, and he's right.

But, hopefully, between us, we can develop the story, understandably no-one wants to put misleading stuff on here, but it can be hard to get it exactly right.

The David O'Neill takeover? It's now common knowledge that he put £150,000 into the club to stave off the taxman last year. However don't fully understand the present position, anyone else?