Fans Advisory Board: Minutes, Discussion etc ..

[Manwork04]

Then prepare to reap what you sow!

Could get messy.

[Observing]

What happens when you can’t put up or shut up?

Buy another oven.

[Melbourne Cobbler]

Buy another oven.

That explains it.

[MCHammer]

Sounds to me like the means by which the information was gathered is more important to you than the information itself.

You read all that and that was your main takeaway from it?   

Random lying that I had no interest.  You are fine with.

No issue with a Trust Board member stating "You can ignore all the Chinese stuff if you choose but that deal with very clearly suspect and very highly linked to money laundering and shows what are owners are prepared to be involved in."

So despite Random, who has a history of being economical with the truth, offering to share information with me and only me for some reason, in private, providing no context for this information, refusing to confirm how he came about the information, or even if it was obtained through legal/ethical means.......your problem is with me for seeking reassurance the information was obtained through legitimate means.

[MCHammer]

As a general principle, it would be highly defamatory to accuse someone of financial shenanigans unless you can prove it. Or indeed have the money to pay for your defence if the person you accused of it took action against you. If you own a house or other assets you stand to lose them all if you cannot substantiate your claims.

I've heard the wildest claims about the Chinese money but I've never seen the slightest evidence of any wrong doing. And I've studied the accounts carefully for this period and can see absolutely nothing that points in this direction.

And whilst we are talking accounts - one of the strangest claims is that the owners haven't invested >£10m into the club (rising to £15m when the East Stand is finished.)

I know statutory accounts are boring, but the evidence is directly in front of you if you care to look....

I agree completely.  Nobody, outside the board of the Supporters Trust, wants to see fellow Cobblers fans facing legal action.

Most of us just want the truth.  Like you I've seen various claims regarding the Chinese money yet EVERY time I've asked for actual evidence none is ever forthcoming.

Same with the accounts and the claim that the owners have falsely accounted for the debt in part through claiming significant expenses.  Again no evidence is ever supplied to support these claims.  In fact to the best of my knowledge despite the Supporters Trust being a shareholder and attending the clubs AGM each year it's never even been raised as an issue?

[Melbourne Cobbler]

There are a number of people at the club who work within the community and generally to raise its profile. Some of this will depend on any effect these actions have on them? In the event they are aware of some of this it may make their role sometimes challenging and have an impact professionally, and who knows even personally. KT has already alluded to it in the interview on the Cobblers Show, and let’s be honest some of the allegations are quite serious. It’s not just the allegations either it’s the relentless nature on social media. If they exist then individuals are entitled to ask questions, but repeated allegations without providing factual evidence to support it presents a dilemma. The club obviously have a duty of care to the staff and if it has an impact on them or their ability to perform their role then they might not get a choice at some point and have to act. Sorted of damned if they do and damned if they don’t scenario. As I said, it all depends on the impact this is having, but this loaded gun people are trying to play pass the parcel with might end up being pointed at their own heads.

[BedsCobb]

As a general principle, it would be highly defamatory to accuse someone of financial shenanigans unless you can prove it. Or indeed have the money to pay for your defence if the person you accused of it took action against you. If you own a house or other assets you stand to lose them all if you cannot substantiate your claims.

I've heard the wildest claims about the Chinese money but I've never seen the slightest evidence of any wrong doing. And I've studied the accounts carefully for this period and can see absolutely nothing that points in this direction.

And whilst we are talking accounts - one of the strangest claims is that the owners haven't invested >£10m into the club (rising to £15m when the East Stand is finished.)

I know statutory accounts are boring, but the evidence is directly in front of you if you care to look....

If you gave someone £16,000.000  to progress a centrally located lower League club in a town of 250,000 inhabitants,  would you waste 10 years working hard to keep the club in a non league setting, just fitting out a tiny stand with just 10 boxes?

No of course you wouldn't,  you'd build up the ground capacity and promote the club to the three hundred thousand plus living within 10 miles..

We have spent £16,000.000 lost the running track, regressing on many things like playing squad, ground getting hemmed in,  etc.
Thanks Tom.

[Tabasco Kid]

If you gave someone £16,000.000  to progress a centrally located lower League club in a town of 250,000 inhabitants,  would you waste 10 years working hard to keep the club in a non league setting, just fitting out a tiny stand with just 10 boxes?

No of course you wouldn't,  you'd build up the ground capacity and promote the club to the three hundred thousand plus living within 10 miles..

We have spent £16,000.000 lost the running track, regressing on many things like playing squad, ground getting hemmed in,  etc.
Thanks Tom.

Hemmed in? There is ample room for expansion on ALL sides of the ground. And you know it. You are so tedious...

[Observing]

If you gave someone £16,000.000  to progress a centrally located lower League club in a town of 250,000 inhabitants,  would you waste 10 years working hard to keep the club in a non league setting, just fitting out a tiny stand with just 10 boxes?

No of course you wouldn't,  you'd build up the ground capacity and promote the club to the three hundred thousand plus living within 10 miles..

We have spent £16,000.000 lost the running track, regressing on many things like playing squad, ground getting hemmed in,  etc.
Thanks Tom.

It is all the fault of Tom of course.

Course it is!

[guest3706]

And to think the detractors could have put their names forward when Tom and Dan did, but no, they’d rather post their monotonous diatribes on here. Fools on the hill!

[Tabasco Kid]

Thats what I call hemmed in . Welcome to Boca Juniors.

[WekaWeka Cobbler]

(I've not got the hang of quote replying yet..)

According to Transfermarkt.com we've got a squad valued at twice that of last year...

And from having a squad value in the bottom 4 of League 1 last year, we've now got one in the top eight..

So unless Transfermarkt.com have got it wrong(), we've got specific evidence of substantial investment by the owners...

If you gave someone £16,000.000  to progress a centrally located lower League club in a town of 250,000 inhabitants,  would you waste 10 years working hard to keep the club in a non league setting, just fitting out a tiny stand with just 10 boxes?

No of course you wouldn't,  you'd build up the ground capacity and promote the club to the three hundred thousand plus living within 10 miles..

We have spent £16,000.000 lost the running track, regressing on many things like playing squad, ground getting hemmed in,  etc.
Thanks Tom.

[Tom]

(I've not got the hang of quote replying yet..)

According to Transfermarkt.com we've got a squad valued at twice that of last year...

And from having a squad value in the bottom 4 of League 1 last year, we've now got one in the top eight..

So unless Transfermarkt.com have got it wrong(), we've got specific evidence of substantial investment by the owners...

You're wasting your time. He's incapable of listening, facts are irrelevant despite being pointed out many times and he will continue to repeat false statements over and over.....and over and over.

[Manwork04]

(I've not got the hang of quote replying yet..)

According to Transfermarkt.com we've got a squad valued at twice that of last year...

And from having a squad value in the bottom 4 of League 1 last year, we've now got one in the top eight..

So unless Transfermarkt.com have got it wrong(), we've got specific evidence of substantial investment by the owners...

It’s probably factored in players like Tyler Roberts who is on loan, but the massive squad we have is definitely worth more than last season, quality has improved too.

[Worthless Recluse]

You read all that and that was your main takeaway from it?   

Random lying that I had no interest.  You are fine with.

No issue with a Trust Board member stating "You can ignore all the Chinese stuff if you choose but that deal with very clearly suspect and very highly linked to money laundering and shows what are owners are prepared to be involved in."

So despite Random, who has a history of being economical with the truth, offering to share information with me and only me for some reason, in private, providing no context for this information, refusing to confirm how he came about the information, or even if it was obtained through legal/ethical means.......your problem is with me for seeking reassurance the information was obtained through legitimate means.

It may surprise you but yes, those were my immediate thoughts when I read your post.
I haven't said I'm fine with or have no issue with anything you raise above.
I've already commented on these bids. In fact I think I was the first to respond to Duston when he made them public on this thread.
This is what I said.
'If that's without condition, that's an astonishing detail'.

[MCHammer]

It may surprise you but yes, those were my immediate thoughts when I read your post.
I haven't said I'm fine with or have no issue with anything you raise above.
I've already commented on these bids. In fact I think I was the first to respond to Duston when he made them public on this thread.
This is what I said.
'If that's without condition, that's an astonishing detail'.

Fair enough.  So now you've had longer to consider your immediate thoughts and I've added further explanation is that still the same and only takeaway you have from what I said?

You're right you didn't say if you were fine or have no issue with what I raised above.  I know you like to promote discussion on this forum so what are your opinions on those matters?

You were indeed the first to respond to Random regarding the bids.  I think most of us that followed were demonstrating thoughts along the same lines as yourself.  As Random was presenting the information in the context of the land being valued at £20m by some yet the council valued it at £890k it genuinely would be an astonishing detail if unconditional.  Some of us, not just me, were even curious enough about the claims to ask to see the court papers that contained this astonishing detail and to understand whether the bids were indeed conditional.

So we end up here, where despite my repeated requests to see this information, we are no further forward but apparently I'm the problem because Random lies that I "wasn't interested" and you think I should care less about being potentially given illegally/unethically sourced information.

For a little bonus, as the cherry on the cake, I get handed a big fat money laundering accusation that I have a personal professional legal duty to follow up on.

[DavCobb]

Random lies that I "wasn't interested"

Can you also follow up on the rumour that he wrote Rachel Reeves' CV please.

[guest3706]

Fair enough.  So now you've had longer to consider your immediate thoughts and I've added further explanation is that still the same and only takeaway you have from what I said?

You're right you didn't say if you were fine or have no issue with what I raised above.  I know you like to promote discussion on this forum so what are your opinions on those matters?

You were indeed the first to respond to Random regarding the bids.  I think most of us that followed were demonstrating thoughts along the same lines as yourself.  As Random was presenting the information in the context of the land being valued at £20m by some yet the council valued it at £890k it genuinely would be an astonishing detail if unconditional.  Some of us, not just me, were even curious enough about the claims to ask to see the court papers that contained this astonishing detail and to understand whether the bids were indeed conditional.

So we end up here, where despite my repeated requests to see this information, we are no further forward but apparently I'm the problem because Random lies that I "wasn't interested" and you think I should care less about being potentially given illegally/unethically sourced information.

For a little bonus, as the cherry on the cake, I get handed a big fat money laundering accusation that I have a personal professional legal duty to follow up on.

If the trust have evidence of this, aren’t they legally obliged to bring it to the attention of the relevant authorities, especially as the “adviser” is a legal professional?

[WekaWeka Cobbler]

It does include loan players and I've often thought (as I have too much time on my hands) whether it should..

I think it should because a) we pay their wages so they are 'our' players for the season. b) to exclude them would distort comparisons..

To take an absurd example, if we'd had had Thiery Henry playing for us on loan at his pomp say at a value of £100m, then to ignore him would have suggested we only had a squad worth £2m when it was £102m..

As I said, I've too much time on my hands..


quote author=Manwork04 link=topic=23087.msg544651#msg544651 date=1732089650]
It’s probably factored in players like Tyler Roberts who is on loan, but the massive squad we have is definitely worth more than last season, quality has improved too.
[/quote]

[Manwork04]

It does include loan players and I've often thought (as I have too much time on my hands) whether it should..

I think it should because a) we pay their wages so they are 'our' players for the season. b) to exclude them would distort comparisons..

To take an absurd example, if we'd had had Thiery Henry playing for us on loan at his pomp say at a value of £100m, then to ignore him would have suggested we only had a squad worth £2m when it was £102m..

As I said, I've too much time on my hands..


quote author=Manwork04 link=topic=23087.msg544651#msg544651 date=1732089650]
It’s probably factored in players like Tyler Roberts who is on loan, but the massive squad we have is definitely worth more than last season, quality has improved too.

You’ll probably find we only part a percentage of the player’s salary, Roberts is one of Birminghams better paid players so I would have thought we are paying half.