The Hotel End
March 28, 2024, 16:53:34 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Downloads Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register Chat  

New Trust statement on club finances

Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 41   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New Trust statement on club finances  (Read 35246 times)
0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.
MCHammer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1342


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search 1000 Posts Apple User
« Reply #440 on: July 22, 2021, 09:56:07 am »

Regarding the 5U Sport saga.  How long has the Trust known about the financial information it published in its statement last weekend?

The Trust became aware of this financial information last summer and the board at that time took the decision not to disclose it publicly, rather write a closed and confidential letter to the club about this information.  The reply to that closed letter – written in September 2020 - was leaked by the club to a third party and published earlier this month. 

What physical evidence do you have that the payments were made/money changed hands for the amounts quoted?  Can that be shared to support the trusts statements?

The Trust Board is satisfied that the evidence of the payments in the amounts stated is accurate.

What is the purpose of the Trust releasing this information in a statement now?

The financial information was released publicly earlier this month after the club owners refused to give written answers to questions about their financial commitment to the football club in respect of the ongoing land deal discussions and because several members of the Trust (and some non-members) were aware of aspects of this financial information and were asking us about it.

Is the Trust saying or implying that some wrongdoing has taken place here?  Either in company law, football league ownership rules or just morally?

The information issued by the Trust is just that: it is information from which any reader of our release can draw their own conclusions. It is factual information.

The suggestion in some posts on social media is that the Trust has a confrontational relationship with the club. While there are disagreements on some issues, the relationship is cordial, and the meetings are always conducted as such.


Has the Trust raised any of these concerns if they have any with Companies house, the Football League, the local council, or any other official body that this would be of interest to?

We are not able to make a detailed reply to this question.  The Trust is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and complies with its reporting obligations. 

We are aware that some former senior NBC councillors and current WNC councillors have been aware from sources independent of the Trust of issues concerning 5U Sports dealings for some time.


If yes when was this done and what were their responses?

Not applicable.

I understand that the Trust has had conversations in the past with KT regarding the 5U Sports deal and there is written correspondence regarding this matter.  What was said during this correspondence and what explanation given?  And can the supporters see this correspondence for complete context?

As above.
Report Spam   Logged
MCHammer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1342


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search 1000 Posts Apple User
« Reply #441 on: July 22, 2021, 09:57:54 am »

Finally, while I understand the Trust Board deal with the day to day running of the Supporters Trust at what point do the matters become so fundamental to the future of the club that you would consult your membership and the wider fan base to ensure the important decisions you are making are what the majority wishes?

There are certain triggers that would prompt a member-wide consultation. These include a sale of the club, the withdrawal of support by the main finance provider or any event considered to be material to the future of the club. Another example would be if the Council withdrew from dealings in relation to the land, as this would suggest that the owners would face a massive, unrecoverable loss. God forbid, if David Bower were suddenly incapacitated as this would have enormous consequences for the club.
Report Spam   Logged
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #442 on: July 22, 2021, 10:25:48 am »

Thank you for this MC

Can you post up the answers from similar questions you have asked KT please.

Thanks
Report Spam   Logged
guest3359
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #443 on: July 22, 2021, 10:26:31 am »

Credit where its due, that is generally a good response to the questions. I don't necessarily agree with some of it but thats just my opinion.

This is where I have said in the past there are some very valid questions and concerns laid out that the Trust have every right to seek answers too.
As previously I do think it was a mistake to decline the Zoom call as some are complex, multi layered questions so a call to ensure clarity followed by minutes signed by both sides would for me have been the right way to go.
Again as previously, I think a discussion with the owners on transparency is needed, for example, I understand why the Trust want to know the following
Quote
The Trust does not know the budgets, timing of cash flows, the extent to which the club may be tied into contracts with Buckingham Group and so on.
but also understand why any owners would see it as private. Just an example
Report Spam   Logged
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5883


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Level 6 Combination
« Reply #444 on: July 22, 2021, 10:31:15 am »

Thanks for asking the questions and sharing the results, MC.

That first one is a proper politician's answer, but what they are essentially saying is the Trust made a decision to back the redev plans and then realised they'd done so without being properly informed, couldn't get a written response from the club and then changed their mind.

It's still in hissy fit territory for me, especially as they themselves go on to refuse to provide a written response to certain questions they've been asked, citing regulatory reasons.

Can they not see the irony there?

I'm not saying they are wrong in refusing an answer, far from it, but how is that different to the club not wanting to respond to written questions? Or would they be sated by a written response from the club that just says "We are not able to answer this due to commercial sensitivities" in response to every question? Hey, it would be a written response, right?? Maybe then they could move beyond the stubbornness and accept the offer of a Zoom call?

Also, interesting that the Trust acknowledge the authenticity of the letter "leaked" by the club. It would be even more interesting if they responded to the allegations made in the letter about soliciting a hatchet job from the national media, wouldn't it?
Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #445 on: July 22, 2021, 10:32:42 am »

Woody, the owners might want the figures to be private but when the money is coming from public funds / NTFC land asset, the people of Northampton need to know they are getting a fair deal.

We have to learn from the DC debacle. Remember many people questioning the cost of building the stand and DC saying it's the best deal we can get. Turned out that one reason is was such poor value was that it included £2m "consultation fees" for him and his dad.

We don't want similar happening this time

Report Spam   Logged
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #446 on: July 22, 2021, 10:43:01 am »

BOTN   what you seem to be forgetting is that KT wanted the Trust to back him with regards to WBC and the land deal.

Given KT appalling treatment of the Trust over the last 6 years, they rightly asked for answers in writing. If anyone had a hissy fit, as you put it, it is KT. IMHO the Trust have been extremely patience and accommodating to KT, perhaps they just had enough.

Dont think it is even worth replying to the ridiculous accusation of a hatchet job, it wasn't the Trust who didn't tell it's own supporters that the club has actually been sold. 

So what if they even did (not sure exactly what the issue is) speak to the National press, trying to raise awareness that our owner is in it just for himself and had pocketed £6.7m, can't go to local media can they ?


Report Spam   Logged
guest3338
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #447 on: July 22, 2021, 10:54:22 am »

Thanks for asking the questions and sharing the results, MC.

That first one is a proper politician's answer, but what they are essentially saying is the Trust made a decision to back the redev plans and then realised they'd done so without being properly informed, couldn't get a written response from the club and then changed their mind.

It's still in hissy fit territory for me, especially as they themselves go on to refuse to provide a written response to certain questions they've been asked, citing regulatory reasons.

Can they not see the irony there?

I'm not saying they are wrong in refusing an answer, far from it, but how is that different to the club not wanting to respond to written questions? Or would they be sated by a written response from the club that just says "We are not able to answer this due to commercial sensitivities" in response to every question? Hey, it would be a written response, right?? Maybe then they could move beyond the stubbornness and accept the offer of a Zoom call?

Also, interesting that the Trust acknowledge the authenticity of the letter "leaked" by the club. It would be even more interesting if they responded to the allegations made in the letter about soliciting a hatchet job from the national media, wouldn't it?

Complying with financial conduct authority reporting regulations (if factually correct) and declining information to others for 'commercial sensitivities' does not like comparable reasons to me. The Trust are minority shareholders, it is in their interests that they get the best deal for themselves in that capacity just as KT and DB do.
I don't see any irony attaching personally?
Report Spam   Logged
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5883


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Level 6 Combination
« Reply #448 on: July 22, 2021, 11:02:13 am »

BOTN   what you seem to be forgetting is that KT wanted the Trust to back him with regards to WBC and the land deal.

Given KT appalling treatment of the Trust over the last 6 years, they rightly asked for answers in writing. If anyone had a hissy fit, as you put it, it is KT. IMHO the Trust have been extremely patience and accommodating to KT, perhaps they just had enough.

Dont think it is even worth replying to the ridiculous accusation of a hatchet job, it wasn't the Trust who didn't tell it's own supporters that the club has actually been sold. 

So what if they even did (not sure exactly what the issue is) speak to the National press, trying to raise awareness that our owner is in it just for himself and had pocketed £6.7m, can't go to local media can they ?


I think it's six of one and half a dozen of the other. It's not dissimilar to on here; only yesterday Evers had rubbed people the wrong way and a few of us had a bit of a dig at him.  It was a disproportionate reaction if taken in isolation but was the result of minor cumulative annoyances. Either way, we were rightly taken to task and basically told to grow up. The Trust and the club need their heads knocking together and told similar because they've both just been rubbing each other up the wrong way for so long the slightest irritation now sets either of them off.

As to seeing nothing wrong with our own supporters trust apparently trying to bring the club's owners into national disrepute.... wow.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2021, 11:04:05 am by BackOfTheNet » Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
DogMan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #449 on: July 22, 2021, 11:19:02 am »

....and just think...if the owners were up front and said "We have just sold not just 60%...but 100% of YOUR club to a Chinese company you have never heard of"...everybody would have been fine with that, wouldn't we?

Im still curious why Fans of NTFC have not questioned the statement by the owners that they " RE-AQUIRED " the shares without actually saying they had bought them back.

That money is still in Bowers' and Thomas's bank accounts?
If so, why are the Chinese not kicking off?
If somebody had decided to do a business U-turn on me, I think I would have wanted my £6.68 Million back, wouldn't you.

Any Fans got any answers?

....and a last thought....None of this would be necessary if the owners had engaged with the Trust, an organisation for NTFC fans that is fighting to keep YOUR football club.
Report Spam   Logged
DogMan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
« Reply #450 on: July 22, 2021, 11:34:54 am »

Another thing to think about.
For all the fans of the Cobblers.

Why did the owners insist on the Trust relinquishing 2 seats on the board as a condition of the owners accepting ownership of NTFC?

Did the owners not want to be open with anyone questioning the movement of monies?

So, going back to the Chinese question.......I would love a sound 100% water tight business answer to that one.
Report Spam   Logged
guest3338
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #451 on: July 22, 2021, 11:35:24 am »

....and just think...if the owners were up front and said "We have just sold not just 60%...but 100% of YOUR club to a Chinese company you have never heard of"...everybody would have been fine with that, wouldn't we?

Im still curious why Fans of NTFC have not questioned the statement by the owners that they " RE-AQUIRED " the shares without actually saying they had bought them back.

That money is still in Bowers' and Thomas's bank accounts?
If so, why are the Chinese not kicking off?
If somebody had decided to do a business U-turn on me, I think I would have wanted my £6.68 Million back, wouldn't you.

Any Fans got any answers?

....and a last thought....None of this would be necessary if the owners had engaged with the Trust, an organisation for NTFC fans that is fighting to keep YOUR football club.
Understanding where the Chinese obtained their money in the first instance might explain why they didn't kick off with greater force?
Report Spam   Logged
guest3338
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #452 on: July 22, 2021, 11:41:09 am »


As to seeing nothing wrong with our own supporters trust apparently trying to bring the club's owners into national disrepute.... wow.
If the Trust believe it is beyond contentious, why so?
Report Spam   Logged
everbrite
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20217


Steve Howard best since Cliff Holton


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
20000 Posts Search Apple User
« Reply #453 on: July 22, 2021, 11:50:39 am »

Understanding where the Chinese obtained their money in the first instance might explain why they didn't kick off with greater force?

Interesting comment and adds to the mystery of the lack of potential involvement by them.
Report Spam   Logged

2020 Grand National S/S 3rd Place
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #454 on: July 22, 2021, 12:12:46 pm »

i expect the contract was in 2 parts - initial payment for shares of £6.8m to KT / DB and then £1.2m into NTFC.

As they didn't do the £1.2m they failed to meet the contract and expect the contract said they were in breach and so shares re-acquired.

Money was also paid off-shore so little /  nothing the authorities could / would do.

Again these are people who had a very small business in China suddenly overpaying X6 at least, for a football club 5000 miles away, and talked up by having our star striker visit in the name of Education.

so draw your own conclusions on that one.

Report Spam   Logged
guest3359
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #455 on: July 22, 2021, 13:14:37 pm »

Woody, the owners might want the figures to be private but when the money is coming from public funds / NTFC land asset, the people of Northampton need to know they are getting a fair deal.

We have to learn from the DC debacle. Remember many people questioning the cost of building the stand and DC saying it's the best deal we can get. Turned out that one reason is was such poor value was that it included £2m "consultation fees" for him and his dad.

We don't want similar happening this time

Agree, but isn't that the responsibility of the council and part of the due diligence they are running?

We 100% need to learn from it, but equally cant let what (choosing my words carefully) some people may or may not have done to cloud our judgement of the current owners or any in the future.
Report Spam   Logged
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #456 on: July 22, 2021, 13:39:16 pm »

agreed Woody, but you would hope that in the given situation and very tight deadlines, that you have to trust people and think that they are reasonable and well intentioned.

My judgement of the current owners is taken due to the following: (lots of other more trival matters)

1. He refused to repay £10k paid to keep the staff their so the deal could get done and the club would fulfil it's fixtures
2. All the same staff remained despite being in the employment and supported DC in all his actions
3. Knocked a hole in the home toilets and stopped there,
4. Didn't want to deal with the Supporters Trust at all
5. Stated the club doesn't warrant developing
6. Obviously didn't build the East stand with the £4m ringfenced.
7. That NTFC has now been the same for the last 10 years, repeating the same mistakes time after time, no plans, no ambitions, no imagination, just treading water after treating water,
8. Pocketed £6.8m by selling the club of the QT.
9. 95% focus on land deals
10. Offering the club to one group for one price and then to a NTFC fan for £1m more a week later.
Report Spam   Logged
MCHammer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1342


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search 1000 Posts Apple User
« Reply #457 on: July 22, 2021, 13:56:42 pm »

Thank you for this MC

Can you post up the answers from similar questions you have asked KT please.

Thanks


You're welcome. 

What was KT's response to the many questions you clearly have?  What did they say to you at the Open Day the other week?  Have they responded to any of your emails, letters or private messages? 

Would be good if you could post up the answers.

Thanks.
Report Spam   Logged
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #458 on: July 22, 2021, 14:32:44 pm »

Thanks MC, you tell more yours and i'll tell you mine

and remember I asked first  Grin

Once again those who hold the Trust to a high level of scrutiny never give any reason or evidence of how or why KT has been good for NTFC

On a side note, if we had done an Exeter and kept with the same manager and support staff, ie: Rob Page, where do you think we would be today?

How much money would we have saved? and even better if that money had gone into infrastructure projects what would we have?  obviously not expecting an answer from MC, Tcobb, BOTN, SingCobb, Hammy and others but thought I would ask again
Report Spam   Logged
guest3359
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #459 on: July 22, 2021, 14:57:24 pm »

Thanks MC, you tell more yours and i'll tell you mine

and remember I asked first  Grin

Once again those who hold the Trust to a high level of scrutiny never give any reason or evidence of how or why KT has been good for NTFC

On a side note, if we had done an Exeter and kept with the same manager and support staff, ie: Rob Page, where do you think we would be today?

How much money would we have saved? and even better if that money had gone into infrastructure projects what would we have?  obviously not expecting an answer from MC, Tcobb, BOTN, SingCobb, Hammy and others but thought I would ask again
Exeter appointed Tisdale in 2006. Not including that seasons they spent 2 seasons in the conference, 3 of them in League 1 and 7 in League 2.
In the same time we've spent 5 years in League 1 and 7 in League 2

Not sure infrastructure wise or playing level its made any difference sticking with him.
Also not sure if Page was just an example but I suggest watching the highlights back from P*sh away!
Report Spam   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 41   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Parental guidance is urged as this messageboard may not be suitable for all persons especially those under the age of 16 as the forums may contain words, phrases and expressions not considered appropriate for a younger audience so please express caution. If any posts in the forums offend you, please let us know and we will look at them and if we agree with your complaint, we will remove them. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and may be sued should your posting contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. We check the forums at various times of the day and remove offending posts. Other supporters are welcome but abusive or silly posts will be removed and the offenders potentially barred from future access to the site. We advise that you never reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: telephone number, home address or email address), and please do not include postal addresses of any kind. This messageboard is not endorsed or in any way affiliated with Northampton Town FC. All postings on this board become copyright of The Hotel End & may not be reproduced without the permission of the board administrator. By signing up to this message board you agree to this. The Hotel End cannot be held liable for the actions or postings of its members. The Hotel End reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. The Hotel End may disclose user information to government authorities at their discretion or when required by law. The Hotel End may also disclose user information when The Hotel End has reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with its rights or property, other The Hotel End users, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. By registering for The Hotel End, you agree to indemnify The Hotel End its representatives, and agents, and hold them harmless from any and all claims (including claims for legal fees) which may arise from your participation on the The Hotel End. You also agree that The Hotel End is not responsible for the materials posted by users of The Hotel End. In addition, you grant The Hotel End and its affiliates, worldwide, royalty-free perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display any message or content posted on The Hotel End and/or e-mail sent by you to The Hotel End (in whole or in part). The Hotel End reserves the right to make the rules up as it goes along. Thank you - The Hotel End I love Quidco
Bookmark this site!
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy