sky blue john
Well-Known Member
From what i see it all looks investagative at this stage. I'm sure once there is anything concrete then the members will be consulted.
Have I missed them?
I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.
Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.
Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.
There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose? That's a very reasoned assessment but still , Two things puzzle me, that never get address,1st, is all this effort to own a football team for such a little return WHY? if we all took the emotion out of it and say its was a factory and not a football team , would they keep going ,and 2ND, the less money going into any business means more time and effort to make a return (even though now it has been explained how they could make a small return, its not there business model so again WHY?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.
Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!
From what i see it all looks investagative at this stage. I'm sure once there is anything concrete then the members will be consulted.
Administration worked so well for us last time, if it wasn't for admin we'd still have SISU in charge, oh wait..
Thats why we have voting in this country.
How many members do the trust have ?
Surely a vote accross its members is the way to go. Its simple really if you want a say/vote join if you haven't already.
Andrew Andronikou who was an uncooperative total pain in the ass & Trevor Birch who was 9eventually) more receptive to common their sense proposals.I'm sure he mentioned the name but I can't remember who he said. Fairly sure it was a company not an individual though the second administrator was Trevor Birch I think.
That's a very reasoned assessment but still , Two things puzzle me, that never get address,1st, is all this effort to own a football team for such a little return WHY? if we all took the emotion out of it and say its was a factory and not a football team , would they keep going ,and 2ND, the less money going into any business means more time and effort to make a return (even though now it has been explained how they could make a small return, its not there business model so again WHY?
I agree. We've discussed so many times how it's going to take an insane bid to completely remove them. I think a foot in the door approach can be the only realistic way forward, a bandage to get the on the pitch side sorted and stop us hemorrhaging fans is as much a priority as removing SISU (although the two will likely come in hand in hand)Admin works for no-one, certainly not the trust. There is no party in theory that could force admin upon the club other than SISU so if it did occur it would be on their terms, with their appointed administrator. And if they desired to keep hold of the club it would be their bid that is successful.
IMO we have the option of either someone approaching the owners privately and doing a deal that way, or coming to some arrangement where AVRO continue to be the owners but SISU move aside.
I like the idea of having a local chairman with no previous connections to the club coming in and taking over day to day running might be more realistic. Fans see SISU move out of the way - all monies that the club can generate would stay in the club (and this would mean a short/medium term deal at Ricoh) and then fans can see their money is going to fund squad/club/academy. This wouldn't really be a million miles away from what the trust are proposing or would be likely to end up with.
I agree. We've discussed so many times how it's going to take an insane bid to completely remove them. I think a foot in the door approach can be the only realistic way forward, a bandage to get the on the pitch side sorted and stop us hemorrhaging fans is as much a priority as removing SISU (although the two will likely come in hand in hand)
Of all the people around me who are not renewing not one is boycotting to starve them out. Just because a few onhere are saying it doesn't make it trueNo, some are not going cos the football is rubbish. Many state they're boycotting to 'starve them out'.
Of all the people around me who are not renewing not one is boycotting to starve them out. Just because a few onhere are saying it doesn't make it true
I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.
Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.
Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.
There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.
Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!
.Out of interest, will they do away games?
Admin works for no-one, certainly not the trust. There is no party in theory that could force admin upon the club other than SISU so if it did occur it would be on their terms, with their appointed administrator. And if they desired to keep hold of the club it would be their bid that is successful.
IMO we have the option of either someone approaching the owners privately and doing a deal that way, or coming to some arrangement where AVRO continue to be the owners but SISU move aside.
I like the idea of having a local chairman with no previous connections to the club coming in and taking over day to day running might be more realistic. Fans see SISU move out of the way - all monies that the club can generate would stay in the club (and this would mean a short/medium term deal at Ricoh) and then fans can see their money is going to fund squad/club/academy. This wouldn't really be a million miles away from what the trust are proposing or would be likely to end up with.
I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.
Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.
Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.
There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.
Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!
I listened to the Periscope stream (Thanks CJ!) yesterday and it seems like those there like the idea of starving the club into administration where the Trust will be ready to pick up the club for a pittance. The side effect of course is that it will hurt SISU.
Those who believe that we can hurt SISU by hurting the club do not after all these years understand the ownership structure. SISU do NOT own the club. They are NOT being paid management fees by the club. They are not being paid interests on the loans. They are NOT lining their pockets when the club sell players. Depriving the club of money will have no effect on SISU’s pockets as they get nothing already.
Anyway, the logic is that if we stop buying season tickets the club will run short of cash in the off season. No cash equals administration, surely?
Not really! What it will achieve is a situation where SISU need to decide if they want out or not. If they want to stay they can then act as a bank and provide a short term loan to be repaid during the season. They did that two years ago, they can do it again. The point is that SISU have options even if the club runs out of cash.
There may be one scenario where SISU would accept administration to be in their best interest. That is if they should want to write off the original investments from Funds A-E. Problem is that it’s here they make their money as they charge these funds a small percentage of the nominal value invested. So why would they slaughter their golden goose?
But let’s play on – SISU decide to get rid of the original investors Funds A-E and so they (SISU/ARVO, not the club or the Trust or the fans!) put the club in administration – what happens next? Well, SISU/ARVO will bring back Mr Appelton who did a great job (SISU perspective) last time. ARVO sit on all assets so only a very high bid from the Trust (or others) will relieve us from SISU. And such a high bid would probably buy the club even without an administration.
So the outcome of administration would most likely be SISU/ARVO now the actual owners with a club free of debts, running at break even and with the possibility of selling off Ryton and make a couple of millions on that. Those millions then goes into their own pockets – they wouldn’t have to share with the original investors. AND they could even sell the debt-free and self-sustainable club for another couple of millions.
Maybe we should re-think the idea of pushing the club into administration, because if SISU have the power to prevent it, and if they allow administration they will benefit from it – AND retain ownership!
Got to ask is the bold bit still in the negative area?
With that one line you confused me as to whether you want adminstration or not.
Our club getting sold to new owners debt free, depending on who the new owners are that could be an absolute God send
Go on..... Oh, is it if you go to games you are a sisu supporting scab?Hahahaha
I see after last night, Sisu's shite PR department cranks back into action.........
Hahahaha
I see after last night, Sisu's shite PR department cranks back into action.........
You should read the whole paragraph again as what you pick out is just a part of a very speculative scenario that is very unlikely to happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?