Elstone refusing to allow shareholders who are also Blue Union members into meetings

[Moomin]

Irrelevant, he was a key man in a group set up to publicly slate the board, why would they let him anywhere near another meeting with them?

To prove him wrong, best way to stop the detractors is meet them head on.

I think the problem is not with the Blue Union, but more that he shown Robert Elstone up in the Kirkby enquiry.

 

[Ihaters]

The club is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Anyone who's willing to pay £100 million upwards for a club in our position should be sectioned. As should the people demanding that price.

Theres a massive payout on the way in terms of the TV money that will cover this difference between valuation and reasonable cost though. I actually think 125mil now is reasonable, however when the 150mil valuation was mentioned before this TV deal was announced, that was a scandalous figure.

 

[Jacko93]

I think personally that there are two sets of people/groups who believe what they are doing/talking about/ campaigning for. i believe that the actual truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.

 

[sheeds]

It's a transfer story recounted to me but it sums up everton in negotiations and is probably applicable here . When we bid for Carlo Nash we rang up and bid £X but Wigan said "no we want £Z" and everton didn't call back . Wigan called an agent and said "will you ring everton and explain to them how it works they did X we ask for Z and we settle in the middle on Y . It's not difficult to follow". Everton were contacted and the deal was done on minutes at £Y .

I'm told This wasn't a clever negotiating tactic just everton being well everton and if that's a microcosm of how we behave any surprise the deal hasn't been done

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Irrelevant, he was a key man in a group set up to publicly slate the board, why would they let him anywhere near another meeting with them?

You're missing (or avoiding) the point mate. They wouldn't 'want' him anywhere near, but by creating a caveat to future meetings that a particular shareholder is 'barred', says to me that Esltone is concerned about his ability to answer the questions, he knows that he'll pose.

 

[Jacko93]

The club is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

Anyone who's willing to pay £100 million upwards for a club in our position should be sectioned. As should the people demanding that price.

Why is that? We have £60m coming in this Summer, with a guaranteed income for the next three years. If somebody bought the club for the £60m, which I believe is actually lower than the worth of the current playing staff, then they are effectively buying money, and through this process you will find people coming in purely for a quick buck. I personally feel that a buyer who can afford to open up negotiation at £125m is a buyer that, for us, would be serious enough about long term investment to want to make a difference.

 

[Moomin]

I think personally that there are two sets of people/groups who believe what they are doing/talking about/ campaigning for. i believe that the actual truth probably lies somewhere in the middle.

You could be right, we all have different views on it.

I believe Kenwright wants to sell up, but he has got himself into a bad situation. The high valuation could be due to the other board members, or maybe he owes people for fronting him the cash to buy the club.

One day, the full story might come out and it will be a hell of a read.

 

[Ihaters]

To prove him wrong, best way to stop the detractors is meet them head on.

I think the problem is not with the Blue Union, but more that he shown Robert Elstone up in the Kirkby enquiry.

Perhaps but they will never meet with BU members again, I said this from the moment BU released the meeting notes. Whether its a PR shot in the foot, cowardice, or just a poor decision from the club, it is irrelevant, BU or its key members will never knowingly be given the chance to do that to the board again.
The result of publicly humiliating the chairman, is that the board won't like you and will no longer share their hobnobs with you at meetings.

 

[Ihaters]

You're missing (or avoiding) the point mate. They wouldn't 'want' him anywhere near, but by creating a caveat to future meetings that a particular shareholder is 'barred', says to me that Esltone is concerned about his ability to answer the questions, he knows that he'll pose.

Without doubt, they still won't let a key member of the BU into a public meeting after the last time they met with members of the BU for a meeting.
We all know Elstone cannot answer the questions that would be asked, but even if he could, I doubt they would give anyone at BU the time of day.

 

[LITLEJOE]

The debt has risen because no members of the board have invested a penny of their own money into the club, beyond the original purchase of their own shares. The debt has also risen because the club panicked and took a very short term approach by taking out a 25 year loan for £30m with exorbitant interest rates, meaning we will have paid back £68m when all is said and done. The training ground is impressive, but unlike Bellefield, we do not own it. We once did, but we sold Finch Farm for £2m. It is now worth £16.5m. We now pay £1.25m a year for the privilege of training there.

In dismissing our ability to attract high revenue streams, using such major clubs in world football in comparison is ludicrous and totally unfair. Using fairer comparisons, our revenue streams are less than the likes of Aston Villa, West Ham and Stoke City. We are an 'unattractive club' (or are we, a top 7 club for most of the past decade?) because of the lack of investment into the club, coupled with bad short-term thinking deals, such as the merchandising deals with Kitbag and hospitality deals with Sodexo, which offer up short term positives in no increased losses, but long term problems in no growth, ever. So as costs go up, revenue streams don't, as the fixed amount as per contract goes to Kitbag and Sodexo.

We become more attractive on the pitch by investment into the club by the aforementioned board. The means, buying players during a January transfer window, and not selling players to finance signings. The stadium issue will only ever be solved when the ownership of the club changes, as the current board have an unwillingness/inability to do anything about it, other than hope Liverpool change their mind over groundsharing (which they won't).

great post.

 

[Chang Elephant]

One day, the full story might come out and it will be a hell of a read.

It's telling that Gregg, Birch and Wyness have all kept their mouths firmly shut, on the record. They can't be scared of legal action by Kenwright, as he's a well known, accepted plonker. Got to be the greatest living tax avoider.