Bob's Board - Chesterfield FC: Club Statement - Bob's Board - Chesterfield FC

Jump to content

  • (6 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Club Statement

#41 User is offline   The Earl of Chesterfield 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 25,622
  • Joined: 24-February 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:With the Rainbow People

Posted 22 February 2017 - 03:22 PM

View Posts43spire, on 22 February 2017 - 11:26 AM, said:

Why does this board keep harping on about a fkin Swedish consortium if they had the inclination and money they would have done the deal or at least gone through the proper motions .they have to deal with shorts and prove that you have the funds this has been the case for months not just put out in a. Statement,if you want to buy a house now you have to prove with the agent you have the money to buy said house this is no different and they certainly wouldn't be telling everyone on a message board.


First, Carson's statement confirms the bid from, as you put it, a 'fkin Swedish consortium' was legitimate. So it's not a case of 'this board harping on', infact it was 'this board' that demonstrated how misleading his earlier statements actually were.

Then, were these bidders made aware of what you again dub 'proper motions'? Because the evidence suggests they were handed a brief, instantly dismissive rejection rather than being instructed to contact Allen's representatives.

Your post suggests you'd rather trust AC than 'Bob's Board' members, yet whatever the credibility of this bid he's yet again contradicted his earlier comments.

Other's may use a somewhat less charitable term.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 22 February 2017 - 03:40 PM

Spanish proverb: 'Pessimists are just well informed optimists'
6

#42 User is offline   moondog 

  • Legend
  • Group: Moderators
  • Posts: 26,810
  • Joined: 09-June 05
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chesterfield

Posted 22 February 2017 - 04:29 PM

View Postdim view, on 22 February 2017 - 12:51 PM, said:

I'm saying that the statement does not say that Carson referred it to Allen.



I'd say "I speak to Dave on a daily basis and keep him informed of any developments" says he did.
0

#43 User is offline   spireitenag 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,230
  • Joined: 16-July 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Barlow

Posted 22 February 2017 - 04:35 PM

View Postmoondog, on 22 February 2017 - 04:29 PM, said:

I'd say "I speak to Dave on a daily basis and keep him informed of any developments" says he did.


There won't be a single decision of any note made at CFC by anyone without DA sanctioning it through AC.



1

#44 User is offline   Ernie Ernie Ernie 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30,421
  • Joined: 06-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 February 2017 - 04:40 PM

View PostSammy Spireite, on 22 February 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

http://www.chesterfi...nt-3588542.aspx

Director & company secretary Ashley Carson has reiterated that owner Dave Allen is willing to sell his majority shareholding in the club, issuing the following statement:

“Anyone who is interested in making a serious bid for the majority shareholding should submit the offer in writing through legal representatives acting on their behalf.
“There is also a requirement for proof of funds for a minimum of £10m, to be lodged with Shorts Accountants, before any negotiations can take place.
“There has been no offer received so far which has met those requirements. A speculative offer from overseas was received in January, but there was no structure to the deal and no proposal to purchase the 83% shareholding, so for those reasons alone, the offer was rejected.
“I have spoken to Dave Allen about the situation and he maintains that he will not sell his shareholding to anyone unless the offer meets his valuation and is in the best interests of the football club.
“I speak to Dave on a daily basis and keep him informed of any developments. If there is anyone who is serious about making an offer for the majority shareholding, I would be delighted to speak to them. I firmly believe that a deal can be done in the region of £10m."



It will be interesting when Stockholm Spireite comes back on to see if the club actually told them at any point they needed proof of funds or if they were just supposed to magically know. Again a club statement that throws up more questions than answers. Shock!
0

#45 User is offline   Toddhopper. 

  • First Team Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,718
  • Joined: 21-June 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Essex

Posted 22 February 2017 - 04:45 PM

View PostErnie Ernie Ernie, on 22 February 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

It will be interesting when Stockholm Spireite comes back on to see if the club actually told them at any point they needed proof of funds or if they were just supposed to magically know. Again a club statement that throws up more questions than answers. Shock!

I am as frustrated & annoyed as everyone else at the goings on in our club at the moment but let's have it right, it was made abundantly clear that proof of funds was required before negotiations could commence. But why the Swedish consortium were apparently not told this instead of a flat no requires an answer.
0

#46 User is offline   Spire-Power 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 20,868
  • Joined: 29-June 13

Posted 22 February 2017 - 08:10 PM

View PostErnie Ernie Ernie, on 22 February 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

It will be interesting when Stockholm Spireite comes back on to see if the club actually told them at any point they needed proof of funds or if they were just supposed to magically know. Again a club statement that throws up more questions than answers. Shock!

Stockholm will surely respond to this thread
0

#47 User is offline   Ernie Ernie Ernie 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 30,421
  • Joined: 06-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 February 2017 - 08:18 PM

View Postdtp, on 22 February 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

I'm somewhat with you Cartman.

I believe Stockholm is telling the truth as far as he knows it. This is supported by the fact that AC admits that there was overseas interest. I believe AC had also stated this before but when the consortium were asked for more info and proof of funding it fell by the wayside.

However, whilst Stockholm tells us what these Swedes were wanting to do he doesn't actually say exactly how their interest in CFC was presented to AC, DA, Shorts or whatever when they made their approach. Whatever people might think of the various parties I cannot see that a serious interest, presented in the proper manner, with proof of funding, would be kicked into touch without further consideration.



The statement is quite ambiguous. Is says no-one has met the criteria but it doesn't specify if the Swedes were told what the criteria was. I'm a cynic these days with everything that comes out of the club. I think if the Swedes had been asked to provide info and they hadn't the statement would be a lot clearer.

View PostToddhopper., on 22 February 2017 - 04:45 PM, said:

I am as frustrated & annoyed as everyone else at the goings on in our club at the moment but let's have it right, it was made abundantly clear that proof of funds was required before negotiations could commence. But why the Swedish consortium were apparently not told this instead of a flat no requires an answer.



That's the issue and was it?

You seem to be in the know, who at the club relayed that to the Swedes and in what form?
0

#48 User is offline   dim view 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 21,990
  • Joined: 09-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 February 2017 - 08:22 PM

View PostToddhopper., on 22 February 2017 - 04:45 PM, said:

I am as frustrated & annoyed as everyone else at the goings on in our club at the moment but let's have it right, it was made abundantly clear that proof of funds was required before negotiations could commence. But why the Swedish consortium were apparently not told this instead of a flat no requires an answer.

perhaps it was because they only offered £3m up front and the rest in annual instalments - maybe a justifiable reason for DA to turn it down flat. I can't see though why the conversation could not be handled professionally, so as to stimulate negotiations.

This post has been edited by dim view: 22 February 2017 - 08:22 PM

Get it on, bang the gong , get it on
0

#49 User is offline   Guest_freelander2_* 

  • *Deleted*
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: *Deleted*
  • Posts: 11,866
  • Joined: 24-December 09
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 22 February 2017 - 08:28 PM

View Postdim view, on 22 February 2017 - 08:22 PM, said:

perhaps it was because they only offered £3m up front and the rest in annual instalments - maybe a justifiable reason for DA to turn it down flat. I can't see though why the conversation could not be handled professionally, so as to stimulate negotiations.

I believe one of the existing directors can introduce a group from the Middle East who will pay an advance and the balance on the drip with DA having security on the ground until the last payment is received.
0

#50 User is offline   s43spire 

  • Reserve Team Player
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 851
  • Joined: 07-January 09

Posted 22 February 2017 - 08:29 PM

View PostMDCCCLXVI, on 22 February 2017 - 03:22 PM, said:

First, Carson's statement confirms the bid from, as you put it, a 'fkin Swedish consortium' was legitimate. So it's not a case of 'this board harping on', infact it was 'this board' that demonstrated how misleading his earlier statements actually were.

Then, were these bidders made aware of what you again dub 'proper motions'? Because the evidence suggests they were handed a brief, instantly dismissive rejection rather than being instructed to contact Allen's representatives.

Your post suggests you'd rather trust AC than 'Bob's Board' members, yet whatever the credibility of this bid he's yet again contradicted his earlier comments.

Other's may use a somewhat less charitable term.

Chris if you tried a little harder you might be able to twist my words a bit more than you have.
Firstly I never said it wasn't a legitimate bid,
Secondly by what I can gather they did not prove with shorts that they could fund the purchase as has always been the case. Sounds like a ordacious cheecky bid that's probably why it got rejected and apparently they didn't come back with another offer and have already moved on.
Thirdly please don't be under the illusion that I'm trying to defend the club or anyone else I'm mearly stating the facts as I know them they may be way of the mark but there as I see them.
I also know what's gone on at the club over the last couple of years and ruined my /our club
1

#51 User is offline   Somerset Spireite 

  • Reserve Team Player
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 711
  • Joined: 29-May 11

Posted 22 February 2017 - 08:46 PM

View Postdim view, on 22 February 2017 - 08:22 PM, said:

perhaps it was because they only offered £3m up front and the rest in annual instalments - maybe a justifiable reason for DA to turn it down flat. I can't see though why the conversation could not be handled professionally, so as to stimulate negotiations.

It's funny, but I misread that as "simulate negotiations" and I now wonder how wrong I was?
Riding the blue & white roller-coaster since 1989
0

#52 User is offline   DIFH 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 38,449
  • Joined: 26-October 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Can be found mainly in Sheffield these days lol

Posted 22 February 2017 - 09:57 PM

View PostErnie Ernie Ernie, on 22 February 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

It will be interesting when Stockholm Spireite comes back on to see if the club actually told them at any point they needed proof of funds or if they were just supposed to magically know. Again a club statement that throws up more questions than answers. Shock!


I take it provision was in place to purchase the remaining shares and what about directors outstanding loans.

It''s going to end up being more than the circa 10 million.
God I hate this league.
0

#53 User is offline   Middle East 

  • Total Legend..
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,723
  • Joined: 09-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wingerworth
  • Interests:Its fair to say i have a passing interest in chesterfield fc!

Posted 23 February 2017 - 06:56 PM

View Posts43spire, on 22 February 2017 - 08:29 PM, said:

Chris if you tried a little harder you might be able to twist my words a bit more than you have.
Firstly I never said it wasn't a legitimate bid,
Secondly by what I can gather they did not prove with shorts that they could fund the purchase as has always been the case. Sounds like a ordacious cheecky bid that's probably why it got rejected and apparently they didn't come back with another offer and have already moved on.
Thirdly please don't be under the illusion that I'm trying to defend the club or anyone else I'm mearly stating the facts as I know them they may be way of the mark but there as I see them.
I also know what's gone on at the club over the last couple of years and ruined my /our club

I would hardly call £10 million an audacious cheeky bid as to my mind it considerably exceeds the real market value of our financially floundering club!

I believe it was immediately rejected as Dave Allen has absolutely no intention of selling if his current ludicrous valuations are anything to go by......
BRITISH BY BIRTH - ENGLISH BY THE GRACE OF GOD
0

#54 User is online   dtp 

  • Key Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10,551
  • Joined: 29-June 05

Posted 23 February 2017 - 08:46 PM

View PostMiddle East, on 23 February 2017 - 06:56 PM, said:

I would hardly call £10 million an audacious cheeky bid as to my mind it considerably exceeds the real market value of our financially floundering club!

I believe it was immediately rejected as Dave Allen has absolutely no intention of selling if his current ludicrous valuations are anything to go by......


Do we actually know that the Swedish consortium put in a written opening offer of £10 million whilst offering proof of funding?

Or, was there contact made with an unknown tentative offer without any further information?
0

#55 User is offline   dim view 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 21,990
  • Joined: 09-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 February 2017 - 09:41 PM

View Postdtp, on 23 February 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

Do we actually know that the Swedish consortium put in a written opening offer of £10 million whilst offering proof of funding?

Or, was there contact made with an unknown tentative offer without any further information?

Even if the offer was tentative, I doubt if it excluded a contact name and telephone number. Perhaps we'll hear at tomorrow's press conference that Ashley has contacted them to see if there is any mileage in taking things further.
Get it on, bang the gong , get it on
0

#56 User is offline   Middle East 

  • Total Legend..
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,723
  • Joined: 09-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wingerworth
  • Interests:Its fair to say i have a passing interest in chesterfield fc!

Posted 23 February 2017 - 09:55 PM

View Postdtp, on 23 February 2017 - 08:46 PM, said:

Do we actually know that the Swedish consortium put in a written opening offer of £10 million whilst offering proof of funding?

Or, was there contact made with an unknown tentative offer without any further information?

Stockholm Spireite would seem to be the man to put that to!

However it does sound like the offer had some substance which ever way it was made and if DA is (allegedly) keen to sell I'm struggling to see why he dismissed out of hand with no further discussion...
BRITISH BY BIRTH - ENGLISH BY THE GRACE OF GOD
0

#57 User is online   azul 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 33,885
  • Joined: 15-June 05
  • Gender:Male

Posted 23 February 2017 - 09:57 PM

View PostMiddle East, on 23 February 2017 - 09:55 PM, said:

Stockholm Spireite would seem to be the man to put that to!

However it does sound like the offer had some substance which ever way it was made and if DA is (allegedly) keen to sell I'm struggling to see why he dismissed out of hand with no further discussion...

It would be nice if he posted again or have I missed it?
Accentuate th Positive, eliminate the negative
0

#58 User is offline   Middle East 

  • Total Legend..
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,723
  • Joined: 09-May 06
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wingerworth
  • Interests:Its fair to say i have a passing interest in chesterfield fc!

Posted 23 February 2017 - 09:59 PM

View Postazul, on 23 February 2017 - 09:57 PM, said:

It would be nice if he posted again or have I missed it?

I've only seen the OP he made which has certainly created a stir...to say the least!

This post has been edited by Middle East: 23 February 2017 - 10:00 PM

BRITISH BY BIRTH - ENGLISH BY THE GRACE OF GOD
0

#59 User is offline   Bonnyman 

  • Legend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19,159
  • Joined: 23-September 07
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:brockwell

Posted 23 February 2017 - 10:18 PM

I hope they come back and put an offer on the table otherwise they will be just another set of clowns...if i had given up trying to produce children after the first bunk up i would not be living in the 7 bedroom house in london provided for by the state and £3000 a week in benefits...you have to keep trying.
ITS NOT THE WINNING,ITS THE TAKING APART
0

#60 User is offline   Nitrous Oxide 

  • First Team Player
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,892
  • Joined: 02-November 09

Posted 23 February 2017 - 10:33 PM

View Postazul, on 23 February 2017 - 09:57 PM, said:

It would be nice if he posted again or have I missed it?

Hopefully he's busy trying to mediate negotiations.
0

Share this topic:


  • (6 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users