[Spire-Heights]

marlons curtains, on 19 November 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

I thought it was being conservative.
And not even mentioned revenue from player sales, promotions and two Wembley finals.

Please someone tell me... what the hell kind of business model has led us to this?

A very poor one.

[Torteval]

freelander2, on 19 November 2016 - 08:42 PM, said:

Perhaps AC could confirm what he means by, all the directors to remove their debentures?

Whatever it means, I wouldn't think he'd ask them to do anything he hadn't already done himself...

[Torteval]

jack bauer, on 19 November 2016 - 08:47 PM, said:

just listened to it, I may be wrong but have the 4 directors done what he asked or only half of it? AC said that DA asked them to remove their debentures and then resign, he states that David Jones contacted him to say they would resign but no mention of removing the debentures, so i'm guessing this is the sticking point for allen's return, as I say i'm guessing, that part wasn't clear perhaps AC may come on here and clear this up

The question we need to ask here is why on earth would DA want them to remove the debenture on the ground? Why is it SO critically important that without it all compromise deals were thrown out by the major shareholder. The ground is already security for a great deal of loans and with it's stadium use conditions, it's unlikely to realise enough to pay them all off in any admin situation.

It's worth considering whether those debentures secured on the stadium may be of significantly greater value to the club, than to the holders as loan security, in what look like very, very dangerous times.

[Skywalker]

Dave Allen is an astute and successful business man. Whilst I don’t think he wanted the club to suffer, he certainly doesn’t want to lose out himself. Having spoken to him on a couple of occasions, it was clear to me that he doesn’t suffer fools gladly which makes his decision to persist with someone as financially incompetent as Turner baffling.

It’s not like Allen is reluctant to fire someone if they are not cutting the mustard. He dispensed with Shez after only 3 league games of a new season and dispatched Saunders when it was clear attendances would suffer. So the 60 million dollar question is why is he allowing a financial f**kwit like Turner to preside over record losses and mounting debt? The answer has to be because he wants this current situation. It’s the only plausible explanation.

This post has been edited by Skywalker: 19 November 2016 - 10:57 PM

[azul]

Skywalker, on 19 November 2016 - 10:43 PM, said:

Dave Allen is an astute and successful business man. Whilst I don’t think he wants the club to suffer, he certainly doesn’t want to lose out himself. Having spoken to him on a couple of occasions, it was clear to me that he doesn’t suffer fools gladly which makes his decision to persist with someone as financially incompetent as Turner baffling.

It’s not like Allen is reluctant to fire someone if they are not cutting the mustard. He dispensed with Shez after only 3 league games of a new season and dispatched Saunders when it was clear attendances would suffer. So the 60 million dollar question is why is he allowing a financial f**kwit like Turner to preside over record losses and mounting debt? The answer has to be because he wants this current situation. It’s the only plausible explanation.

I'm not sure these two sentences are entirely compatible

[Stoptalkingbol]

Pathetic interview. It says a lot about the mistrust that surrounds the club that not many fans are getting suckered in by the AC spin machine anymore.

Not a chance DA will allow us into to administration. Just makes you laugh that AC always claims to know nothing about what DA has planned and plays the victim.

CT must be on a hell of a salary and bonus also to be happy to be constantly used as the scapegoat for abuse when it's as clear as day he has sod all to do with running the club and the financial mismanagement that's taken place.

This latest stunt will get a few extra through the turnstiles, so it will have served its purpose however.

What a farce of a club we have become. I still can't get over the deceit over the fake raffle and then having the gumption to claim they knew nothing about it to the point of swearing on kids lives.

We are a tin pot joke and the loyal fans are having the urine royally ripped out of them.

[Skywalker]

azul, on 19 November 2016 - 10:48 PM, said:

I'm not sure these two sentences are entirely compatible

Predictive text...arrrggghhh (Now edited)

I don’t think his intentions were to make the club suffer, but as soon as it started to impact him, the tide changed.

[Westbars Spireite]

marlons curtains, on 19 November 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

I thought it was being conservative.
And not even mentioned revenue from player sales, promotions and two Wembley finals.

Please someone tell me... what the hell kind of business model has led us to this?

The one DA presumably was happy to proceed with.

[The Black Triangle]

150 years of history destroyed by 3 men from Sheffield

[bullseyerob]

CloudBlue, on 19 November 2016 - 09:49 PM, said:

No one to blame but Dave Allen. His over spending is to blame, clubs going down the drain. Unfortunately his ego comes first, swear the bloke models himself on Napoleon..

He does.Hes the director of Napoleons leisure ltd

[dim view]

freelander2, on 19 November 2016 - 08:42 PM, said:

Perhaps AC could confirm what he means by, all the directors to remove their debentures?

Just listened. To translate into English....

1. Allen resigned because his request for directors to cancel their right to cash in debentures within the foreseeable future was rejected by some. Allen had demanded a unanimous result.

2. The day after, the Board had a rethink and decided unanimously to accept Allen's demand so that Allen would un-resign.

3. Allen changed the goalposts and had a new demand. He would only un-resign if the directors 'removed their debentures' and resign.

4. 3 Directors accepted the new demand, 4 didn't. Allen brought an end to negotiations.

5. David Jones, on behalf of the 4, made a counter proposal which Allen again rejected.

6. David Jones let Carson know that the 4 had resigned.

So....
I don't see why Carson is so 'disappointed'. Allen has engineered a situation whereby all remaining CFC Directors have agreed to his demand (point 3).

Ashley, please tell us why DA won't return. Stop bleating and get on with it. Perhaps CT could help you with negotiations. He's a dab hand.
Also, why does your generosity extend to 'removing' your debentures and resigning? Nowt to do with being gifted nearly 200000 shares is it?

[Bankrobber]

The fact that this has all been done this year, the football club's 150th year, when we're all supposed to be celebrating this fantastic institution, tells you exactly where the football club figures in the list of priorities of the people who've brought this situation about.

[Paul Fisher]

Can I just add that before anyone thinks that 'hallelujah' we are now in a clearer position to before thanks to the latest propaganda, just remember that the main characters to this farce are still in situ. At the moment we are experiencing a high class game of musical chairs.

I applaud that Mike Warner and John Croot are still on the board because without them we have no Genuine Chesterfield FC supporters there, the current majority shareholder has just stage managed to get rid of four CFC fans (who we are yet to hear their side of the story which I would imagine would be slightly different). The majority shareholder has outlined his plans by sitting back and dictating, whilst tugging on the heart strings of the support.

Beware the wolf's clothing, expect change at boardroom level once more, whilst CFC supporters fall out over their best course of action.

[SpireiteFitzy]

Skywalker, on 19 November 2016 - 09:06 PM, said:

500k by Christmas is simply staggering. WTF is going on at our club? We need to exceed our capacity by 50% just to break even. We know Turner is numerically challenged but this is something else.

It's a complete no win situation. Either we don't pay up and start getting sanctioned or someone bails us out and that's another half a million added to the already unsustainable debt

[the enemy within]

Bankrobber, on 20 November 2016 - 01:13 AM, said:

The fact that this has all been done this year, the football club's 150th year, when we're all supposed to be celebrating this fantastic institution, tells you exactly where the football club figures in the list of priorities of the people who've brought this situation about.

well said

[Rudeboy spireite]

Ashley where have you gone, you was going to tell us everything and yet we still no nothing ?

[dim view]

SpireiteFitzy, on 20 November 2016 - 02:42 AM, said:

It's a complete no win situation. Either we don't pay up and start getting sanctioned or someone bails us out and that's another half a million added to the already unsustainable debt

It's not unsustainable if we can just get through this period. CFC needs forensic action and hard decisions. The debt has been increased deliberately.

[azul]

Rudeboy spireite, on 20 November 2016 - 09:00 AM, said:

Ashley where have you gone, you was going to tell us everything and yet we still no nothing ?

All you need to know is that Dave Allen will come riding down Sheffield Road on his white charger.

If we don't all get to our knees he'll go riding on by

[Misnomer]

dim view, on 20 November 2016 - 12:43 AM, said:

Just listened. To translate into English....

1. Allen resigned because his request for directors to cancel their right to cash in debentures within the foreseeable future was rejected by some. Allen had demanded a unanimous result.

2. The day after, the Board had a rethink and decided unanimously to accept Allen's demand so that Allen would un-resign.

3. Allen changed the goalposts and had a new demand. He would only un-resign if the directors 'removed their debentures' and resign.

4. 3 Directors accepted the new demand, 4 didn't. Allen brought an end to negotiations.

5. David Jones, on behalf of the 4, made a counter proposal which Allen again rejected.

6. David Jones let Carson know that the 4 had resigned.

So....
I don't see why Carson is so 'disappointed'. Allen has engineered a situation whereby all remaining CFC Directors have agreed to his demand (point 3).

Ashley, please tell us why DA won't return. Stop bleating and get on with it. Perhaps CT could help you with negotiations. He's a dab hand.
Also, why does your generosity extend to 'removing' your debentures and resigning? Nowt to do with being gifted nearly 200000 shares is it?

Well said, DV. I'm not remotely surprised by any of this. I have never wavered in my distrust of DA (as folk are aware) and I'd rather us fold and start again than have anything to do with him and his cronies.

[azul]

dim view, on 20 November 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

It's not unsustainable if we can just get through this period. CFC needs forensic action and hard decisions. The debt has been increased deliberately.

Stating we need £500K by Christmas will get potential investors queuing round the block