Bob's Board - Chesterfield FC: Confirmation That Nothing Will Change - Bob's Board - Chesterfield FC

Give it Evo till the end of the season. Humphries as assistant. Thats the only in house decision I would welcome. We tried Smith before and he was extremely poor. What would be worse is Turner taking over

SpireiteJN, on 05 December 2016 - 01:34 PM, said:

You might find Turner is a better manager than CEO. Re Evatt and Humphries - would they be able to bring the right personnel in in January. . Agree on Smith.

How could you expect a football player to look at Chris Turner and respect him as a manager? Simply impossible.

Kenny Jacket may be just the man for the job

SpireiteJN, on 05 December 2016 - 01:34 PM, said:

Wow....... Just Wow!!

I honestly think that DW going or staying, or the idea of bringing a new manager in is the least of our problems.
CFC is a time bomb atm and a power game is being played out by DA. He wants rid of the 4 directors totally and the shares is the biggest issue. We are told that he loves CFC, we are told that he enjoys being involved with CFC yet all he wants to do is cause unrest.
I have heard that he will not be happy until he get's all the shares, he was peed off when the club needed to sign a player and when DA asked the others to throw into the pot and they declined, it started to go downhill.

DA wants 5 million for his 4 million shares, why doesn't he buy the shares off the other directors and pay them his 20% valuation on top? If he wants to own it lock stock & barrel, why doesn't he pay them their loans back as well?

He has a game plan and nobody knows what it is. I really fear for CFC! 150th year and all I've got to show for it is 3 ties & 6 limited edition medals and the fear of closure. You couldn't pen this scenario.

There maybe lots of talking points come out of this over the next months and eventually I believe the truth and facts will come out into the open.
CFC is a community club with very loyal fans. DA might think he has a business, but don't 'pee' the community off. We have long memories!!

Thank you for giving us the Proact and the years we've had but you have lost my respect totally. Apart from the odd beer at the games, I will not be giving the club anymore of my money until it reverts back to enjoyment without the politics. I hate to think how much I have given CFC in 30 years of sponsoring and commercial functions that I have attended. I am just one of many fans that have gladly given and sponsored CFC, some may think that the sponsorship is recouped through advertising, I can tell you that that is totally untrue. I don't know many sponsors who received a return on their sponsorship. We do it for the love of the club and to help towards the running. I think my money maybe appreciated more at Matlock Town or to local football teams where most of us started out.

Z

Zorro, on 05 December 2016 - 03:25 PM, said:

On that note, I'm with him all the way. Appreciate the money other directors have put in but it's not the first time he's asked them to put money in. It shouldn't just be one man doing this. We need to get two or three more in and share the burden. You can't just be a director for a relatively nominal amount compared with the chairman. More directors please.

DA is just a bitter old man...

Heard him say he would take 1p in the £ because even though it wouldn't do him any favours it would screw the other directors...

Elton John 1866, on 05 December 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

Knowing how the company has been run over the last 3 to 4 years, why would you expect anyone other than DA to fund the business?

Elton John 1866, on 05 December 2016 - 03:40 PM, said:

I can accept what you are saying but would you put any money into a business when you don't have a say in the running of it?

Wouldn't you be asking why DA has to keep putting money into the pot in the first place?
The debt has not just popped up over the last 18 months, the debt has been with us since the move and we were all told that the debt needed managing and DA himself told us all at a shareholders meeting that he would handle and worry about the debt. It might be a relatively nominal amount compared to the chairman, but surely if they have reservations about loaning more money, then that is their prerogative. Do you think that their £1.8M loans which is a nominal amount compared to DA & AS Leisure should be lost?

Those 4 directors may not be in the same league as DA financially but they were there when we needed them before and have been fans for many many years.
I have nothing but respect for DJ, CB, PT & AG and I do not like this in any shape or form how it has been handled. They have been 'shafted'!!

Z

Zorro, on 05 December 2016 - 03:25 PM, said:

that's perhaps because the others were aware of the wastage. To accept wastage and put more money in is the height of stupidity. At the forum, Chris Breeze and John Croot declined to suggest what cost saving initiatives they had proposed at previous board meetings. That's 'cos they hadn't made any. They were either frit or resting on their laurels. That doesn't mean they will put more of their own money at risk though.

I can't understand why you should think Allen has got a share fetish. Why does he need any more?

Zorro, on 05 December 2016 - 03:25 PM, said:

Are the other directors share holdings the biggest issue? Surely their loans/debentures are the biggest issue (and whatever they are secured against) and he doesn't want to pay for them

I assume they don't want to call them in for fear of sending the club into admin (or worse) and/or want to retain some influence but it would be interesting to see what would happen if they called DA's bluff

dim view, on 05 December 2016 - 04:26 PM, said:

He wants 90% minimum
He also wants rid of CFSS.
I was asked a question a few months ago about the 'gifted' CFSS shares, I was asked do you think the fans would give them back to the club? I said no.

Z

Zorro, on 05 December 2016 - 04:22 PM, said:

Having a say equates to what...I'm not sire that this inclusive style of management would make us better off -

As i said earlier most football board members are sucesseful business men and FANS of the club , the exiled four definetly fell into that category and i suspect invested in the club more with their hearts than head, Dave Allen is not a town fan and therefore you can assume invests with his head not heart. One thing i will never understand is why he got involved in the first place,( though glad he did at the time and greatful for the proact and good times) surely no one thinks a league one club can be sold at a profit or run with any decent profit , the concept of getting into the championship then selling was also very unrealistic and an unbelievable motive for investment. I can only assume there was an element of proving to his former club that he could run a succesful football club , an ambition he did achieve until the cost became unacceptable , all supposition

Zorro, on 05 December 2016 - 04:45 PM, said:

Overall, I think he seems a bit needy.
That puts JC in a difficult position then.

dim view, on 05 December 2016 - 04:26 PM, said:

Here's why:

He will own 100% of club, answerable to no one.
He will then invest and get the club into the Championship and then sell the club, lock stock and barrel to either a Chinese/Russian/Thai Billionaire for approx. £20m. Dave then walks away with a nice profit of £10m fro his trouble(less whatever he had he had to invest to get the club to the Championship), plus in the meantime he will have been receiving £29k per month mortgage payments and a healthy interest on his other loans, so when he finally leads us to the promised land, he'll be happy and we'll be happy (being in the Championship)




...oh yes, and I believe in Father Christmas too

Zorro, on 05 December 2016 - 04:22 PM, said:

I stand by my original argument and state that if CFC is totally different to other clubs with similar financial backgrounds/accounts, fair enough, if not I'm afraid it's an occupational hazard.

Close but no prawn sarnies, on 05 December 2016 - 04:50 PM, said:

Therein is the problem.Let me say this. Until someone says CFC is unique in this excessive cost respect compared to other clubs, then people going on about mismanagement have no basis for their claims. Just saying.

Close but no prawn sarnies, on 05 December 2016 - 04:50 PM, said:

its a very realistic one on paper.

However, getting so close, then 'pulling the plug' is where the concept falls to pieces.