Newest article: Re: Those were the days ......
by Surrey s8/5 15:31Wed May 8 15:31:35 2024
1 personview thread
Oldest article: ''ships in the night ''
by Andrew6726/2/2014 10:25Wed Feb 26 10:25:34 2014 3 peopleview thread
Next thread: Supporters Club Xmas/New Year Raffle by John Blair26/11/2021 15:22Fri Nov 26 15:22:25 2021view thread
Shameful
Views: 1267
I see the club had another good hiding today, it is shameful to see we’re the club has gone in just over 3 years. A once proud club disgracefully being run into the ground.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 1083
I had intended to be there yesterday. However, I was asked to go to St Thomas for an ultrasound examination at 2.45. I wonder what your excuse was for not attending? It would be interesting to hear about the last game you did attend. Admittedly results have not been too good lately. However we did reach the first round proper of the Trophy, beating a Premier League team on the way. The green shoots are there. If our landlords concentrated more on making money (their record on profitability makes you wonder why anyone would advise investors to put their money into the Thames Club) then there would be more funds available for the manager. One more strike and you are out.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 1281
Trying hard Arthur to understand why the Thames club being profitable can impact on more funds being available to our manager.
Surely the first port of call for funds is normally the club owner and his business connections and friends.But in our case................................................................................................................................................................. its down to
STFC supporters who are doing a great job in trying to make funds available to support the manager and players.
Yesterdays game was very interestng - for the first 20 minutes we were marginally the better side and it was played on G3/4 pitch which in my humble view must givea great advantage to the home side.
Looking on the bright side -if corners were banned from the game we may have only lost by the odd goal.Plenty of games to come still.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 1018
Norm, My Grandad told me never to date a tennis player - love means nothing to them ...... and I am certain my love for the Swans is more than matched by yours. I think the boost the budget scheme contributed to by a number of suppoerters is an great example of our supporters club in action. It is, I am sure, appreciated by both the Chairman and the owners.
The Thames Club are our landlords and have, over the past few years, put many obstacles in the way of the club ....... change of position of the boardroom and use of the bar to name but two. There are myriad other examples. This has involved unnecessary legal fees to the club - the owner put circa £180k into the club for bills etc up to last year. It is his guarantee - exemplifying his love for the club that enables us to keep on trading. If those interventions were not there, there would be more funds available to put into the players. The Thames Club were able to maintain their going concern status by a massive investment in 2015. This has nearly all been eroded. The Thames Club plight is being funded through losses against that original investment. There is only one way that those investors can hope to recoup their investment ...... without any return; and that would be to get a change of use for there freehold. However, the local effects of global warming have made this very unlikely. The Thames Club are our biggest problem right now. We need to support the owners in their vision to support the club we all love - a love that means something to us all
Edited by Arthur at 19:54:55 on 21st November 2021
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 1039
He doesn't love the club - he didn't buy it because he loved it - he bought it as an investment opportunity. If he loved the club then he would have made sure it was able to pay the players to compete at a competitive level and secure that player funding before spending money on anything else. The fixation with Thames Club has nothing to do with how the football club should be run and what they are doing for their investors is neither here nor there. He took a gamble and that doesn't look like it's paying off. The club should be built around the supporters. If his love for the club is as you say then the very least he can do is come out publicly to the supporters and let them know what is actually going on and his plans for the future and how the club is not going to continue to fall down the pyramid.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 953
I cannot answer for the owner ...... However, in order to arrive at my position I looked back at the history of the club and how we have arrived at our current plight. I will give you a few. To some of the questions I know the answers for definite; to some there is circumstantial evidence; and to some it is gut feeling. These are the questions:
1. How did the title to the freehold ever get transferred from the club to the Thames Club; and what happened to any compensation for loss of that title?
2. How many owners have made realistic bids to get title to the freehold of Wheatsheaf Park back in order to secure the long term future of the club?
3. How many owners have ever held face to face or online meetings with supporters in order to answer any questions put forward by supporters?
4. How many owners have legally guaranteed the future of the club by promising to pick up the obligations the club incurs in the ordinary course of business?
5. Can the club meet its bills from its current trading arrangements?
6. How many owners have ever genuinely appreciated what the supporters do for the club?
7. How many owners have ever suffered continual vitriol from some supporters?
8. Who would you seer best to become an owner of the club?
9. In its current situation why would anyone invest in our club?
and finally, in case this is all getting a bit heavy ........
A woman walks into a pub and asks the barman for a double entendre, so he gave her one.......
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 866
Arthur I have never supported the current owner he comes across as ruthless arrogant and to be quite frank cold.,,but everything u write is true he has paid to keep club going from the disaster the Boons skilfully created before slipping through the backdoor .. We need to demand an answer as to where the money went from the sale of the land when the club was a trust...................... with regards to communication pretty sure the current owner organised a long video on the accounting side of the problems at the club and was going to fo on BBC radio.. so he is not completely silent.... I cannot say I support the guy nor do I believe that he loves the club he is a business man... but Arthur is correct and his comments are factual and valid, any other argument are the rantings of the over emotional who cannot look at this situation with clarity. LET THE BOONS SHOW US THAT THEY DID NOT SELL US OUT. LET THEM EXPLAIN WHERE THE MONEY WENT FROM THE LAND SALE. THEY WERE THE ONLY TRUSTEES AT THE TIME AND NOT DIRECTORS OF A LIMITED COMPANY. WHO WERE THE BENEFICIARIES OF THE TRUST AND IF THE BENEFICIARIES ARE THE FANS AND THE COMMUNITY ...WE MUST DEMAND AN ANSWER AS TO WHAT HAPPENED AT THAT POINT IN TIME... The inevitable Disaster that has eventually followed is a residual effect of this event.
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 865
dixon was on bulgarian tv and media when another chance to make money came up
he doesnt love our club if he cared that much he could do a question and answer with fans
if he cares about people and history of stfc he has a funny way of showing it
i dont care about the boons that cant be the excuse all the time we lose 4-0
i want to know why we lose players to westfields and marlow they are jokes of clubs
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 852
'i dont care about the boons that cant be the excuse all the time we lose 4-0' Lampshade88 u don't care that the land was once owned by the club and it got sold off. your a fan of the club which would of made you a trustee at the time. you have a right to know where that money went. all of us do. if we had our own stadium and bar we wouldn't be getting beaten 4-0 and we wouldn't be losing our best players.. fact.. you are right to be angry we all are but we have to focus on the facts and the fact is Dixon props the club up .. WE HAVE TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO THE MONEY FROM THE SALE OF THE LAND.. AND WE NEED TO DEMAND IT. IT WASNT A LIMITED COMPANY THEN.IF WE AS THE FANS WERE BENEFICIARIES OF THE TRUST.. THEN THE TRUSTEES ...(BOON).. NEEDS TO GIVE US ANSWERS...
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 959
yea i agree its something that needs to be checked but i dont think answers from the past solve this problem
i want to know how dixon props up the club when there is no budget
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 1113
Thanks again for the inside info Arthur. Goes to prove again the Thames club has been our undoing and that the alleged figure of 180k used to keep the club afloat (which under normal circumstances would have been invested in the team) would appear an honourable gesture made by the club’s owner. The only thing that I continue to find odd is why this could not have been communicated by the club directly and instead through an unofficial fan’s forum? I’m sure there would be a lot more respect
and understanding shown to the owner if this was the case?
reply to this article | return to the front page
Re: Shameful
Views: 1106
Maybe because if you throw an 0 on the end and that's what the land is worth
10 x return isn't bad hey !
reply to this article | return to the front page
Previous thread: Any News by Surreysage23/11/2021 10:47Tue Nov 23 10:47:55 2021view thread