Return to front page

Newest article: Re: FA Vase 2024/25 season by John Blair20/9 19:56Fri Sep 20 19:56:25 2024view thread

Oldest article: ''ships in the night '' by Andrew6726/2/2014 10:25Wed Feb 26 10:25:34 2014view thread

MenuSearch

Reply to "Re: A new low"

You must log in or register before you can post an article

return to the front page

Re: A new low

By Arthur14/1/2022 15:56Fri Jan 14 15:56:49 2022In response to Re: A new low

Views: 1254

We really need a wake up call here. We need some Janet and John economics and to consider the reality of the situation. Firstly Joe Dixon is not the only director of STAINES TOWN FC. You are at liberty to ask questions of any of the Board if you so wish. Joe Dixon is the majority shareholder.

As an investor in STAINES TOWN FC he is entitled to spend his money on protecting his investment as he sees fit. Playing football at an alternative venue is possible. Is it suggested we build a new stadium; if so who pays? Or do you suggest a ground share? If so, where, and how many new supporters do you think we will attract for our "home game" and how many fans would stop coming.

With regards to the Thames Club. the 2015 accounts, after a cash injection from investors of £1,500,000, the net assets were £1,491,318. This is the rough guide to the worth of the company.You case argue about goodwill, and resale value versus net book value, but in rule of thumb terms the net assets were about the cash sums Downings had convinced investors to put into the Thame Club. At the end of December 2020, those net assets were £117,443. In simple terms, if you invested a tenner in 2015, it would be worth £1 at the end of 2020. There can only be one thing an investor would be interested in. We can then go into the arguments about the increasing effects of global warming, including the likelihood of the area flooding. Should the council permit development on the flood plain. Can the infrastructu7re drainage cope for starters.

There are a number of other outstanding legal issues being raised by our landlords, to (presumably) try to mitigate their potential losses. We can see from the recent cladding issues following Grenfell Tower, developers soon disappear once they have cashed in. The legal cases involved which Joe is pursuing firstly is to protect his investment (which sees football at Wheatsheaf Park for as long as you care to think. Secondly it protects all of us a Staines Council tax payers from being saddled with further debts should development take place and the developer disappear. .Rathe than take it out on Joe, you should all be 110% behindd him.

Joe has held more question and answer sessions than any previous Stainers Town owner. When was the last time the Glazers held Q&A, or the owners of any football league club you wish to namer. Think before you speak and support the club, as I do, Joe Dixon does, and I hope each one of you does.

  • Collapse threadA new low by swanvesta12/1/2022 05:17Wed Jan 12 05:17:49 2022view thread
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 11:31Wed Jan 12 11:31:52 2022
  • Re: A new low by Gareth Coates12/1/2022 12:00Wed Jan 12 12:00:59 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 14:23Wed Jan 12 14:23:07 2022
  • Re: A new low by Gareth Coates12/1/2022 15:01Wed Jan 12 15:01:52 2022
  • Re: A new low by Surreysage12/1/2022 14:50Wed Jan 12 14:50:04 2022
  • Re: A new low by gregs12/1/2022 17:45Wed Jan 12 17:45:25 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 20:42Wed Jan 12 20:42:08 2022
  • Re: A new low by Surreysage13/1/2022 10:29Thu Jan 13 10:29:13 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur13/1/2022 10:48Thu Jan 13 10:48:38 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 20:54Wed Jan 12 20:54:08 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 21:00Wed Jan 12 21:00:38 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 21:04Wed Jan 12 21:04:14 2022
  • Re: A new low by Swandico13/1/2022 10:14Thu Jan 13 10:14:02 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur13/1/2022 10:28Thu Jan 13 10:28:35 2022
  • Re: A new low by Surreysage13/1/2022 12:29Thu Jan 13 12:29:56 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur13/1/2022 19:34Thu Jan 13 19:34:29 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur13/1/2022 21:12Thu Jan 13 21:12:10 2022
  • Re: A new low by lampshade8813/1/2022 11:08Thu Jan 13 11:08:31 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur13/1/2022 11:58Thu Jan 13 11:58:14 2022
  • Re: A new low by gregs14/1/2022 12:09Fri Jan 14 12:09:37 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur14/1/2022 12:46Fri Jan 14 12:46:46 2022
  • Re: A new low by gregs14/1/2022 17:02Fri Jan 14 17:02:17 2022
  • Re: A new low by Surreysage14/1/2022 14:31Fri Jan 14 14:31:15 2022
  • Re: A new low by Swandico14/1/2022 15:28Fri Jan 14 15:28:44 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur14/1/2022 15:56Fri Jan 14 15:56:49 2022
  • Re: A new low by Gareth Coates14/1/2022 17:32Fri Jan 14 17:32:51 2022
  • Re: A new low by Swandico14/1/2022 16:18Fri Jan 14 16:18:59 2022
  • Re: A new low by swanvesta14/1/2022 16:27Fri Jan 14 16:27:37 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur14/1/2022 22:54Fri Jan 14 22:54:14 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 11:40Wed Jan 12 11:40:02 2022
  • Re: A new low by Arthur12/1/2022 11:49Wed Jan 12 11:49:30 2022
  • Re: A new low by scouser12/1/2022 11:20Wed Jan 12 11:20:09 2022