Money Money Money

Post a reply

Smilies
:goodpost: :lol: :rofl: :goal: :scarf: :keepie: :clap: :bow: :engflag: :-P :) :-D :nod: ;-) :-/ :( :'( :Z :@ :| :oops: :yellow: :red: :O :whistle: (*) (8) (D)
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Money Money Money

Money Money Money

by portugull » 29 Sep 2016, 13:48

Wellswood I have just re read your posts in April and wonder how you would deal with the situation now given that the inevitable has happened.

Money Money Money

by portugull » 18 May 2016, 18:40

I am more and more convinced that this prospective deal with GIL will not happen.

Why? Because it will involve Torbay Borough Council who could not organise a " p~~~ up in a Brewery".

I am happy to be proved wrong but the thought of GIL having just 2 months to agree a deal with TBC fills me with dread.

TBC do not live in the real world and will just not have the nous to sort out a complex deal in an expeditious way.

Money Money Money

by Neal » 18 May 2016, 15:41

BobBobBob wrote: It's definitely worth being suspicious and sceptical. I'm unable to work out what a business like Gaming International could hope to gain from Torquay United. Do you know if the deal complete? What is the size of the budget and who has set it?
:goodpost:

Money Money Money

by BobBobBob » 14 May 2016, 18:48

Southampton Gull wrote:Time will tell but isn't it worth being suspicious and sceptical?
It's definitely worth being suspicious and sceptical. I'm unable to work out what a business like Gaming International could hope to gain from Torquay United. Do you know if the deal complete? What is the size of the budget and who has set it?

Money Money Money

by Plainmoor78 » 14 May 2016, 14:11

It is OK to suspicions Dave. Back in February when talk of Nightingale park first emerged there was no mention of GI. There was something about a company of American developers, to the best of my knowledge GI is not an american firm. So who bought GI on board? And are the yanks still involved? I would think they are. But the yanks would have to secure planning permission from the council before it is safe for GI to finalize the purchase of the club. On another thread it has been suggested that the change of the political situation in Torbay may hamper negotiations. I do not think Dave Philips has changed his agenda between first agreeing to sell up and now, which is what I thought you meant.

Money Money Money

by Southampton Gull » 14 May 2016, 13:24

With other potential parties showing interest in buying the club I'm a little intrigued as to exactly why the deal with GI is preferable to the others. Isn't it worth questioning the possible conflict that I clearly see.

Is the deal with GI better for the club or simply a tool for them to bank a profitable land deal. The size of the budget suggests to me that we'll just be treading water again and Nicholson will struggle to improve on the great start he's already made. Offering him the security of a 3 year deal keeps him onboard. Board positions for Phillips and the Balsons keeps them onboard, I'm starting to smell a rat.

Time will tell but isn't it worth being suspicious and sceptical?

Money Money Money

by Plainmoor78 » 14 May 2016, 12:49

Southampton Gull wrote: Perhaps you might consider the possibility that in his position he now has a conflict of interest that previously wasn't there? If the sale reaches or has reached a conclusion he stands to get all his investment back and retain his position as Chairman. Would he go along with the plans afoot IF he was back to just being another fan? I'm not so sure.
Dave Philips stepped in last year to save the club for the short term by risking his own money. You are now suggesting that after risking his own money he would simply sell the club down the river to protect his money. Why then did he take the risk in the first place? When he could have sat back and done nothing thus keeping his money safe.

Money Money Money

by Richinns » 14 May 2016, 12:11

Hi SG

Perhaps you know and can't say but as far as I am aware their plans have not been made public? I console myself with the hope that Nicho would not sign up to three years without the belief things are going to get better. Rumour is rife because of the silence. Let's hope the worst of what people are suggesting is nothing more than a consequence of worry.

Money Money Money

by Southampton Gull » 14 May 2016, 10:35

Plainmoor78 wrote:"Letting them get away with too much". In what sense? If they buy the club they own it lock, stock and barrel anyway, theirs to do wjat they want with it anyway. So how is Dave Phillips supposed to be letting them get away with too much. What more can he give them than 100% ownership of the club. Once they have the club he has lost his influence anyway even if does stay as chairman because they are the ones with thee lucre.
Perhaps you might consider the possibility that in his position he now has a conflict of interest that previously wasn't there? If the sale reaches or has reached a conclusion he stands to get all his investment back and retain his position as Chairman. Would he go along with the plans afoot IF he was back to just being another fan? I'm not so sure.

Money Money Money

by Neal » 14 May 2016, 07:21

Oh Fer Christ Sake wrote:The reason you are being asked to prove evidence is because you're the one making accusations. You're saying that the new owners are in it for themselves, on the make, looking to shaft the club for their own gains. I'm suggesting this needn't necessarily be the case but you're still banging that drum. This, quite reasonably, leads us to assume that you have good reason to continue on your discredited line of attack.

If all you're doing is baselessly presupposing that the new owners are shysters, then that's fine. That's your prerogative, but you'll have to forgive us if we write you off as a gibbering lunatic who sees conspiracy at every turn.
If you've some evidence, then we, as the presently unseeing, would be grateful to be brought "into the loop" such that we might make a more informed assessment of our future prospects.

As for being angry, it might have something to do with ALL THE SHOUTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!111!!!!11!1!!1

So, in the words of the youth, evidence or GTFO.
wrong wrong wrong!!!

I said I do not know what their motives are, you deliberately ignore those statements. AND until I know their motives I will NOT support it. I don't know how many times I have to repeat myself, obviously allot for you.

No accusation against Gaming International, I don't know their motives (That's the f8cking point). But I am against anyone taking over TUFC and using at as a vehicle to line their own profits, as I was against the Roberts consortium.

Shysters who called them that, again you obviously like to exaggerate to try and put your point across angrily.

Mmmmmmm do you have any association with GI?

Using capitals is not angry or shouting but stressing a point, as I have in the last paragraph.

"So, in the words of the youth, evidence or GTFO." Getting angry are we, GOOD! If this thread is getting yer angry and stressed GOOD Im enjoying it!

Money Money Money

by Plainmoor78 » 13 May 2016, 22:13

"Letting them get away with too much". In what sense? If they buy the club they own it lock, stock and barrel anyway, theirs to do wjat they want with it anyway. So how is Dave Phillips supposed to be letting them get away with too much. What more can he give them than 100% ownership of the club. Once they have the club he has lost his influence anyway even if does stay as chairman because they are the ones with thee lucre.

Money Money Money

by Southampton Gull » 13 May 2016, 21:37

One has to wonder how much Dave Phillips has to lose if this deal goes tits up. Is he letting them get away with too much in order to remain in a position of influence on the board? I must admit I'm seriously beginning to question his motives. I'd be far happier if he had conducted negotiations from a totally different standpoint.

These guys know what they're doing, are they using the lure of a seat on the board to keep him sweet? Is he really doing what is in the best interests of the club or is he now looking after number 1?

Money Money Money

by Plainmoor78 » 06 May 2016, 13:51

Of course Gaming International are looking to profit from their association with TUFC. That is how businesses operate. But any sensible business man would not 'shaft' his asset, he would nurture it by careful investment and administration in order to attract custom, and thus make his profit and also having money to reinvest in said asset. That is the optimistic scenario. If it does not work out then TUST can step in and take the club into community ownership where it will have to have to find its natural level as Neal wishes. I believe the current situation where we are about to be taken over is worth the risk for the chance to see if we can become a Football League club again. I believe this is our last chance to do so. If we have to settle for finding our natural level as it is then I believe that will be as a part-time club and I am not sure we would even be able to afford the rent on Plainmoor when you consider the sort of attendances the Southern Leagued attracts.

Money Money Money

by Jerry » 06 May 2016, 13:19

Oh Fer Christ Sake wrote:The reason you are being asked to prove evidence is because you're the one making accusations. You're saying that the new owners are in it for themselves, on the make, looking to shaft the club for their own gains. I'm suggesting this needn't necessarily be the case but you're still banging that drum. This, quite reasonably, leads us to assume that you have good reason to continue on your discredited line of attack.

If all you're doing is baselessly presupposing that the new owners are shysters, then that's fine. That's your prerogative, but you'll have to forgive us if we write you off as a gibbering lunatic who sees conspiracy at every turn.
If you've some evidence, then we, as the presently unseeing, would be grateful to be brought "into the loop" such that we might make a more informed assessment of our future prospects.

As for being angry, it might have something to do with ALL THE SHOUTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!111!!!!11!1!!1

So, in the words of the youth, evidence or GTFO.
Welcome back Matt ;-)

Money Money Money

by Oh Fer Christ Sake » 06 May 2016, 11:46

The reason you are being asked to prove evidence is because you're the one making accusations. You're saying that the new owners are in it for themselves, on the make, looking to shaft the club for their own gains. I'm suggesting this needn't necessarily be the case but you're still banging that drum. This, quite reasonably, leads us to assume that you have good reason to continue on your discredited line of attack.

If all you're doing is baselessly presupposing that the new owners are shysters, then that's fine. That's your prerogative, but you'll have to forgive us if we write you off as a gibbering lunatic who sees conspiracy at every turn.
If you've some evidence, then we, as the presently unseeing, would be grateful to be brought "into the loop" such that we might make a more informed assessment of our future prospects.

As for being angry, it might have something to do with ALL THE SHOUTING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!111!!!!11!1!!1

So, in the words of the youth, evidence or GTFO.

Top