Shangull wrote: ↑07 Sep 2018, 13:04
Once GI have ownership they might as well make the best of a bad lot is probably their view. Not helped by the council being ambiguous....tin pot councillors messing up ... Torquay United at present
Interesting take you have on Osborne/GI, Shangull.
Your slightly unfair on the councillors. Osbourne has advised that he has not engaged with Torbay's 36 Councillors (apparently he did not know he had too ).
Rather he elected to spend 2 years talking about his grand 'wrecking ball' plan to the Elected Mayor and a TDA representative. ( probably a ill-fated move given the fate of Plainmoor from May '19 will no longer be the decision of the elected Mayor but the 36 Councillors he neglected to talk too )
Dig a little deeper into the subject matter Shangull and your understanding of Osborne/GI today will probably take on a whole new dimension tomorrow.
Be real guys. GI leant the money knowing it couldn't be paid back and they would take ownership.
Also, don't be too quick to blame the councillors, from what I've read recently they seem on the ball, it's the dodgy Mayor that's selling the club down the river.
Edit: Apologies Mellow, I didn't notice your post on the next page!
Gary Johnson's Yellow Army! Yellow Army! Yellow Army!
ref the councillors and being on the ball....have you seen Torquay recently, the plans for the Pavilion and whether you believe it's a good thing or not what a mess has been made of that, the purchase of Wren Park (when retail is in decline) for £20m. I'll be transparent and say that I don't believe that giving people with minimal business experience in many cases the ability to run councils given their scale and the size of monies involved. On the point of lending 100k on basis they knew it wouldn't be repaid. 100k is a relatively small amount in the scheme of things. If the owners at the time had wanted to have an open conversation with enough of the right people I'm sure they could have raised 100k to prevent this. Thanks Mellow Yellow and Phil Gull for your comments.
A crington Stanley. Earn around 1,000 a week from car parking shock.
They have land far more than plainmoor.
So Accrington Stanley whom we must look up to. Make money from the poorest ground on England.
Where does that leave us oh yes 10 years behind and in the national league south.
You still don't get it.
What don't we get? You've said in twice on this thread and no, i still don't get it. So please tell us in a clear and legible manner just what it is that you know and what it is we don't get.
I think the point is that if/when we move to a new stadium, receipts from car parking will go straight to club to invest in the football team so we can be a successful football team.
Perhaps all the receipts from all the other activities at the stadium which generate income will also go straight to whoever owns the actual football club.
Splitting my sides with laughing at those assumptions.
BUT..... CO could easily come and state NOW that I'm totally wrong and in the tenancy agreement we have these:
1) Current rent / terms and conditions we have at Plainmoor will be the same at a new stadium
2) Any income generated by that stadium will go to the football club, not a third entity.
3) That this tenancy is in place BEFORE Plainmoor is developed
A very easy commitment to make, and it would put people with views like me well on the back foot.
It all depends on where CO sees the most value. One could make a case that he will make the bulk of his profit from the housing and the whole stadium complex will be sold as a whole with the football club, greatly improving the club's sale value and giving it some guaranteed income in to the future. Alternatively the stadium and club could be sold separately with the club paying rent to the stadium owners and not receiving a penny from any of the ancillaries. Or, to be more realistic, there will be no stadium, just houses for CO to make his money from before ditching the club.
Gary Johnson's Yellow Army! Yellow Army! Yellow Army!
Neal wrote: ↑19 Sep 2018, 09:57I think the point is that if/when we move to a new stadium, receipts from car parking will go straight to club to invest in the football team so we can be a successful football team.
Perhaps all the receipts from all the other activities at the stadium which generate income will also go straight to whoever owns the actual football club.
Splitting my sides with laughing at those assumptions.
BUT..... CO could easily come and state NOW that I'm totally wrong and in the tenancy agreement we have these:
1) Current rent / terms and conditions we have at Plainmoor will be the same at a new stadium
2) Any income generated by that stadium will go to the football club, not a third entity.
3) That this tenancy is in place BEFORE Plainmoor is developed
A very easy commitment to make, and it would put people with views like me well on the back foot.
Yeah i get that. As most people do but we're being told we don't get it. :-o
PhilGull wrote: ↑19 Sep 2018, 10:32Or, to be more realistic, there will be no stadium, just houses for CO to make his money from before ditching the club.
A bit like Swindon Speedway then who are unfortunate enugh to be his tenants.
I am no apologist for the chairman but It is interesting to see the demonization of Osborne, part factual, part fiction, all of it based on his previous history, none of it giving credit for his continued bankrolling of Torquay, yes he gave money to the idiot Phillips and his crew, possibly, even probably being fully aware they would never be able to pay it back and he would get the club on the cheap, he is first and last a businessman who sees a profit in every venture, that is the way he operates, he admits to not being a football guru or more importantly a lifelong Torquay supporter which is probably why he employed the idiot that is Harrop. he has no emotional ties to the club whihc may be a good thing where you can make effective decisions unhindered by emotional ties.
Yes, he may wish to develop Plainmoor subject to another venue being constructed, well I do not see the profit in that, assuming and its a big assume that a new ground materialises within three years that means he has probably forked out close to a million of his own money to keep us going season on season, what price terraced or semi detached houses on Plainmoor, well in excess of what the local housing stock goes for at the moment when you take out the construction costs so no profit there, more likely he would hope for a land swap with the sports pitches at Quinta where house prices would be six times the value of anything on Plainmoor.
Regardless of his motives, he is no super rich white knight, Torquay United is a business venture, nothing more nothing less, whether that is a good thing for the United purists is yet to be written, judge him on what he does at United in comparison to other owners and so called chief executives we have had.
culmstockgull wrote: ↑19 Sep 2018, 19:19Regardless of his motives, he is no super rich white knight, Torquay United is a business venture, nothing more nothing less, whether that is a good thing for the United purists is yet to be written, judge him on what he does at United in comparison to other owners and so called chief executives we have had.
Anything I post is not demonization but pointing out the actuality of the situation...
I am not denying Clarke Osborne is a business man and that the Club should (and must) be run as a business and this is what the two people who now sit in the directors seating at matches as 'Presidents for Life' patently failed to do during their time in possession of the responsibility of running the club.
It was pointed out soon after the return to the Football League under Paul Buckle and Alex Rowe's board, that the club was being run in an unsustainable manner with no effort to lessen the very necessary capital injection to cover operating losses in favour of seeking additional revenue streams and business income; and that is how it continued throughout under the muddled ownership of Thea Bristow. She now sits there almost revered beside Ian Hayman and their escorts uncriticised by the local doyen of the press, Dave Thomas and I can't help but feel every time I see this that a large portion of protectionism and denial of the actualite is going on.
The whole point of the continuation of keeping on the front page what Clarke Osborne and Gaming International have been involved in over the past thirty years with sporting venues, is all about keeping people's feet on the ground and not allowing them to be seduced by a person who has yet to produce one single project such as he is talking about for Torquay United.
People closed their eyes to the profligacy of the previous era before the ruination of the last regime's ticking time bomb that had been indecently handed to them on a red hot plate by Thea Bristow and the rump of her outgoing board; surely it cannot be allowed for further delusion to continue in the manner that it had and in the manner that the Herald Express would have us believe.
If only judging Clarke Osborne on what he does at United in comparison to other owners were that simple ~ it is not; as most people are coming round to the notion have become aware of.
Yes; Clarke Osborne saw an oportunity of a land grab and fed the monkeys of the last board enough peanuts so they would become incapable of hanging on in their tree any longer. Yes; there has to be an end game (and a profit) for him and yes; Gaming International have capitalised the running of the Club to the tune of c£1 million in the manner of loans (not share purchase) and more than likely been able to set that off against tax demands on other operations within the group. To that end; they are behaving no differently than when they were propping up the Dave Phillps board.
But what we are talking about here (and always have been) is the avoidance of allowing the Club to go down the road that Coventry City did, which your local MP knows plenty about; and the disadvantages of being willing partners to ceasing to be a local authority tenant in favour of being a private one of Gaming International.
merse btpir wrote: ↑19 Sep 2018, 20:18 Anything I post is not demonization but pointing out the actuality of the situation...
I am not denying Clarke Osborne is a business man and that the Club should (and must) be run as a business and this is what the two people who now sit in the directors seating at matches as 'Presidents for Life' patently failed to do during their time in possession of the responsibility of running the club.
Are these the same two who fiddled while Rome burnt under the Robert's era Merse?
You are aware who the Club's Presidents for Life are, aren't you?
Thea Bristow and Ian Hayman ~ Hayman was a director in the Bateson era and pro-active in bringing about the exposure of the Roberts regime. He was co-opted onto the ' Rowe Board' and I'm pretty certain was the man who brokered the participation of the Bristows within that initial set-up.
He is a United man through and through and done more than any other to maintain the existence of the Club through some very dark years. I'm sure he was instrumental in Clarke Osborne becoming involved during the Philips' regime and recently transferred a tranche of his shares to Osborne (taking Osborne's shareholding from c74% to over 90% which was the tipping balance in taking the club further into the almost exclusive domain of the man so that he now no longer needs to be so transparent in it's declarations.
I am sure Ian has done this for reasons that (in his considered view) assure the club of continued capitalisation as it continues to operate at a loss and has become the irretrievable possession of Osborne.
merse btpir wrote: ↑19 Sep 2018, 21:55You are aware who the Club's Presidents for Life are, aren't you?
Thea Bristow and Ian Hayman ~ Hayman was a director in the Bateson era and pro-active in bringing about the exposure of the Roberts regime. He was co-opted onto the ' Rowe Board' and I'm pretty certain was the man who brokered the participation of the Bristows within that initial set-up.
A shame Brian 'Palky' Palk is not also recognised - he did a great deal behind the scenes for the Club.
I understood Hayman was away in Aussie watching England cricket whilst Rome burnt under Roberts!
).
