TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

So this 'consortium' isn't anything to do with Norman Smurthwaite' s interest in the club ~ Smurthwaite who is Paul Cox's paymaster......is mushroom now going to come on here and clearly state that Smurthwaite does not now pay Cox? Is he going to deny that Cox was Smurthwaite's 'plant' in the club. Is he going to deny that Smurthwaite drew back when the matter of the ground freehold was put in abeyance in May?

....and if there is another consortium biding their time to make a bid in the new year, would that have anything to do with the departed Simon Baker who is convinced he can 'do something with the trust'?

Half the problem with this 'debate' on here is that people who know who they are talking about don't have the balls to come out and name names. Why is that; is it because they are afraid of repercussions? Are they afraid of the people they are hinting about?

Time for a lot more transparency and honesty as to what is going on in the manouvrings I would suggest.

....and if there is another consortium biding their time to make a bid in the new year, would that have anything to do with the departed Simon Baker who is convinced he can 'do something with the trust'?
.[/quote]



oh, it's that Simon, is it ? I didn't want to appear ignorant, nay, appear to be a 'stupid local'....

Scott Brehaut wrote:It was a much needed restructure to ensure that the current Board could keep the club afloat. The previous Board pissed Thaea's money up the wall. Regardless of how much you try to convince us that Bill Phillips was a saint, he sat back, along with the rest of them, and helped to spend Thaea money quicker than she could withdraw it from the bank.

It was unsustainable in its previous form, and the new Board realised this very quickly. The reason why you and the rest are pissed off is because they have managed to breathe life into a club that was dying very very quickly, ruining your plans to pick it up for nothing and chuck a Sainsburys on it.

PARASITE.

That fact of the matter the restructure has caused the current liability. They alone have to deal with hopefully not at the cost of relegation

Added in 5 minutes 6 seconds:

Bomber wrote:But asking for a Bond is standard practice, as is the same for Conference North/South clubs.
Truro City needed to pay a similar bond to fulfil their fixtures a few years ago.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20005762

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32992910

It seems you are just trying to different ways to frighten us. HMRC closure didn't work so now you're trying this.

No Bond was paid to the National League by Torquay United. Its as simple as that

Truro was in Administration with a 4.5m Debt. Torquay has a good Balance Sheet and at the time paid all their Debts when due

Now it is down to cashflow

:rules: :rules: :rules:

Yells wrote: That fact of the matter the restructure has caused the current liability. They alone have to deal with hopefully not at the cost of relegation

NO - the FACT of the matter is, without the restructure, there would BE NO CLUB!!!!

What part of that do you not get??!!

We were losing money quicker than Thaea could withdrawn it - she kept the club afloat on a DAILY basis!! It was unsustainable in that form.

For a potential investor (or rather, a representative of one - Simon....), you seem to know very little about the fact that spending more money than you make = zero club.

Yells wrote: That fact of the matter the restructure has caused the current liability. They alone have to deal with hopefully not at the cost of relegation

Added in 5 minutes 6 seconds: No Bond was paid to the National League by Torquay United. Its as simple as that

Truro was in Administration with a 4.5m Debt. Torquay has a good Balance Sheet and at the time paid all their Debts when due

Now it is down to cashflow

:rules: :rules: :rules:

Truro still needed to pay the Bond though.

Shouldn't that be 'Torquay have a good balance sheet' rather than 'has a good balance sheet'.

Also, why were June's wages paid by the current consortium and not the previous one, as stated at the fans forum.

Finally, why do you and your friends only target this forum?

Surely if you really believed what you were saying you would say it to anyone?

tomogull wrote:

Yes - we're still in the bottom four and Boreham Wood won. But Barrow, Welling, Guiseley and Altrincham all lost. This is the group of teams we can catch and overtake, and we will - just wait and see.

There's an interesting and revealing post on the TFF Forum about Paul Cox's time at Eastwood and Mansfield. Yes, he had success at both clubs ...... but at quite a price, apparently. Eastwood went into liquidation during Cox's tenure and re-formed under Eastwood Town. Cox moved on to Mansfield, Eastwood Town dropped back two divisions to where they were before Cox took over and have since been wound up. In three seasons at Mansfield, the club racked up losses of an eye-watering £3 million and when the Board decided to reduce the playing budget to reduce the losses, Paul Cox departed. This is just a summary of the post - it sure makes extremely interesting reading. Not that I wish to criticise Paul Cox, though. He took us on without a contract and knowing the club was at rock bottom, so fair play to him on that score. (quote][/quote]

What hapened at Eastwood was the club finished in the play offs in the conference north but couldnt take part in them because there ground wasnt good enough. Cox quit to further his career and move up a level to Mansfield and realising the club could go no further the owner pulled the plug. At Mansfield , the owner spent big to get the club back in the league then because of a legal battle with some old directors , pulled the ammount of money he was putting in at league two level.

Yeay - George is back and defending his bestie who had more interest than just 'managing' Torquay!
Tell us all about it Georgie! (the actual truth would be nice for once!).

Scott Brehaut wrote: NO - the FACT of the matter is, without the restructure, there would BE NO CLUB!!!!

What part of that do you not get??!!

We were losing money quicker than Thaea could withdrawn it - she kept the club afloat on a DAILY basis!! It was unsustainable in that form.

For a potential investor (or rather, a representative of one - Simon....), you seem to know very little about the fact that spending more money than you make = zero club.

If this is the 'Simon' who was suggested earlier then he was one of those happily pouring Thea's money down the drain. Never in a million Chris Roberts' would I want him back in the boardroom.

Nobody called Simon that i know is interested in buying the club and Its not Norman smurthwaite either. For the record if the person i know did purchase the club then clear dialogue with its supporters , having monthly face to face q & a sessions with staff, and growing both the clubs commercial and community presence would be amongst the most immediate changes. The only ground change thats been identified would be relocating the directors box.

[quote="funguy"]So this 'consortium' isn't anything to do with Norman Smurthwaite' s interest in the club ~ Smurthwaite who is Paul Cox's paymaster......is mushroom now going to come on here and clearly state that Smurthwaite does not now pay Cox? Is he going to deny that Cox was Smurthwaite's 'plant' in the club. Is he going to deny that Smurthwaite drew back when the matter of the ground freehold was put in abeyance in May?

....and if there is another consortium biding their time to make a bid in the new year, would that have anything to do with the departed Simon Baker who is convinced he can 'do something with the trust'?

Half the problem with this 'debate' on here is that people who know who they are talking about don't have the balls to come out and name names. Why is that; is it because they are afraid of repercussions? Are they afraid of the people they are hinting about?

Time for a lot more transparency and honesty as to what is going on in the manouvrings I would suggest.[/quote

I have today spoken to Smurthwaite and he advised as follows

He was the money behind a group wishing to buy Club
As the owner of PVFC he personally could not own any shares but consulted The FL of his intentions and putting initially 1M in to fund Club
There were some conditions
All existing Management be severanced off
New Board be appointed
Micky Adams be appointed as Manager
Academy to be retained
The council agree that the Frehold be purchased at same time as Club
Although the Council would consider TUST would not revoke their application to place stadium as a community asset so time scales would be months not weeks which Phillips could not wait to be resolved
When DE bid became a reality Smurthwaite withdrew his interest although he has dialogue with Board mainly about Loan options and advice if needed
He wants to see Club back in LG2 and reinstate its Academy
He had no contact or dealings with Cox until loan was done for Nathan Smith
So to be clear there is no intention by him to be involved in Club sadly now or in the future

Thanks for being so honest with your straight answers to my straight questions mushroom.

I know your answers to be truthful and it just shows that if a straight question is asked in an adult manner then a straight answer can be forthcoming.

Forgive me for coming onto your site Louis; but I felt this had to be done and as anyone can see if they log in to BTPIR; this more or less tallies with what I was saying on there weeks a go. I must say this has been the best thread on this site in years.

Merse

I'll delete the account now and leave you guys to it!

Glad it's entertained you but surprised you needed to add your signature, we knew you were here

Good to catch up at Eastleigh.

Bomber wrote: Truro still needed to pay the Bond though.

Shouldn't that be 'Torquay have a good balance sheet' rather than 'has a good balance sheet'.

Also, why were June's wages paid by the current consortium and not the previous one, as stated at the fans forum.

Finally, why do you and your friends only target this forum?

Surely if you really believed what you were saying you would say it to anyone?

The June Wages was covered off in the Agreement the Club was purchased remember for nothing as a "going concern" If you had the SOF it would confirm the actual position

:rules: :rules: :rules:

Added in 7 minutes 56 seconds:

Scott Brehaut wrote:It was a much needed restructure to ensure that the current Board could keep the club afloat. The previous Board pissed Thaea's money up the wall. Regardless of how much you try to convince us that Bill Phillips was a saint, he sat back, along with the rest of them, and helped to spend Thaea money quicker than she could withdraw it from the bank.

It was unsustainable in its previous form, and the new Board realised this very quickly. The reason why you and the rest are pissed off is because they have managed to breathe life into a club that was dying very very quickly, ruining your plans to pick it up for nothing and chuck a Sainsburys on it.

PARASITE.

It was a needed Restructure but it was done in an expensive way wielding the axe. They simply got it wrong. It will cost dearly to put it right.
:rules: :rules: :rules:

It was done in the only way they could have done it. The club was on its last legs.

They did almost exactly what your mate would have done (see post from mushroom above)

Hopefully another win tonight will keep you parasites at bay for a few more days.

Scott Brehaut wrote:It was done in the only way they could have done it. The club was on its last legs.

They did almost exactly what your mate would have done (see post from mushroom above)

Hopefully another win tonight will keep you parasites at bay for a few more days.

Scot I would expect that sort of reply from someone who is unaware of the position and unable to grasp what should have been done on handover. The only thing I can agree with is getting the Win tonight. Meanwhile
:rules: :rules: :rules: Get a Grip!