Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Dec 19, 2016 12:50:37 GMT
HE online reporting press conference delayed.
|
|
|
|
Post by loyaltygull on Dec 19, 2016 12:56:06 GMT
I bet it is
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Dec 19, 2016 12:57:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by loyaltygull on Dec 19, 2016 13:09:56 GMT
Lol
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Dec 19, 2016 13:35:26 GMT
ITV Sport reporting "no show from new owners". Torquay source saying they've had a phone conversation with GI and "hoping for meetings this afternoon". Meetings had been arranged for this morning with football management and backroom staff.
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Dec 19, 2016 14:07:47 GMT
Is the ITV reported "no show from new owners" to both press and the outgoing owners? Certainly reads that way from both ITV and the reports from "the club". Presumably the latter "club" reference is to transitional chair and outgoing owner Dave Phillips.
|
|
rjdgull
TFF member
Admin
Posts: 12,232 
|
Post by rjdgull on Dec 19, 2016 14:22:46 GMT
Pete - the suspicion does remain that either the terms of their loan deal with GI or the prospect of getting a return on their investment ( maybe both, carrot and stick and all that) has prejudiced this decision. It seems that most are frankly horrified by this deal.... So that implies rj that TUST refused to pay back the loan and would never be in a position or had any intention to do so. Now put youself in their position. Your reasonably well off but not wealthy by any strectch of the imagination) if you had a very considerable sum of money essentially loaned to a business thtas was about to fold. You did it for sentimental motives THERE WAS NO OTHER REASON TO DO IT WHATSOEVER. You have resposibilities to your family would you honestly write off a large proportion of your you childrens inheritance? It sure did play a part and why shouldnt it ? If Tust had made assurances that they would do all in their power to reapay these very generous loans that bailed out a business that was going down the pan there may just have been another result but as we all know TUST has no real money and are guessing what they acan actually raise. Phillips is a bookmaker after all he knows what a bloody gamble is he was forced by emotional ties to bet on a donkey and was offered a way to get his stake back . I see nothing wrong in that. But they were given control of the club ( as opposed to TUST for example) on the basis that they were going to invest £300k of share capital into the club. Not one penny of this was converted into capital for the club so as far as I am concerned control of the club was gained on a false premise. As the consortium fell apart most of this money was taken back and the rump now want their money back as well. Don't think fans would have been so happy to see them take over if they weren't actually going to invest (spend) anything? If they were up front with that would not have been a problem. Do not think any directors of TUFC have got away without having financially contributed anything previously? That is why they have those perks.... You could argue he has got his money back by selling the donkey to the knackers yard? |
|
petef
Match Room Manager
Posts: 4,627
|
Post by petef on Dec 19, 2016 14:57:56 GMT
So that implies rj that TUST refused to pay back the loan and would never be in a position or had any intention to do so. Now put youself in their position. Your reasonably well off but not wealthy by any strectch of the imagination) if you had a very considerable sum of money essentially loaned to a business thtas was about to fold. You did it for sentimental motives THERE WAS NO OTHER REASON TO DO IT WHATSOEVER. You have resposibilities to your family would you honestly write off a large proportion of your you childrens inheritance? It sure did play a part and why shouldnt it ? If Tust had made assurances that they would do all in their power to reapay these very generous loans that bailed out a business that was going down the pan there may just have been another result but as we all know TUST has no real money and are guessing what they acan actually raise. Phillips is a bookmaker after all he knows what a bloody gamble is he was forced by emotional ties to bet on a donkey and was offered a way to get his stake back . I see nothing wrong in that. But they were given control of the club ( as opposed to TUST for example) on the basis that they were going to invest £300k of share capital into the club. Not one penny of this was converted into capital for the club so as far as I am concerned control of the club was gained on a false premise. As the consortium fell apart most of this money was taken back and the rump now want their money back as well. Don't think fans would have been so happy to see them take over if they weren't actually going to invest (spend) anything? If they were up front with that would not have been a problem. Do not think any directors of TUFC have got away without having financially contributed anything previously? That is why they have those perks.... You could argue he has got his money back by selling the donkey to the knackers yard? I agree rjd - many wouldnt have been happpy but I actually dont believe they would have cared less or kicked up any sort of fuss at the time because the only other option was to shutup shop. I have no recollection of the promised £300K share capital, to whom did they promise that figure? Was this a suggestion, a promise or a contract written in stone? Lip service or perhaps something they would have loved to have done but were prevented from doing as circumstances changed? As a footnote I would like to thank all posters who have responded to my personal viewpoint with dignity and respect I sense you feel strongly about the circumstances of his deal and all of the shenanagins that went before and I respect your views and personally feel the samne hurt and fear for the future of the football club. I might add this wouldn't have been the case on a certain other forum where if you disagree with the concensus you become labled as a local simpleton! |
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Dec 19, 2016 15:43:01 GMT
It's all very well, but the TUST and former owners debate will be rightly poured over no doubt on other threads not about the "new owners" with positions no doubt becoming further and further entrenched.
But we currently have new owners - at least I thought we did. They have not turned up for their unveil press conferences. Meanwhile, they've left the old owners and press and public hanging around.
We've had three snippets from GI to date since they were involved.
1) don't care what division you're in
2) we're not involved and
3) a no show today.
Is there anything further on whether we are getting a 4) today???
|
|
|
|
Post by loyaltygull on Dec 19, 2016 15:49:29 GMT
Are they new owners rob? Have they signed sealed but not yet delivered maybe?
|
|
petef
Match Room Manager
Posts: 4,627
|
Post by petef on Dec 19, 2016 16:06:54 GMT
Extremely frustrating and totally disrespectful to supporters Rob.
|
|
|
|
Post by stig123 on Dec 19, 2016 16:17:08 GMT
Poor form. You only get one chance to make a first impression. .....
Totally disrespectful to the club, management, players and supporters.
What the hell is going on?
Very difficult to be optimistic at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by loyaltygull on Dec 19, 2016 16:35:42 GMT
Statement on o/s saying completion delayed til tomorrow a few details too sort out,i bet there are
|
|
Rob
TFF member
Posts: 3,607
Favourite Player: Asa Hall
|
Post by Rob on Dec 19, 2016 16:45:04 GMT
|
|
petef
Match Room Manager
Posts: 4,627
|
Post by petef on Dec 19, 2016 17:03:46 GMT
Predictable there is no way they are going to make a press conference style statement whilst there's an air of resentment and hostility toward this deal and everyone concerned with it. Thye had better choose their words carefully in any press release if they want supporters "onside". |
|
