Latics TV | Vital Football

Latics TV

D

Degsy1

Vital Reserves Team
Am I the only one with absolutely crap audio for the Gillingham game / what a wast of £10 !
 
Garbled audio at the start and then no audio. When it came on it was far ahead of the TV visual. Difficult to follow the game.
Have they cut the bandwidth to save £££s?
 
I am getting real. This club has been systematically destroyed and the performance of this group of strangers aka the team comes as no surprise whatsoever.
 
Nah, the EFL will intervene soon enough. They only let us start the season because Krasner said a sale was virtually done. Er....no. We will be kicked out.

Plus, admins have their money now, from Euxton. They could literally get up and walk out now. Can see it happening...theyve no reason to hang about now.

If we were an animal, we would've been put down weeks ago.
 
I don’t necessarily disagree with this. Given the vast underselling of assets money will run out in a couple of months so it wouldn’t be difficult for the efl to make that decision.

However whilst the SC clearly cannot provide proof of funding for two years, given the previous furore over efl involvement in what’s happened, covid and other clubs on the brink I think they would perhaps allow a takeover. Unfortunately the cash would only cover several months and it’s whether the SC believe they could find a buyer in that time frame. It’s a gamble as that 700 grand could be used for a Phoenix club should anyone have a desire to see one. Clearly it wouldn’t cover CP so we’d have no training ground and Pollard would probably crank the rent up excessively so it’s probably a no no unless they were really confident of a buyer in about two months. Either way it’ll be resolved one way or another before Christmas.
 
The supporters club are still working with the Americans aren’t they so maybe the SC could acquire the club and then the Americans come in to buy it ?....is this too simple
 
charlz54 said:
The supporters club are still working with the Americans aren’t they so maybe the SC could acquire the club and then the Americans come in to buy it ?....is this too simple
Click to expand...

TBH charlz,I don't think the Americans were that serious. The last offer they allegedly made was basically £1 million. They wanted the SC to put up the rest for a seat on the board. If they were serious then surely if the SC were putting up half the cash they should have had 50% of the shares, but I doubt that was the deal.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
TBH charlz,I don't think the Americans were that serious. The last offer they allegedly made was basically £1 million. They wanted the SC to put up the rest for a seat on the board. If they were serious then surely if the SC were putting up half the cash they should have had 50% of the shares, but I doubt that was the deal.
Click to expand...

Admin only ones saying that version of events and let's be honest they have a strained relationship with the truth to say the least.
 
charlz54 said:
The supporters club are still working with the Americans aren’t they so maybe the SC could acquire the club and then the Americans come in to buy it ?....is this too simple
Click to expand...

To buy club you need 5m proof of funds to cover 2 years. Supporters club only raised 650k so even if Krasner allowed fans to buy just the club for £1 we wouldn't pass EFL requirements.

Most likely outcome i fear is that money spent on a phoenix club and starting from scratch at the bottom of non league.

Admin I think have fucked us.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Admin only ones saying that version of events and let's be honest they have a strained relationship with the truth to say the least.
Click to expand...

I know you are not going to accept anything the admins say but there are always two sides to a story and I haven't heard either the SC or the Americans deny that what they have said was incorrect. If Ganaye or the SC want to come out and give us their side of the story then I am all ears, and they are quite able to do that as the NDA would not be breached as they would only be confirming or dismissing something already disclosed.

Nixon, I believe, has said the final bid was £2 million so I assume that given the admins said that the SC were to pay half for representation on the board, they were only prepared to put £1 million of their money into the club for overall control, if that is so then I would say that they are shafting the SC by only offering a seat on the board and not 50% control.

Would you pay 50% of something for a minor interest ?

The seat on the board would give the SC a voice but no say in matters requiring a vote as they would be outnumbered every time. It seems to me that although they want our money they are only prepared to pay lip service to the fans interest.

As I say this is merely my own opinion and I may be far from correct but it is only the same as everyone else's speculative opinions on here, none of us know the actual facts despite what some think.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
I know you are not going to accept anything the admins say but there are always two sides to a story and I haven't heard either the SC or the Americans deny that what they have said was incorrect. If Ganaye or the SC want to come out and give us their side of the story then I am all ears, and they are quite able to do that as the NDA would not be breached as they would only be confirming or dismissing something already disclosed.

Nixon, I believe, has said the final bid was £2 million so I assume that given the admins said that the SC were to pay half for representation on the board, they were only prepared to put £1 million of their money into the club for overall control, if that is so then I would say that they are shafting the SC by only offering a seat on the board and not 50% control.

Would you pay 50% of something for a minor interest ?

The seat on the board would give the SC a voice but no say in matters requiring a vote as they would be outnumbered every time. It seems to me that although they want our money they are only prepared to pay lip service to the fans interest.

As I say this is merely my own opinion and I may be far from correct but it is only the same as everyone else's speculative opinions on here, none of us know the actual facts despite what some think.
Click to expand...
Thank you for pointing out that "this is merely my own opinion and I may be far from correct".
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
I know you are not going to accept anything the admins say but there are always two sides to a story and I haven't heard either the SC or the Americans deny that what they have said was incorrect. If Ganaye or the SC want to come out and give us their side of the story then I am all ears, and they are quite able to do that as the NDA would not be breached as they would only be confirming or dismissing something already disclosed.

Nixon, I believe, has said the final bid was £2 million so I assume that given the admins said that the SC were to pay half for representation on the board, they were only prepared to put £1 million of their money into the club for overall control, if that is so then I would say that they are shafting the SC by only offering a seat on the board and not 50% control.

Would you pay 50% of something for a minor interest ?

The seat on the board would give the SC a voice but no say in matters requiring a vote as they would be outnumbered every time. It seems to me that although they want our money they are only prepared to pay lip service to the fans interest.

As I say this is merely my own opinion and I may be far from correct but it is only the same as everyone else's speculative opinions on here, none of us know the actual facts despite what some think.
Click to expand...

Nixon said 2m bid rejected that didn't include supporters club money but supporters club were involved, Supporters club confirm bid rejected and they were involved with the bidder but didn't confirm they had put any of the money into the offer, admin confirm bid rejected and said 'they think' the supporters club were going to pay half. The offer would've come in as a joint bid, there is no think about it - they know for sure if they were paying half or not (not that we even have half to give them) - i suspect the word 'think' is admins backdoor to say they were mistaken and not lying later on.

Nixon got the other part of the story all right, if he had so much inside info to get so much right why would he have that bit wrong? Why would the supporters club not confirm they were part of the bid? How many times have admin said untrue things? I think the most likely circumstance stance is it's a transparent attempt to justify the highly unpopular move to reject the only credible bid.

When you say you about 50% of control are we going to be willing or able to cover 50% of the annual loses expected to be 5m over the next 2 seasons? If we are asking Ganaye and the Americans to pay all of the ongoing millions in loses i think it's not unreasonable to suggest that it won't be a 50/50 partnership. The other thing is it won't be 50% of the 2m fee we only raised 650k to buy into the club (unless admin get their full 4m that we know they wont we are unlikely to ever see the first 200k back, and even with that it leaves us short of going to 1m).

Even if we gave Ganaye and the American's our 650k it will probably be a small percentage of the money we need the American's to invest so i'm happy to hand it over in exchange for certain conditions if it saves the club. If we had the money to cover the loses and show proof of funds we wouldn't need the Americans but we know our investment is a one time pledge while they will need to invest far beyond the initial outlay indefinetely, so i don't think a 50/50 partnership is remotely doable in anyway.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Nixon said 2m bid rejected that didn't include supporters club money but supporters club were involved, Supporters club confirm bid rejected and they were involved with the bidder but didn't confirm they had put any of the money into the offer, admin confirm bid rejected and said 'they think' the supporters club were going to pay half. The offer would've come in as a joint bid, there is no think about it - they know for sure if they were paying half or not (not that we even have half to give them) - i suspect the word 'think' is admins backdoor to say they were mistaken and not lying later on.

Nixon got the other part of the story all right, if he had so much inside info to get so much right why would he have that bit wrong? Why would the supporters club not confirm they were part of the bid? How many times have admin said untrue things? I think the most likely circumstance stance is it's a transparent attempt to justify the highly unpopular move to reject the only credible bid.

When you say you about 50% of control are we going to be willing or able to cover 50% of the annual loses expected to be 5m over the next 2 seasons? If we are asking Ganaye and the Americans to pay all of the ongoing millions in loses i think it's not unreasonable to suggest that it won't be a 50/50 partnership. The other thing is it won't be 50% of the 2m fee we only raised 650k to buy into the club (unless admin get their full 4m that we know they wont we are unlikely to ever see the first 200k back, and even with that it leaves us short of going to 1m).

Even if we gave Ganaye and the American's our 650k it will probably be a small percentage of the money we need the American's to invest so i'm happy to hand it over in exchange for certain conditions if it saves the club. If we had the money to cover the loses and show proof of funds we wouldn't need the Americans but we know our investment is a one time pledge while they will need to invest far beyond the initial outlay indefinetely, so i don't think a 50/50 partnership is remotely doable in anyway.
Click to expand...

Your first sentence sums up my argument "Nixon says". If what I am saying is that far from the truth then why are the Americans still using him to speak for them, why not come out and tell us what has taken place.

The SC have confirmed they were part of the bid, but not how big a part. The only player in this charade that has said anything is the admins who said that the SC were being asked to fund 50% of the buyout, something that the SC have not denied.

As far as the losses go, the £5 million was a figure quoted weeks ago based on the wage bill at the time. A wage bill that as you know has been substantially reduced. The other major part of the losses were the stadium cost and as I have speculated could possibly be reduced by a rent increase and investment from the local authority.

There is also the possibility that because of the change of ownership of the stadium a rates reduction might now be possible due to the change of circumstance, something I am sure Lenegan would have looked into as the original decision to refuse the change was that the stadium was still owned by a former premier league football club. If it was owned by a rugby club the reason for maintaining the rate at the higher level is removed.

As I said, I know you don't want to believe anything the admins say, but I think you are blindly following Nixon, who as you say has been right on a lot of things, but he is fallible. If the Americans are the great hope for the club I for one wish they would come out and speak for themselves without the need to use the press. The only conclusion I draw from them not speaking for themselves is deniability, they can always claim that they didn't say anything and that Nixon had made the whole lot up.
 
For all we know the Americans could've bid 2m and the SC added the crowdfunding to that bid in return for a small stake in the club.
Therefore the actual bid could've been at least 2.7m.Maybe even more with the 200k from the 1st crowdfund which the administrators said we get back,plus the 200k left over from Euxton that paid the administrators fees(according to Nixon who has been spot on throughout this s***show).

So that joint bid could've actually been over 3m!If the administrators have taken 1.3m from Euxton for their fees,then IF the offer was around 3m it's an absolute disgrace IMO it wasn't accepted!
 
You are my sunshine said:
For all we know the Americans could've bid 2m and the SC added the crowdfunding to that bid in return for a small stake in the club.
Therefore the actual bid could've been at least 2.7m.Maybe even more with the 200k from the 1st crowdfund which the administrators said we get back,plus the 200k left over from Euxton that paid the administrators fees(according to Nixon who has been spot on throughout this s***show).

So that joint bid could've actually been over 3m!If the administrators have taken 1.3m from Euxton for their fees,then IF the offer was around 3m it's an absolute disgrace IMO it wasn't accepted!
Click to expand...

Then why did Nixon say the final bid was £2 million ? As you say he has been spot on before why not now.
 
TRUE BELIEVER said:
Then why did Nixon say the final bid was £2 million ? As you say he has been spot on before why not now.
Click to expand...

Nixon has also (repeatedly) been at pains to point out that he has little truck with the concept of Supporters putting money into clubs....his mantra being that “owners should buy clubs and fund them, the supporters role is to buy tickets” (and merchandise)

So if he is the French Americans puppet/mouthpiece as you assert then by repeatedly stating that investor/supporter ‘conglomerates’ should be a ‘no no’ (in his view) .....then hasn’t he been effectively undermining the US bid ...IF ...it’s true that
(a) he is their tame journo and
(b) the US bid truly was relying on the SC to stump up a million or half the money ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.