Scally to stand down | Page 14 | Vital Football

Scally to stand down

chris who said:
With time to think I doubt very much Scally will sell the club. Unless there is a bid he cannot refuse on the table.
Firstly he has no real need to .
He has at least it appears a excellent CEO to work for him .His Jockey Club experience and CV look on the face of it a really good credentials for the job of Co Chairman. I believe he could bring a more relaxed but more professional air to the club .Scally appears to have found a man well qualified to do a better job than he could do himself.
That said Scally is in a position to employ Paul Fisher for the foreseeable future.
If he simply leaves him to do the day to day running of the club Scally could find himself able to take up to about half of his previous income for doing the overseeing most probably from aboard .He might at some point face stiff competition for Paul Fisher's services. So he will need to offer a excellent package. So I would doubt that any wages will be saved by the move.
If this happens it will probably really frustrate Mr Perry as Scally to a large extent by out of reach. He I believe still own the club .So those staying away for that reason will have perhaps a excuse to continue. There would be no point to SOB as he simply will not be there most of the time. Although I do believe he may well turn up unannounced for some fixtures.
Pure guess worth I know as Scally himself possibly doesn't know himself yet.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't disagree and you describe the perfect situation, where the appointment of Paul Fisher could be the same sort of unexpected masterstroke as persuading NH to take the manager's job.

The problem is that I remember that young CEO that we had before who moved on pretty quickly. I was never sure whether he got fed up or fell out with Scally, who may have interfered, or whether he just got a better offer which, as you say, could happen with Fisher as well.

The other issue is whether Scally will be happy to just be the owner and, effectively, a sleeping partner, which has not really been his style. Maybe his age and health will finally persuade him to follow that path.

If that frustrates Perry and the SOB, all the better.
 
Breckland said:
That's right - the football club does not own the ground, Mr. Scally does.
Click to expand...

Most businesses with an asset of substantial value (like a football stadium) would separate the trade and asset as it gives more protection in case the trade goes bust.

I couldn’t imagine anyone buying the club without Priestfield, so would fully expect any buyer to buy GFC Holdings.
 
Breckland said:
That's right - the football club does not own the ground, Mr. Scally does.
Click to expand...

How does that work?

If he owns GFC Holdings, and GFC Holdings includes the ground, then surely it means he owns the lot as one entity? He owns the football club, which owns the ground. Or am I getting that wrong.

It would be a different situation if he owned one company “GFC” and another company “Priestfield Stadium Ltd”. And I can’t imagine any buyer saying “I’ll buy the club, you keep the stadium” can you?

Whether he does sell up or not, remains to be seen. But I reckon if he just stays out of it in the distant background and Mr Fisher instills some feel good factor around the place by trying to rectify some of the obvious faults at GFC, then it’s a win/win. Even better if with his business skills and contacts he manages to bring in some investment.

And if that happens (a happy, more successful club) then it will further alienate and remove that hard core element, for whom Scally failing is their only motive, regardless of Gills success or failure.
 
NathanH_GFC said:
Most businesses with an asset of substantial value (like a football stadium) would separate the trade and asset as it gives more protection in case the trade goes bust.
Click to expand...
That wouldn't work in this case would it? The club has already been in receivership and Banks have had to write off substantial debt, so our credit rating is likely to be zero.

Therefore, any new debt (even overdrafts for short term issues) would only be allowed to build up on an account in the name of the company that owns the asset, in order that the lender can be pledged the asset as security. Either that or there would be a cross guarantee structure between the companies.

Banks and financiers are not mugs.
 
GillsBluenose said:
That wouldn't work in this case would it? The club has already been in receivership and Banks have had to write off substantial debt, so our credit rating is likely to be zero.

Therefore, any new debt (even overdrafts for short term issues) would only be allowed to build up on an account in the name of the company that owns the asset, in order that the lender can be pledged the asset as security. Either that or there would be a cross guarantee structure between the companies.

Banks and financiers are not mugs.
Click to expand...

I’m sure there are several cross-charges, I haven’t checked, but the point is still the same - standard commercial arrangement that any sensible businessperson would follow, and it’s all part of the same group, so any buyer would buy Holdings, not just GFC.
 
shotshy said:
Surprisingly quite a few football clubs don’t own their ground including some very big ones.
Click to expand...

I can see how that would work on bigger clubs who have a variety of revenue streams as well as valuable goodwill/fan following. We don’t have that luxury.
 
Last edited:
OneSirKeefy said:
How does that work?

If he owns GFC Holdings, and GFC Holdings includes the ground, then surely it means he owns the lot as one entity? He owns the football club, which owns the ground. Or am I getting that wrong ........
Click to expand...

PDPS effectively owns GFC Holdings Ltd.

Gillingham Football Club, Priestfield Banquetting, The Factory and GFC School are all Trading Subsidiaries of GFC Holdings Ltd.

The point is, it's all (including the ground) under one umbrella.
 
My thoughts stand Scally will probably feel that he can remain as owner as long as he is not so visible.He has no real reason to sell at this time he would get a low price for the club.With Fisher there with his track record you would have thought the club would have more interest not less. Scally might have a interested party from abroad who through Fisher might be more likely look at a purchase with Fisher in control during the transition rather than Scally.But I would think that is what Scally hopes not currently likely.
First we have to get the club into a better state .At present nobody in their right minds will bid even a nominal sum .The atmosphere has been terrible for too long.Even if Scally has to pay Fisher a sum in excess of the income Scally himself has been earning. Then it could pay dividends for him if it enables a buyer to see potential and give Scally a better price in a few years time .
The time scale I would guess would be a two or three year minimum plan.And that would be if everything went to plan during that period. Including
promotion ,
better player development.
A much stronger playing squad .
Better gates and revenue streams.
A tall order in two or three years.
 
Last edited:
chris who said:
The time scale I would guess would be a two or three year minimum plan.And that would be if everything went to plan during that period. Including
promotion ,
better player development.
A much stronger playing squad .
Better gates and revenue streams.
A tall order in two or three years.
Click to expand...

That would coincide with PS's 70th birthday so it really will be last chance saloon. May explain the timing, if you are right.
 
gills69 said:
PDPS effectively owns GFC Holdings Ltd.

Gillingham Football Club, Priestfield Banquetting, The Factory and GFC School are all Trading Subsidiaries of GFC Holdings Ltd.

The point is, it's all (including the ground) under one umbrella.
Click to expand...

That’s what I was saying. I was just questioning Breckland saying GFC don’t own the ground. It’s all part of the same thing as far as I can see.
 
I would say one way Scally could almost guarantee keeping Fisher is to give him share holding inducements in return for hitting targets. If Fisher felt that long term he could be the chairman in a group buy out arrangement that could greatly appeal. Scally might have to sell a portion of the club to raise investment to get the ball rolling in the right direction but selling 10% or there abouts when you own 80% or there about is not major. Even if you are going to offer a further small percentage to your co chairman in return for being successful.
 
NathanH_GFC said:
I can see how that would work on bigger clubs who have a verity of revenue streams as well as valuable goodwill/fan following. We don’t have that luxury.
Click to expand...
Look at the Coventry situation.
They don’t own their ground and as i type they cannot hold home fixtures because the pitch is unplayable.
They cancelled the Rotherham game and will be sanctioned and played their cup game at Burton.
It’s possible that they may become squatters again.
 
Excellent interview.
The SOB should hang their heads in shame.
I’m glad this has gone national to show up the dangers of toxic social media.
Good on Scally for doing the interview.
Now go home and chill.

Simon Jordan said that he would make the leaders of the SOB lives as difficult as possible.
Get them nicked.
 
Last edited:
shotshy said:
Excellent interview.
The SOB should hang their heads in shame.
I’m glad this has gone national to show up the dangers of toxic social media.
Good on Scally for doing the interview.
Now go home and chill.

Simon Jordan said that he would make the leaders of the SOB lives as difficult as possible.
Get them nicked.
Click to expand...

For an exile, who is Simon Jordan? And what could he do to make their lives difficult? Or did he mean that’s what he would do in PS place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.