• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Irate Ian

Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
2,070
Since the 2000 article in the Independent Newspaper [see Other Owners thread at Fossetts Forum], what has changed ?

RM/Owners have not "demanded" rent for RH and have already written off a sizeable sum, yet there remains an equally large sum, still technically due or payable.

Suppose 20% p.a. interest might have been paid, but scrutiny of the club accounts would be needed, or questions raised at shareholders meetings and as to what level the capital borrowing may be at.

The longer term question is how SUFC are to be brought to a financial position of being capable of paying what rent may later be fixed by "the owners" and be payable at FF and what sanctions may be taken by "the owners" when and if future default may arise.

It may be that the terms and conditions of any future lease of FF where possible conflicts of interest [hence "Questions RM thread] may arise between RM/the owners/developers [whoever they may now be, which remains unclear] and Southend United Football Club.


Although RM has indicated some acquisition of "the whole", the details remain vague and the prior published information is:-


South Eastern Leisure (SEL), a joint venture by two property development companies, the locally-based Martin Dawn and Delancey Estates, a £295m London plc owned substantially by:-


The Currency Magnate

Mr George Soros


SEL bought for £4m the club's historic Roots Hall ground, which was paid for in the 1950s entirely by supporters and built by their legendary groundsman, Sid Broomfield - plus what Broomfield calls "a small group of hardworking blokes."



Mr Soros has a history in speculation on the currency markets and is reputed to have been instrumental in causing the downfall of the "exchange rate mechanism" which was part of the british governments central plank of fiscal policy under former Chancellor Nigel Lawson

This was I think known as "Black Monday" on the financial markets. Those who work in the city may recall that day, my abiding memory is seeing Lawson coming from the Treasury ashen faced to announce Britain having withdrawn from the ERM.

Every man woman and child in the country lost a very substantial sum of money that day. Effectively he made massive and I mean really massive profit at the expense of all the citizens of our country/taxpayers.

This man can make and break governments let alone little old SUFC. We really are small fry in the financial language of this man. Hope he is a Blues Supporter [and not Chelski]

RM's recent visit to USA to seek funding for the development from Morgan Stanley, does seem rather odd in the context of the what was last known to be the status quo, concerning ownership.

£80M surely is way beyond the cost of building the stadium alone ?
 

weststander

Manager
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
1,350
Since the 2000 article in the Independent Newspaper [see Other Owners thread at Fossetts Forum], what has changed ?

RM/Owners have not "demanded" rent for RH and have already written off a sizeable sum, yet there remains an equally large sum, still technically due or payable.

Suppose 20% p.a. interest might have been paid, but scrutiny of the club accounts would be needed, or questions raised at shareholders meetings and as to what level the capital borrowing may be at.

The longer term question is how SUFC are to be brought to a financial position of being capable of paying what rent may later be fixed by "the owners" and be payable at FF and what sanctions may be taken by "the owners" when and if future default may arise.

It may be that the terms and conditions of any future lease of FF where possible conflicts of interest [hence "Questions RM thread] may arise between RM/the owners/developers [whoever they may now be, which remains unclear] and Southend United Football Club.


Although RM has indicated some acquisition of "the whole", the details remain vague and the prior published information is:-


South Eastern Leisure (SEL), a joint venture by two property development companies, the locally-based Martin Dawn and Delancey Estates, a £295m London plc owned substantially by:-


The Currency Magnate

Mr George Soros


SEL bought for £4m the club's historic Roots Hall ground, which was paid for in the 1950s entirely by supporters and built by their legendary groundsman, Sid Broomfield - plus what Broomfield calls "a small group of hardworking blokes."



Mr Soros has a history in speculation on the currency markets and is reputed to have been instrumental in causing the downfall of the "exchange rate mechanism" which was part of the british governments central plank of fiscal policy under former Chancellor Nigel Lawson

This was I think known as "Black Monday" on the financial markets. Those who work in the city may recall that day, my abiding memory is seeing Lawson coming from the Treasury ashen faced to announce Britain having withdrawn from the ERM.

Every man woman and child in the country lost a very substantial sum of money that day. Effectively he made massive and I mean really massive profit at the expense of all the citizens of our country/taxpayers.

This man can make and break governments let alone little old SUFC. We really are small fry in the financial language of this man. Hope he is a Blues Supporter [and not Chelski]

RM's recent visit to USA to seek funding for the development from Morgan Stanley, does seem rather odd in the context of the what was last known to be the status quo, concerning ownership.

£80M surely is way beyond the cost of building the stadium alone ?


George Soros is a partner in Delancy, who were our former part-owners. Dont forget that Ron bought them out last year. Delancy now have nothing to with the Club, SEL or Roots Hall Ltd. They were in it to make a quick buck or so they thought, it didnt materialise so they sold to Ron when an acceptable offer was made. Thus Ron needs to seek finance as he cant really go cap in hand to Delancy again.
I think that his trip to New York was to search for finance but also has anyone thought that the New York Giants are building a brand new stadium ( http://www.nyg2010.com/ )and they are looking to get the fans to put up a proportion of this by selling seats for life, debenutres etc so he might have used it as a fact finding mission to find out how they work these schemes to see if they MIGHT be appropriate for FF.
 

Irate Ian

Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
2,070
George Soros is a partner in Delancy, who were our former part-owners. Dont forget that Ron bought them out last year. Delancy now have nothing to with the Club, SEL or Roots Hall Ltd. They were in it to make a quick buck or so they thought, it didnt materialise so they sold to Ron when an acceptable offer was made. Thus Ron needs to seek finance as he cant really go cap in hand to Delancy again.
I think that his trip to New York was to search for finance but also has anyone thought that the New York Giants are building a brand new stadium ( http://www.nyg2010.com/ )and they are looking to get the fans to put up a proportion of this by selling seats for life, debenutres etc so he might have used it as a fact finding mission to find out how they work these schemes to see if they MIGHT be appropriate for FF.


Yes he has stated as much, but the evidence is not apparent [or it is not transparent].

I welcome clarification on these and other questions. Please refer to "RM Questions" or non-answered questions on "Fossetts Forum"
 

fbm

Blue tinted optimist⭐
Joined
Oct 28, 2003
Messages
9,274
Location
Cloud cuckoo land
The £80m isn't just for the stadium... it's for the entire development including shops and hotel I believe. I'm sure Ron sent an email round after this was reported in the Echo.

Jesus, I don't think the Emirates stadium cost that much!
 

Irate Ian

Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
2,070
The £80m isn't just for the stadium... it's for the entire development including shops and hotel I believe. I'm sure Ron sent an email round after this was reported in the Echo.

Jesus, I don't think the Emirates stadium cost that much!


This is part of the "slicing up of the cake" that is not yet disclosed.

SUFC are not [at present] hoteliers, shop owners or landlords of shops and I have doubt that RM will be enabling these revenue streams to enure to the football club, but he has not yet been prepared [or maybe the timing has not been right] to answer or supply public detailed information on these questions/issues.

It may be that SUFC should have additional revenue streams so that the business as a whole is sufficiently diversified, as the perception is that football revenue alone will not be sufficient to enable a commercial rent to be paid and the club to flourish [make a profit], especially when and if the going gets tough [should the unthinkable happen and we be relegated and lead to a dropping off of support].

We have to plan for the rainy days, even though we hope the sun may continue to shine long into the future.

If other revenue streams are not to accrue to the club, borrowing for those parts of the development should not be taken into account when supporters consider the cost of "seats for life" or other fixed periods that may later be proposed.

It stands to reason that if offered a "seat for life" [which can be likened to buying a share in the club], one would not want to be paying also for the building of an hotel/shops in the price !!

How would anyone be able to assess the true cost /comparison on which also a future rent may be based in the lease to SUFC ?

On another thread it has been suggested the building cost of one seat is in the order of £1,600 - £1,800 at to-day's building cost estimation ?
 
Last edited:

davewebbsbrain

Webby⭐
Joined
Aug 17, 2005
Messages
23,704
Location
Eastwood
Since the 2000 article in the Independent Newspaper [see Other Owners thread at Fossetts Forum], what has changed ?

RM/Owners have not "demanded" rent for RH and have already written off a sizeable sum, yet there remains an equally large sum, still technically due or payable.

Suppose 20% p.a. interest might have been paid, but scrutiny of the club accounts would be needed, or questions raised at shareholders meetings and as to what level the capital borrowing may be at.

The longer term question is how SUFC are to be brought to a financial position of being capable of paying what rent may later be fixed by "the owners" and be payable at FF and what sanctions may be taken by "the owners" when and if future default may arise.

It may be that the terms and conditions of any future lease of FF where possible conflicts of interest [hence "Questions RM thread] may arise between RM/the owners/developers [whoever they may now be, which remains unclear] and Southend United Football Club.


Although RM has indicated some acquisition of "the whole", the details remain vague and the prior published information is:-


South Eastern Leisure (SEL), a joint venture by two property development companies, the locally-based Martin Dawn and Delancey Estates, a £295m London plc owned substantially by:-


The Currency Magnate

Mr George Soros


SEL bought for £4m the club's historic Roots Hall ground, which was paid for in the 1950s entirely by supporters and built by their legendary groundsman, Sid Broomfield - plus what Broomfield calls "a small group of hardworking blokes."



Mr Soros has a history in speculation on the currency markets and is reputed to have been instrumental in causing the downfall of the "exchange rate mechanism" which was part of the british governments central plank of fiscal policy under former Chancellor Nigel Lawson

This was I think known as "Black Monday" on the financial markets. Those who work in the city may recall that day, my abiding memory is seeing Lawson coming from the Treasury ashen faced to announce Britain having withdrawn from the ERM.

Every man woman and child in the country lost a very substantial sum of money that day. Effectively he made massive and I mean really massive profit at the expense of all the citizens of our country/taxpayers.

This man can make and break governments let alone little old SUFC. We really are small fry in the financial language of this man. Hope he is a Blues Supporter [and not Chelski]

RM's recent visit to USA to seek funding for the development from Morgan Stanley, does seem rather odd in the context of the what was last known to be the status quo, concerning ownership.



£80M surely is way beyond the cost of building the stadium alone ?


Here we go again!!!!
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
Messages
3,939
Location
Colchester
The £80m isn't just for the stadium... it's for the entire development including shops and hotel I believe. I'm sure Ron sent an email round after this was reported in the Echo.

Jesus, I don't think the Emirates stadium cost that much!

You would be surprised FBM the Emirates cost around £430 million including the other bits and pieces associated with building the stadium.

Your proposed development is massive for a club of your size, there are tenders doing the rounds of something like 22 million for the groundworks and 7 million for the electrical stuff, compare that with our stadium where the electrical works came out at around 1.2 million and the groundworks 7 million.
 

ElstreeBlue

Coach
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
601
Location
Elstree
Ian

Thanks for continuing to pursue this.

I am concerned over the club's future given this sudden £80m black hole in the stadium's development.

Your crusade to pin down Ron Martin over the financial future of the club is to be welcomed. My recollection was also that Delancey had been bought out and was no longer involved, but I haven't investigated the position. If it's not apparent to you after all of your investigations, I wonder why not?

There still seem so many unanswered questions involved with the club's future finances at the moment. Not least:

1 Exactly who will be making money out of the ancillary activities? In the 80s, when Vic Jobson wanted to build us a new ground at the site that Norman Clarke then decided the council should instead develop at Garons Park, the club was going to be 100% beneficiary of all of the ancillary revenues. The aim was that the club would make a profit without needing any football revenue. And the football club would own the development. Now, there seems to be a complete lack of clarity as to who will benefit from any "profits" from the ancillary activities. Understandably, it might not be the club, because Ron Martin's company had rescued the club in the first place when insolvency for the club seemed the most likely option. But why all these suggestions that the club may benefit (other than getting a nice new stadium)? Will the club actually benefit - and if so then how?

2 Why has the cost of building the stadium ballooned to £80m? How could Ron Martin have got the costs so far wrong? Why has this only come to light as soon as the development has 100% definitively been given the green light?

3 How can the £80m cost generate a decent return for any investor at this site? What are the projected revenues? How would they be "shared" with any potential investor? Would the terms of that investment be so crippling (just to take on such a risk) that the club/owners would be saddled with this noose for ever that could only ever lead to one outcome?

4 Who exactly would be saddled with that £80m debt? Would it be the club itself? SEL? Anyone else?

If it's the club - that's obviously dangerous. If not the club, then what happens to the club if the person saddled with that debt goes insolvent?

5 Is the ground still currently being built despite this enormous black hole? What's happening on the ground while Ron Martin's looking to raise the cash?

6 Is £80m the final figure? Could it rise further?

7 Is there any alternative that would secure the club's future other than a stadium with such crippling debt? Possibly not. But as a director, Ron Martin has a legal duty to consider this and look after the club's interests, even if he may also be interested in benefiting through his other companies that are behind the venture.

I'm sure there are many other questions. But isn't it time that Ron Martin came out once and for all and answered in writing all of our - and others' - collective unanswered questions, and not just give us feel-good statements that get the fans on-side to back his plans for his property company to try to make some money out of the venture without realising that they're really lobbying for someone other than the club to benefit? Of course we could get the stadium (if there's enough money for it to get built), but at what price to the club's future?

Incidentally, the Soros incident you refer to was a Wednesday. I remember big economic commentators dubbing it "White Wednesday" rather than "Black Wednesday". The reason being the country actually benefited enormously from that day. The Pound devalued, which massively kick-started the depressed economy and brought an end to the devastating recession in the early 90s, which had been caused or prolonged/worsened largely by shadowing the Deutsche Mark and being in the ERM at the wrong price. And it was Norman Lamont who was ashen face and windswept!

But the point about Soros or any other investor remains. Anyone investing in the club who does not really care about throwing money at a loss-making venture is concerned with one thing only: making a decent return that rewards the risk. The bigger the risk - and it is getting bigger - the bigger the return the investor would want. Which begs the question above: if there is such a big gaping financial black hole, then either no one is going to invest and the project is doomed, or any external investor that doesn't have the football club at its heart is going to invest on such terms that the football club may suffer for generations or end up ceasing to exist.

We would like answers. And to our satisfaction. And in writing - not at a secret meeting with one of our fans behind closed doors. And not just wishy-washy public statements. We need the questions answered in writing, one by one. And we need it all backed up by documentary evidence. Or at least that's what we'd want as fans. Whether Ron Martin is prepared to provide it is another matter - and that's his prerogative. He chooses to give public pronouncements about some things as he chooses. But he may decide that he doesn't want to fully answer the difficult questions, of course. He may decide only to give as much information to us as he is required to at law - which means whatever are the SUFC's shareholders' rights to the information.

We shouldn't be fooled by his fan-friendly statements - whether on the pitch or by email, etc. As welcome as many of them have been because they share information and insight with us, they should not lull us into any false sense of security as to the club's future. The most important statement Ron Martin could make to reassure us as fans is to tell us publicly in writing in a clear, backed-up way what is going on financially with the development and what this really means for the club's future.

I am certainly not saying he has bad motives or there is anything untoward. Remember - he gave the club a lifeline when it was in trouble. But as a fan I have many concerns that I would like answered.
 

leeblue

Members⭐
Joined
Aug 22, 2006
Messages
8,599
Location
On the seafront c c csiders
firstly I think its brilliant that tha likes of Irate Ian and elstree bring these issues to us the minions, they obviously know their beans, and raise many a good point and are asking the right questions, I personally do not see the ground being built in the current financial turmoil........if ever
 

graysblue

Banned
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
1,602
Location
grays
lets be honest,

the purse strings appear to be tightened this season hence very small squad with loan signings making up the numbers.

the credit crunch ect has frightened bankers into NOT lending money.

the clubs plans are indeed ambitious and fraught with comebacks on a grand scale.

the money loaned to the club charged at 20% interest is crazy ,lets assume the club owe 1 million the interest alone will be 200k per year add the rent of 400k total being 600k?? or 50k per month?

the club have sold off everything and rely on others to keep afloat.
 

Irate Ian

Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
2,070
Ian

Thanks for continuing to pursue this.

I am concerned over the club's future given this sudden £80m black hole in the stadium's development.

Your crusade to pin down Ron Martin over the financial future of the club is to be welcomed. My recollection was also that Delancey had been bought out and was no longer involved, but I haven't investigated the position. If it's not apparent to you after all of your investigations, I wonder why not?

There still seem so many unanswered questions involved with the club's future finances at the moment. Not least:

1 Exactly who will be making money out of the ancillary activities? In the 80s, when Vic Jobson wanted to build us a new ground at the site that Norman Clarke then decided the council should instead develop at Garons Park, the club was going to be 100% beneficiary of all of the ancillary revenues. The aim was that the club would make a profit without needing any football revenue. And the football club would own the development. Now, there seems to be a complete lack of clarity as to who will benefit from any "profits" from the ancillary activities. Understandably, it might not be the club, because Ron Martin's company had rescued the club in the first place when insolvency for the club seemed the most likely option. But why all these suggestions that the club may benefit (other than getting a nice new stadium)? Will the club actually benefit - and if so then how?

2 Why has the cost of building the stadium ballooned to £80m? How could Ron Martin have got the costs so far wrong? Why has this only come to light as soon as the development has 100% definitively been given the green light?

3 How can the £80m cost generate a decent return for any investor at this site? What are the projected revenues? How would they be "shared" with any potential investor? Would the terms of that investment be so crippling (just to take on such a risk) that the club/owners would be saddled with this noose for ever that could only ever lead to one outcome?

4 Who exactly would be saddled with that £80m debt? Would it be the club itself? SEL? Anyone else?

If it's the club - that's obviously dangerous. If not the club, then what happens to the club if the person saddled with that debt goes insolvent?

5 Is the ground still currently being built despite this enormous black hole? What's happening on the ground while Ron Martin's looking to raise the cash?

6 Is £80m the final figure? Could it rise further?

7 Is there any alternative that would secure the club's future other than a stadium with such crippling debt? Possibly not. But as a director, Ron Martin has a legal duty to consider this and look after the club's interests, even if he may also be interested in benefiting through his other companies that are behind the venture.

I'm sure there are many other questions. But isn't it time that Ron Martin came out once and for all and answered in writing all of our - and others' - collective unanswered questions, and not just give us feel-good statements that get the fans on-side to back his plans for his property company to try to make some money out of the venture without realising that they're really lobbying for someone other than the club to benefit? Of course we could get the stadium (if there's enough money for it to get built), but at what price to the club's future?

Incidentally, the Soros incident you refer to was a Wednesday. I remember big economic commentators dubbing it "White Wednesday" rather than "Black Wednesday". The reason being the country actually benefited enormously from that day. The Pound devalued, which massively kick-started the depressed economy and brought an end to the devastating recession in the early 90s, which had been caused or prolonged/worsened largely by shadowing the Deutsche Mark and being in the ERM at the wrong price. And it was Norman Lamont who was ashen face and windswept!

But the point about Soros or any other investor remains. Anyone investing in the club who does not really care about throwing money at a loss-making venture is concerned with one thing only: making a decent return that rewards the risk. The bigger the risk - and it is getting bigger - the bigger the return the investor would want. Which begs the question above: if there is such a big gaping financial black hole, then either no one is going to invest and the project is doomed, or any external investor that doesn't have the football club at its heart is going to invest on such terms that the football club may suffer for generations or end up ceasing to exist.

We would like answers. And to our satisfaction. And in writing - not at a secret meeting with one of our fans behind closed doors. And not just wishy-washy public statements. We need the questions answered in writing, one by one. And we need it all backed up by documentary evidence. Or at least that's what we'd want as fans. Whether Ron Martin is prepared to provide it is another matter - and that's his prerogative. He chooses to give public pronouncements about some things as he chooses. But he may decide that he doesn't want to fully answer the difficult questions, of course. He may decide only to give as much information to us as he is required to at law - which means whatever are the SUFC's shareholders' rights to the information.

We shouldn't be fooled by his fan-friendly statements - whether on the pitch or by email, etc. As welcome as many of them have been because they share information and insight with us, they should not lull us into any false sense of security as to the club's future. The most important statement Ron Martin could make to reassure us as fans is to tell us publicly in writing in a clear, backed-up way what is going on financially with the development and what this really means for the club's future.

I am certainly not saying he has bad motives or there is anything untoward. Remember - he gave the club a lifeline when it was in trouble. But as a fan I have many concerns that I would like answered.


Thought I was in such a minority that have been reluctant to continue raising these thorny issues.

Appreciate your comments and correction [Norman Lamont]. Your points are also very valid IMO.

It is all about RM's openness and preparedness to disclose.

Anything that falls short causes concern.

Think it about time RM made the whole scheme and the fine detail of his plans avaialable for public consumption.

A statement in the press would best fit the bill, I do not really want to make this personal, I have much regard to the good RM has done and continues to do in his role as Chairman of the club.

However I will be prepared to continue to ask for responses to all the questions, since RM knows he has failed upon his promise gave at our meeting 6 March 2008, to provide responses in writing, as at current date.

6 months down the line, as with the song "there are more questions than answers".

To coin another song title "Now is the time to make things right"

He has my personal email address.
 
Last edited:

Sherif H

Omar's older brother
Joined
Jan 26, 2007
Messages
1,819
Location
Southend
You would be surprised FBM the Emirates cost around £430 million including the other bits and pieces associated with building the stadium.

Your proposed development is massive for a club of your size, there are tenders doing the rounds of something like 22 million for the groundworks and 7 million for the electrical stuff, compare that with our stadium where the electrical works came out at around 1.2 million and the groundworks 7 million.

Hi C&P....you are correct about the value of the M&E (roughly!), but the groundworks were nowhere near £7m. That is just under half the stadium cost!

Based on current day prices, I would estimate that the stadium alone at FF will cost around £38-40 million. That figure is obviously subject to inflation the longer we wait to start on site, and that would not include the costs attached as planning conditions such as junction improvements and any street lighting etc... Within that it is currently impossible to predict what the M&E (Mechanical and Electrical) costs would likely be without knowing what Ron & co are 'value engineering' out of the initial proposal.
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
Messages
3,939
Location
Colchester
Hi C&P....you are correct about the value of the M&E (roughly!), but the groundworks were nowhere near £7m. That is just under half the stadium cost!

Based on current day prices, I would estimate that the stadium alone at FF will cost around £38-40 million. That figure is obviously subject to inflation the longer we wait to start on site, and that would not include the costs attached as planning conditions such as junction improvements and any street lighting etc... Within that it is currently impossible to predict what the M&E (Mechanical and Electrical) costs would likely be without knowing what Ron & co are 'value engineering' out of the initial proposal.

Hello Sherif

Sorry I used that term a little too loosely there when I said groundworks this was the cost of building the actual stadium (ground!) not just the groundworks themselves. This was not including any fitting out, car park, plans etc etc.
 

weststander

Manager
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
1,350
Ian,

I appreciate what you are doing and i am interested in where the money will come from...... BUT why does Ron have to make public where he's going to get the money from ??? The club is a private business to which Ron (or Rons company owns the majority share), would you demand from Tesco's or Currys where the money is coming from to build their latest stores or even from Sainsburys to ask where the money will come form to develop Roots Hall ?? Could you imagine Peter Hill Wood at Arsenal disclosing the intimate financial details of building the Emirates ?? I am sure that if you made enquiries to the Chairman of each of the above you would be given short shrift. I personally think we are quite lucky that Ron throws us the crumbs of information that he does.
The only chance that i will get to ask any questions is at the AGM and i will ask a few but will be prepared for Ron to say he is unable to answer such questions at the moment.
 

ElstreeBlue

Coach
Joined
Feb 2, 2008
Messages
601
Location
Elstree
Ian,

I appreciate what you are doing and i am interested in where the money will come from...... BUT why does Ron have to make public where he's going to get the money from ??? The club is a private business to which Ron (or Rons company owns the majority share), would you demand from Tesco's or Currys where the money is coming from to build their latest stores or even from Sainsburys to ask where the money will come form to develop Roots Hall ?? Could you imagine Peter Hill Wood at Arsenal disclosing the intimate financial details of building the Emirates ?? I am sure that if you made enquiries to the Chairman of each of the above you would be given short shrift. I personally think we are quite lucky that Ron throws us the crumbs of information that he does.
The only chance that i will get to ask any questions is at the AGM and i will ask a few but will be prepared for Ron to say he is unable to answer such questions at the moment.

You're right up to a point.

Ron Martin does not - if he so chooses - have to reveal the goings-on of his other companies which may be owning the site.

However, he does owe us (as shareholders) duties to look after the best interests of the club in his capacity of director. We need to know that the club's best interests are secured.

And in any case, it seems to me that Ron Martin makes public pronouncements from time to time to satisfy the wishes of his customers - ie in order to keep the fans happy because he knows that happy fans mean greater likelihood of more revenue for the business that he's a director of. If we make a big enough request for him to explain away the current position on the club's future and the stadium, he may well decide to do so. No harm in asking for full details and showing that we as fans are concerned. In other words, give us the info to avoid fan discontent.
 

Irate Ian

Members
Joined
Dec 1, 2004
Messages
2,070
Ian,

I appreciate what you are doing and i am interested in where the money will come from...... BUT why does Ron have to make public where he's going to get the money from ??? The club is a private business to which Ron (or Rons company owns the majority share), would you demand from Tesco's or Currys where the money is coming from to build their latest stores or even from Sainsburys to ask where the money will come form to develop Roots Hall ?? Could you imagine Peter Hill Wood at Arsenal disclosing the intimate financial details of building the Emirates ?? I am sure that if you made enquiries to the Chairman of each of the above you would be given short shrift. I personally think we are quite lucky that Ron throws us the crumbs of information that he does.
The only chance that i will get to ask any questions is at the AGM and i will ask a few but will be prepared for Ron to say he is unable to answer such questions at the moment.



He has already publicised going to USA to meet Morgan Stanley to discuss finance of £80 million [which is a bombshell of more than double that we were last given to understand to be the cost of building stadium].

If this is for public consumption, why not the details of how this will likely impact upon SUFC in the longer term [payment for their occupation etc etc].
 

weststander

Manager
Joined
Nov 22, 2004
Messages
1,350
You're right up to a point.


However, he does owe us (as shareholders) duties to look after the best interests of the club in his capacity of director. We need to know that the club's best interests are secured.

.

I agree, he should perhaps be telling us, the shareholders, what is going on, but perhaps its not something that he (or the potential financiers) wants to make public, perhaps the reason that he hasnt told us anything yet is because there is nothing to tell or he has only got half the picture and if he told us certain people would be moanig that he's only told us half of the story !!
I may be naive but there seem to be a lot of conspiracy theorists with regards to this project, Ron has not let us down yet and i see no reason why he will over this, after all this is his real chance to make himself a bit of cash to which i do not begrudge him.
 

CC51DAS

President
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
3,209
I agree, he should perhaps be telling us, the shareholders, what is going on, but perhaps its not something that he (or the potential financiers) wants to make public, perhaps the reason that he hasnt told us anything yet is because there is nothing to tell or he has only got half the picture and if he told us certain people would be moanig that he's only told us half of the story !!
I may be naive but there seem to be a lot of conspiracy theorists with regards to this project, Ron has not let us down yet and i see no reason why he will over this, after all this is his real chance to make himself a bit of cash to which i do not begrudge him.[/quote]

But dare I suggest your sentiments might change if the future of the club was not financially assured ?

From what I recall the project had to work financially on a 'stand alone' basis excluding revenue from footballing activities . So if this is correct in a few years from now we could find a retail park, a hotel, various blocks of flats and a nice stadium which could be used for concerts etc from time to time and would provide an extra amenity for the Borough of Southend , with no football club needed, let alone one that can't pay its way and is homeless.

I think it is a practical illustration of how this situation will not be allowed to develop that would put minds at rest .
 
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
3,454
Location
Little Oakley
i think to be honest irate ian is sticking his nose it where its not welcome. Ron makes more statements then any chairman i know anywhere else and asking where every penny is coming from and going is none of ian's or most of our's business.

Some clarification on the seat for life scheme will no doubt be forthcoming but from what i understand its just an idea at the moment.
 
Top