• 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.

Are You in Favour of a Truce as per SVC

Do SZ members agree with Stan to cease protests asap ?


  • Total voters
    337
  • Poll closed .

JB Shrimper

Youth Team
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
348
So all those that want to believe it to be accurate will hear no different and those offering a suggestion that 95% might not be accurate won't change anyone's mind. Similar to the fact that 95% or not Ron won't be leaving. Strange irony.
 

Rayleigh boy

Director⭐
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
4,297
In a previous zoom call RM said the rent will be X amount in the National League, X amount in Div 2....etc. In the last zoom call he said no rent would be charged. So what is it ? I'll tell you what it is...it's whatever words they think will keep us happy until it's built. He said he hasn't been charging rent for RH, but it's still accruing on the balance sheet as a charge which puts us further in debt, year on year. Yes, he may write off our debts, but if we are unable to meet the rent payments we'll soon be back in debt like we are now.

this is the exactly problem ...

a lot of people with a bit of knowledge trying to interpret complex legal situation -

I am sure a lot of this correct BUT none of it is a definitive trusted legal view backed knowledge and understanding of the process and costs involved in enforcing it ...

not only do we need legal advice to interpret the current situation we need advice on which are effective strategies to pursue ....

otherwise we can all just sit around playing barrack room lawyers and posting "opinions" based on zero understanding and experience of commercial law ....
 

Rayleigh boy

Director⭐
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
4,297
I think one of the first things even the cheapest brief would point out is that separating the football club and the ground into separate entities is entirely acceptable and indeed in, many many cases, recommended practice. More generally, in property development individual projects are often set up as separate limited companies.

On the football side the reason is simple- if the football club fails it doesn't take the stadium with it. If the club went bust it has no assets, and so it could be bought out of administration and come back with the stadium still being there to play in. This is why we have the draconian points penalties. You could put a club into admin, lose all the debt and start over again, never risking losing access to the main asset they need access to (the stadium they play in). It does, however, mean the owner of the stadium and club holds all the cards I'm afraid.

if we had the cheapest brief we would be better informed than we currently are
 

Wise Head

Youth Team⭐
Joined
Aug 7, 2010
Messages
257
this is the exactly problem ...

a lot of people with a bit of knowledge trying to interpret complex legal situation -

I am sure a lot of this correct BUT none of it is a definitive trusted legal view backed knowledge and understanding of the process and costs involved in enforcing it ...

not only do we need legal advice to interpret the current situation we need advice on which are effective strategies to pursue ....

otherwise we can all just sit around playing barrack room lawyers and posting "opinions" based on zero understanding and experience of commercial law ....
You don’t need to a lawyer to understand that the club is much worse of renting a stadium than owning it.
 

Bratislava Blue

Manager
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
2,228
Location
Bratislava
Def need to keep the protesting up from my PoV. RM will just revert to type and continue not to give a ****. His only motive is now getting the ground sorted and it's never been clearer!

And your solution to the enevitable fallout after he is forced out by your protests is what? Do you have one?
 

Massimo Giovanni

Old Timer⭐
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
8,639
Location
Siena
And your solution to the enevitable fallout after he is forced out by your protests is wha? Do you have one?
There have been quite a few ideas from the "Ron OUT" side of it, and what is apparent is that there is NO plan, NO buyer, not a scooby.
Some seem to believe in the wisdom of facebook Karen, other that Jedi mind games will make change. A further favorite stance is the ostrich head in the sand and monkey with eyes closed and fingers in ears.
 

GNH

Fish House Ultras⭐
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
2,988
Location
Rayleigh
There have been quite a few ideas from the "Ron OUT" side of it, and what is apparent is that there is NO plan, NO buyer, not a scooby.
Some seem to believe in the wisdom of facebook Karen, other that Jedi mind games will make change. A further favorite stance is the ostrich head in the sand and monkey with eyes closed and fingers in ears.

We 'know' that if RM leaves we will be bankrupt because we owe him a ton of cash and there's nobody out there who will take us on.

The only reason we 'know' this is because RM has told us. None of us have any real idea if that is the case or not, there maybe a consortium waiting in the background to get involved when it's crunch time, or RM maybe right and we'd be history. The only way to find out is to get to that position.

One thing I've learned over the years is not to take anything RM says as gospel. I'm sure there is more to this than we know, or think we know.
 

kentblues

Director⭐
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
6,180
I disagree. As soon as you strip the ground out of the football club you create a massive problem. In all cases the club then has to pay rent and it just accrues on the balance sheet as no club in the lower leagues can realistically afford to pay any rent. Over time the club becomes an insolvent basket case of a company.
No potential purchaser would be interested in buying a club who are committed to paying an unaffordable rent. This is the situation we are in.
If you want to be an attractive club to purchase you need to keep the freehold of the ground in the club. This asset will increase in value. In this scenario if the club overstretched itself and the owner ran out of money, it would be fairly easy to find a new owner, particularly in the south east of England and in our case a huge catchment area.
Certainly no purchaser would be interested to buying the club with the current stadium on that basis- i.e with the current stadium owned by Ron and the club as a basket case company.

With the new stadium it could generate the necessary revenue streams for the club to be sustainable and pay market levels of rent. Tom mentioned based on his previous experience £3-5m additional revenue is realistic. The new owner may be able to buy and run the club very successfully without owning the stadium, and indeed not be able to find the required investment to buy the stadium as well. If that was your preferred owner as it turned out you would be happy I guess.

Ron said he would also be open to someone buying club and stadium down the line. But doubts I think, as others might, that buyers with that level of funding will indeed come forward. But buying both with and without the stadium he has said he would be open to. And if your preferred new owner could buy both you would also be happier I guess. If your preferred owner could rent and another potential owner you really didn't like could buy both, I suspect then you might want the former.

If someone came in and bought both club and stadium they would probably be advised to put the stadium as a separate entity- or more likely still, they would buy club and stadium as separate entities. You might be happy with this too if it were an owner you particularly wanted.

Where things get very worrying is if the new stadium doesn't happen. If Ron sold club and stadium any new owner would still in all probability want separate ownership of club and stadium. But rent would be charged and never be paid because the basket case generated insufficient cashflow to do so (arms length relationship maintained) and they would simply be putting increasing amounts of cash support into something that will never wash it's own face. Or they (the they could still end up being Ron in your nightmare scenario) could look to develop RH alone and build a cheap stadium elsewhere. It could also mean starting again in the search for a new stadium site. Or certainly restarting a planning process in some way. So an acceptance of needing to fund many more years of losses and to start again.

So this is why I say at this precise moment our interests and Ron's coincide. You don't have to like someone, have confidence in them for that to be the case, and to want him to lose if it means we lose as well doesn't make a lot of sense.

Hopefully
RH & Fossets get's approval/built.
A future buyer can buy the club and rent sustainably or buy both
Hopefully the new owner is someone we want (this isn't something we have much control over either unfortunately..)
 

Massimo Giovanni

Old Timer⭐
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
8,639
Location
Siena
Okay @GNH I will bite.Simple question, SUFC go bust, What is a consortium going to buy?
A, the NFL club name and players, ?
B. Roots Hall which is a separate company and not fit for purpose (now or in 5yrs)?
C.Fossets Farm including B & L?
 

Chris Powell's mate

First XI⭐
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
3,171
We 'know' that if RM leaves we will be bankrupt because we owe him a ton of cash and there's nobody out there who will take us on.

The only reason we 'know' this is because RM has told us. None of us have any real idea if that is the case or not, there maybe a consortium waiting in the background to get involved when it's crunch time, or RM maybe right and we'd be history. The only way to find out is to get to that position.

One thing I've learned over the years is not to take anything RM says as gospel. I'm sure there is more to this than we know, or think we know.
I would suggest there's plenty who might take us on.
It's a different thing whether we would want them. Never, it seems until now, has the right and proper test of a football director been so heavily scrutinised.
And it's interesting there are plenty of foreign investors willing to plough money into English football.
Finding the right one might be an ask - but the notion that none would be interested?
I doubt it.
 

kentblues

Director⭐
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
6,180
I would suggest there's plenty who might take us on.
It's a different thing whether we would want them. Never, it seems until now, has the right and proper test of a football director been so heavily scrutinised.
And it's interesting there are plenty of foreign investors willing to plough money into English football.
Finding the right one might be an ask - but the notion that none would be interested?
I doubt it.
The thing is what a situation to be in- Bury and Macclesfield probably thought someone would come along. Probably there were people interested. The best all round is planning gets approved, stadium must be both started first and finished before the rest of the development, and then the chances of a buyer improve immeasurably.

As you say the fact we can't control who the buyer is in either circumstance is disquieting..
 

Rayleigh boy

Director⭐
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
4,297
The thing is what a situation to be in- Bury and Macclesfield probably thought someone would come along. Probably there were people interested. The best all round is planning gets approved, stadium must be both started first and finished before the rest of the development, and then the chances of a buyer improve immeasurably.

As you say the fact we can't control who the buyer is in either circumstance is disquieting..

as per the list of clubs successfully manged by fans led organisations the thing that really frightens owners of football clubs are the fans led organisations...

RM got his green field site because of SUFC ... because of the political clout of the SUFC supporter base ...
 

* ORM *

Emma Bunton's No. 1 stalker, Adam Barretts No. 1 f
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
17,763
Location
Flying the flag for SUFC in Sai Kung, Hong Kong
as per the list of clubs successfully manged by fans led organisations the thing that really frightens owners of football clubs are the fans led organisation

RM got his green field site because of SUFC ... because of the political clout of the SUFC supporter base ...
That last sentence has got to be one of the funniest things I’ve read on the entire subject.

as for your first comment find me a non Phoenix fan led consortium that succeeded without a discernible plan and a stadium.
 

Rayleigh boy

Director⭐
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
4,297
That last sentence has got to be one of the funniest things I’ve read on the entire subject.

as for your first comment find me a non Phoenix fan led consortium that succeeded without a discernible plan and a stadium.


I don't understand the ridiculing of the thing about the green field site ...

Would anyone have got permission for this development without the involvement of a football stadium ?

Maybe the council hands out greenfield sites left right and centre ...........?
 

Rayleigh boy

Director⭐
Joined
Nov 1, 2006
Messages
4,297
of course Phoenix fan led consortiums need a plan ....

they also need fans who are prepared to put in a hell of a lot of effort.

As for the situation with a stadium, Roots Hall, the ownership of various companies, the possible outcomes of disputes and all that ........... I greatly appreciate all the fine thoughts and interpretations offered by very knowledgeable people on this board

BUT I politely suggest they are completely amateur guess work and a detailed legal view and report would need to be provided by a commercial law firm and would cost quite a few quid.

Until the fans are organised enough to commission such a report - we are all p+ssing in the wind ..
 

rigsby

Life President⭐
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
14,517
of course Phoenix fan led consortiums need a plan ....

they also need fans who are prepared to put in a hell of a lot of effort.

As for the situation with a stadium, Roots Hall, the ownership of various companies, the possible outcomes of disputes and all that ........... I greatly appreciate all the fine thoughts and interpretations offered by very knowledgeable people on this board

BUT I politely suggest they are completely amateur guess work and a detailed legal view and report would need to be provided by a commercial law firm and would cost quite a few quid.

Until the fans are organised enough to commission such a report - we are all p+ssing in the wind ..
I thought a Phoenix rises from the flames rather than starts the fire.
 

GNH

Fish House Ultras⭐
Joined
Oct 26, 2003
Messages
2,988
Location
Rayleigh
Okay @GNH I will bite.Simple question, SUFC go bust, What is a consortium going to buy?
A, the NFL club name and players, ?
B. Roots Hall which is a separate company and not fit for purpose (now or in 5yrs)?
C.Fossets Farm including B & L?

The point i was making is that we shouldn't just accept there is no one waiting to step in just becuae RM says so, he may well be right though.

A consortium is not going to buy a club that's gone bust, any takeover would surely be conducted to allow for RM to step aside before it got to that.

It was purely hypothetical but it's a question that needs answering
 
Top