Question Does RM actually put any money into SUFC ?

[Cricko]

Again, makes no sense.

Why go through all of that if all he ever wanted was us gone.

If he was just out to get rid of us and get the prize it would be very easy. Administration, no investment in the team so we drop out of the league. Not 5 years of struggle getting into 10m+ debt eating away all of his profits.

You are missing the point..RH has a covenant on it that we have to have a new ground before anything happens to it. He cannot just let us go to the wall.Somebody else would step in before SUFC died if he went tits up.

 

[Jam_Man]

You are missing the point..RH has a covenant on it that we have to have a new ground before anything happens to it. He cannot just let us go to the wall.Somebody else would step in before SUFC died if he went tits up.

Yeah thats the point I'm making, did you meant to reply to OOA?

OAA has made the point that he thinks Ron's plan was just for houses on Roots Hall and us to be gone, even as little as I think of Ron and the last 5 years I just dont see how that is possible.

 

[Shrimper51]

You are missing the point..RH has a covenant on it that we have to have a new ground before anything happens to it. He cannot just let us go to the wall.Somebody else would step in before SUFC died if he went tits up.

But aren't you missing the point the tax man went for liquidation. No football club, no covenant.

 

[Cricko]

But aren't you missing the point the tax man went for liquidation. No football club, no covenant.

Exactly that is why RM cannot let us go..He needs us as much as he thinks we need him.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Again, makes no sense.

Why go through all of that if all he ever wanted was us gone.

If he was just out to get rid of us and get the prize it would be very easy. Administration, no investment in the team so we drop out of the league. Not 5 years of struggle getting into 10m+ debt eating away all of his profits.

As Cricko points out there is the covenant. Exactly what is acceptable as rehoming the club is open for debate.

Let me ask you this, with a buyer / backer as huge as Sainsbury's why do you think no progress has been made. My contacts at Sainsbury say it was always meant to be a joint venture with Sainsbury's having a very active part in building the new stadium, now whether that means financially or otherwise they will not expand on but it seems very strange that things have stalled again after they advanced £5M, my money is on not wanting to continue doing business with RM but wtf do I know.

 

[Jam_Man]

As Cricko points out there is the covenant. Exactly what is acceptable as rehoming the club is open for debate.

Let me ask you this, with a buyer / backer as huge as Sainsbury's why do you think no progress has been made. My contacts at Sainsbury say it was always meant to be a joint venture with Sainsbury's having a very active part in building the new stadium, now whether that means financially or otherwise they will not expand on but it seems very strange that things have stalled again after they advanced £5M, my money is on not wanting to continue doing business with RM but wtf do I know.

Yes the Covenant is another thing that makes your theory not make sense, and why I said earlier that planning permission wouldnt be granted.

As for Sainsbury, my understanding is this, their contribution was not going to pay for the new stadium in full (as you say its a joint venture) so we had to obtain further financing. This is backed up by the fact that Sainsbury are (were) to pay for 3 sides of the stadium and we then had to get plans approved again so that we could phase the build. We could then at least get that part built with their contribution.
Since then and due to the delays that we created by not being able to finance the remaining 25% policies internally within Sainsbury may have changed and they may not actually want to continue. This may be why things are now stalled.Time will tell on that, but if Sainsbury really have changed their minds then the stadium is dead in the water and Ron still wont get to build on Roots Hall.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Yes the Covenant is another thing that makes your theory not make sense, and why I said earlier that planning permission wouldnt be granted.

As for Sainsbury, my understanding is this, their contribution was not going to pay for the new stadium in full (as you say its a joint venture) so we had to obtain further financing. This is backed up by the fact that Sainsbury are (were) to pay for 3 sides of the stadium and we then had to get plans re-agreed so that we could phase the build. We could then at least get that part built with their contribution.
Since then and due to the delays that we created by not being able to finance the remaining 25% policies internally within Sainsbury may have changed and they may not actually want to continue. This may be why things are now stalled.Time will tell on that, but if Sainsbury really have changed their minds then the stadium is dead in the water and Ron still wont get to build on Roots Hall.

Yes he can if he re-homes us, what exactly does the covenant say ?

 

[Cricko]

It's a good point , as you say Sainsburys are paying for the 3 sided thing and if they are going to continue with RH what on earth is stopping them? That is the question we all want the answer to.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Also how water tight is the covenant ? ie. If RM was to say ok if we don't ground share and you let me build on Roots Hall the club will cease to exist, your choice, amend / scrap the covenant or the club goes under, if it came to that is it possible ? Please don't say he could have done that already, just because he hasn't doesn't mean it isn't an option.

 

[Jam_Man]

Yes he can if he re-homes us, what exactly does the covenant say ?

It wont include ground sharing if thats the road you are about to turn into...

Also how water tight is the covenant ? ie. If RM was to say ok if we don't ground share and you let me build on Roots Hall the club will cease to exist, your choice, amend / scrap the covenant or the club goes under, if it came to that is it possible ? Please don't say he could have done that already, just because he hasn't doesn't mean it isn't an option.

Even if that's somehow an option(unlikely) it still wouldn't make sense that was Ron's plan from the beginning.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

It wont include ground sharing if thats the road you are about to turn into...



Even if that's somehow an option(unlikely) it still wouldn't make sense that was Ron's plan from the beginning.

Really ? It's called wearing people down, he could now say "I tried my best to deliver the new stadium", remember we are dealing with an egomaniac here !!!

 

[Jam_Man]

It's a good point , as you say Sainsburys are paying for the 3 sided thing and if they are going to continue with RH what on earth is stopping them? That is the question we all want the answer to.

Indeed, the fact Sainsbury aren't driving forward the part that they can do to get us off of Roots Hall is the bit that does give legs to the theory they have a change in policy with new stores and may be considering cutting their losses.

 

[Jam_Man]

Really ? It's called wearing people down, he could now say "I tried my best to deliver the new stadium", remember we are dealing with an egomaniac here !!!

Why would he bother having to wear anyone down, just dont invest in the team and let us slip into the conference like Wrexham did.

That Covenant would make even less sense for a club in the conference.

There is no logic or reason to your theory.

Either he wants us dead and buried, or he doesnt. Why try to get us promoted and sack managers for failing to get promotion if he doesnt want us to exist.

 

[RHB]

I will be very very grateful when the season gets underway and we debate the merits of our football again. Don't get me wrong, it's not that I don't care about the well being of the club, I do. But I can't materially change anything that is going on (or not going on) within SUFC at the moment, neither can I add anything to this debate that will be seen as new info or facts and this, and stuff like it is doing my head in. I feel better now!

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Why would he bother having to wear anyone down, just dont invest in the team and let us slip into the conference like Wrexham did.

That Covenant would make even less sense for a club in the conference.

There is no logic or reason to your theory.

Either he wants us dead and buried, or he doesnt. Why try to get us promoted and sack managers for failing to get promotion if he doesnt want us to exist.

Because now he can say he tried to take the club forward and the only option is to move from RH, a very different scenario to deliberately running it into the ground. Never under estimate a cunning fox !!!

 

[Jam_Man]

Because now he can say he tried to take the club forward and the only option is to move from RH, a very different scenario to deliberately running it into the ground. Never under estimate a cunning fox !!!

So over the past 7 years, with all the planning required for Fossetts, the year or more of working getting plans drawn up and architects to design a bespoke stadium, the months and months of work to get that agreed with the councils, to get Sainsbury to agree to buy the ground, to then change the plans and have months more work, to get Sainsbury to agree to build the 3 sided stadium. The over spending of the squad to stay and get back into the Championship (Peter Clark cost a million dont you know), accruing 10 million pounds of debt in the period, all of this was just to make it look like he "at least tried"?

I think you are just trying to bend reality to fit into your scenario. :smile:

Ron has made a mess of the whole situation and at the moment it looks very uncertain, but I fully believe that's a result of inability to deliver what he started out to do and all the facts I've posted back that up.

If you wish to create a conspiracy theory that it was all intentional and he did all that just to hide his evil scheme than that then that's your prerogative, but personally I have enough to be disappointed in what's happened already.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

So over the past 7 years, with all the planning required for Fossetts, the year or more of working getting plans drawn up and architects to design a bespoke stadium, the months and months of work to get that agreed with the councils, to get Sainsbury to agree to buy the ground, to then change the plans and have months more work, to get Sainsbury to agree to build the 3 sided stadium. The over spending of the squad to stay and get back into the Championship (Peter Clark cost a million dont you know), accruing 10 million pounds of debt in the period, all of this was just to make it look like he "at least tried"?

I think you are just trying to bend reality to fit into your scenario. :smile:

Ron has made a mess of the whole situation and at the moment it looks very uncertain, but I fully believe that's a result of inability to deliver what he started out to do and all the facts I've posted back that up.

If you wish to create a conspiracy theory that it was all intentional and he did all that just to hide his evil scheme than that then that's your prerogative, but personally I have enough to be disappointed in what's happened already.

I think he was rather shocked that a rookie manager took us to the Championship so quickly and we hardly pushed the boat out with signings hence we didn't last long.

 

[Jam_Man]

I think he was rather shocked that a rookie manager took us to the Championship so quickly and we hardly pushed the boat out with signings hence we didn't last long.

Yes that's certainly the case, but when it happened we started throwing big contracts out to the likes of Peter Clarke and Adam Barrett and overspent trying to get back into the Championship which resulted in that massive tax debt even after selling Eastwood for 1.5 million

We also spent a fair bit of money on the likes of Foran/Billy Paynter/James Walker that was money down the drain.

 

[ooh-andy-ansah]

Yes that's certainly the case, but when it happened we started throwing big contracts out to the likes of Peter Clarke and Adam Barrett and overspent trying to get back into the Championship which resulted in that massive tax debt even after selling Eastwood for 1.5 million

We also spent a fair bit of money on the likes of Billy Paynter/James Walker that was money down the drain.

To be fair Paynter has somehow convinced a lot of managers to sign him, quite an achievement

 

[spoons]

Can we have another poll answer?

I suggest:

"None of us really know the truth about the clubs finances as we are not privy to the information therefore we just continue to support our club in the best way we can. Therefore asking questions that hardly anyone knows the true answers to is pointless and only serves to be the catalyst of a continual and circular debate, which in-turn divides supporters when in fact we should all be united for one cause - To support and help drive success of the club we all love, the club that is Southend United".

Spot on but you won't stop the dross posters on here:smile: