The financial worth of the club, and the Trust 20%

None of this can be rushed, it seems almost purposely made to be confusing and I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of why there's a need to create GAS when we have a Trust, I have yet to read a satisfactory reason for the creation of such a group.

As has already been voiced and I'm sure that the Trust are being ultra cautious, but serious consideration must be given to the fact that the Trust are not simply taking on a 20% debt or a 20% stake in future debt, it's the future debt that concerns me the most.

We need to know how the club will be financed in the future, if it's to be funded by the football alone then there should be loud alarm bells ringing but, if there is some sort of guarantee given that will provide income from developments, i.e hotel and facilities or whatever, then it could be of great interest. However it does at this stage appear that no such offer exist and that the Akkeron Group intend to retain the profit from any such developments and with PCC owning Home Park you have to ask what exactly would the Trust be getting for its 20% share of what is at the end of the day, 14 shirts, a few balls and a large maintenance bill for Home Park.

The offer at this stage is so lacking substance to even allow consideration that it remains an "idea" rather then a serious offer. Hopefully the much voiced and promoted era of fan consultation will commence shortly.

GOB wrote:

None of this can be rushed, it seems almost purposely made to be confusing and I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of why there's a need to create GAS when we have a Trust, I have yet to read a satisfactory reason for the creation of such a group.

As has already been voiced and I'm sure that the Trust are being ultra cautious, but serious consideration must be given to the fact that the Trust are not simply taking on a 20% debt or a 20% stake in future debt, it's the future debt that concerns me the most.

We need to know how the club will be financed in the future, if it's to be funded by the football alone then there should be loud alarm bells ringing but, if there is some sort of guarantee given that will provide income from developments, i.e hotel and facilities or whatever, then it could be of great interest. However it does at this stage appear that no such offer exist and that the Akkeron Group intend to retain the profit from any such developments and with PCC owning Home Park you have to ask what exactly would the Trust be getting for its 20% share of what is at the end of the day, 14 shirts, a few balls and a large maintenance bill for Home Park.

The offer at this stage is so lacking substance to even allow consideration that it remains an "idea" rather then a serious offer. Hopefully the much voiced and promoted era of fan consultation will commence shortly.

Mr Brent has said that the development of the stand - on the Exeter Chiefs and Manchester City models - will include revenue streams for the club. I don't know what those clubs have but presumably it will include conference facilities, maybe a small hotel, improved bar & catering facilities. I just listened to his recent interview, in which he clearly said this - in that interview he also placed emphasis on the proven size of our fan-base in comparison to other clubs and that would also bring in money to enable the 55% of turn-over wage-cap to be used to our benefit. I am assuming also that one of the new board members, being an experienced expert in sport financing, will be working behind the scene on this subject - why else would he be there?

I agree none of this can be rushed. I continue to be impressed by his measured approach. I continue to be impressed by his long-term intentions. I am concerned that, not being a football man, he doesn't fully "get it" but that may actually be a good thing in that he brings a more dispassionate, innovative approach to the task.

On a much more minor, peripheral subject, I find the idea floated by others that a man, with the business experience that he has, with the board members that he has - (including a previous board member who will have lots to say about the game) - plus, presumably all the football advice he will have received from elsewhere, would place any meaningful weight on any possible advice he may be receiving from some strange bloke from an internet site and an ordinary fan turned president as frankly laughable. At best he will get a reinforced sense of the importance of a football club from them. If that's what they are achieving - good on them. If it feeds some people's paranoid conspiracy theories to think otherwise, that is sad.

As for the fan consultation, my understanding is that the Trust are about to enter in discussion with the owner on the detail of his 20% offer. I agree with you, GOB, I still don't understand what the roles of the GASB will be as distinct from the roles of the Trust. The only thought I had was that he sees the Trust as having a more central, strategic role as evidenced by his 20% offer. Presumably, via the Trust, we will find out soon.

knecht wrote:

GOB wrote:

None of this can be rushed, it seems almost purposely made to be confusing and I'm still trying to get my head around the idea of why there's a need to create GAS when we have a Trust, I have yet to read a satisfactory reason for the creation of such a group.

As has already been voiced and I'm sure that the Trust are being ultra cautious, but serious consideration must be given to the fact that the Trust are not simply taking on a 20% debt or a 20% stake in future debt, it's the future debt that concerns me the most.

We need to know how the club will be financed in the future, if it's to be funded by the football alone then there should be loud alarm bells ringing but, if there is some sort of guarantee given that will provide income from developments, i.e hotel and facilities or whatever, then it could be of great interest. However it does at this stage appear that no such offer exist and that the Akkeron Group intend to retain the profit from any such developments and with PCC owning Home Park you have to ask what exactly would the Trust be getting for its 20% share of what is at the end of the day, 14 shirts, a few balls and a large maintenance bill for Home Park.

The offer at this stage is so lacking substance to even allow consideration that it remains an "idea" rather then a serious offer. Hopefully the much voiced and promoted era of fan consultation will commence shortly.

Mr Brent has said that the development of the stand - on the Exeter Chiefs and Manchester City models - will include revenue streams for the club. I don't know what those clubs have but presumably it will include conference facilities, maybe a small hotel, improved bar & catering facilities. I just listened to his recent interview, in which he clearly said this - in that interview he also placed emphasis on the proven size of our fan-base in comparison to other clubs and that would also bring in money to enable the 55% of turn-over wage-cap to be used to our benefit. I am assuming also that one of the new board members, being an experienced expert in sport financing, will be working behind the scene on this subject - why else would he be there?

I agree none of this can be rushed. I continue to be impressed by his measured approach. I continue to be impressed by his long-term intentions. I am concerned that, not being a football man, he doesn't fully "get it" but that may actually be a good thing in that he brings a more dispassionate, innovative approach to the task.

On a much more minor, peripheral subject, I find the idea floated by others that a man, with the business experience that he has, with the board members that he has - (including a previous board member who will have lots to say about the game) - plus, presumably all the football advice he will have received from elsewhere, would place any meaningful weight on any possible advice he may be receiving from some strange bloke from an internet site and an ordinary fan turned president as frankly laughable. At best he will get a reinforced sense of the importance of a football club from them. If that's what they are achieving - good on them. If it feeds some people's paranoid conspiracy theories to think otherwise, that is sad.

As for the fan consultation, my understanding is that the Trust are about to enter in discussion with the owner on the detail of his 20% offer. I agree with you, GOB, I still don't understand what the roles of the GASB will be as distinct from the roles of the Trust. The only thought I had was that he sees the Trust as having a more central, strategic role as evidenced by his 20% offer. Presumably, via the Trust, we will find out soon.

You're right Knecht, after watching the BBC interview I have gained a little more insight into the proposed ideas of financing and I have to agree that it sounds more promising, but I still have concerns regarding the financing of the Grandstand as I posted on another thread. Who finances the building of the Grandstand etc? Would the Trust be left with a potential 20% responsibility of any club default of any loan etc? Will the Grandstand be of at least Championship proportion? etc - As you say, there's much to be discussed.

I hope you're right regarding the areas where Brent is gaining his advice and I think you probably are considering Brent's background. Even so, I understand the concern that has been voiced regarding the characters concerned but I suspect it was simply a mistake that was made regarding the choosing of characters that were believed would assist a PR stunt at the time and is now difficult to shrug off.

GOB wrote:

........... but I still have concerns regarding the financing of the Grandstand as I posted on another thread. Who finances the building of the Grandstand etc? Would the Trust be left with a potential 20% responsibility of any club default of any loan etc? Will the Grandstand be of at least Championship proportion? etc - As you say, there's much to be discussed.

........

I agree. That's the sort of detail that The Trust will need to discover. To coin a phrase, "Trust in Woz"*.

*(other board members are also available)

Those are the types of issues that we clearly need to be very aware of.

We are expecting to get more details in the next couple of weeks. A meeting has been pencilled in for the first week in March, possibly as early as the end of next week.

Obviously it's tricky to get specific advice until more details are known, but we have already some initial feedback from SD and a lawyer. Gareth is also speaking to other Trusts, including Swansea.