#NeverAgain - Questions for the Fans Forum

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

As confirmed in our last statement, the Never Again group agreed to submit in writing and in advance the questions they wanted to raise at the Fans Forum on Saturday 24th September, to give the Board members time to respond. Members of the group will be attending the meeting. These are the questions:-

Q1
If the Club decides to pay for the freehold purchase by issuing new shares to the current board, will that change the balance of ownership between James Brent, Simon Hallett and Tony Wrathall? Would it lead to a revaluation of the Home Park stadium and a consequent enhanced value to the individual shareholders? Would each of those shareholders also be able to sell his stake on, without agreement from the others?

Q2
In the multi-part response to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], it was suggested that private ownership of Home Park was much more likely to lead to its long-delayed development. But there is no current development plan or timeline for the new grandstand on the table for the fans to review. The previous HHP plan didn’t depend on private ownership of the stadium, but you still spent a great deal of time and resource on it, ultimately agreeing to a higher rent and longer lease with the Council.

How can you prove that private ownership will make any difference to the current development limbo? Meanwhile, several other clubs at our level (Northampton, Peterborough, Crawley and Stevenage) have delivered improved football stadia in partnership with their councils and third parties, without buying their publicly owned freehold. Have there been any recent discussions with the City Council to do the same?

Q3
If the football club does purchase Home Park’s freehold, then the ground can be reunited with the adjoining and separately owned Higher Home Park land, which houses the Football Club’s administrative offices, club shop and external hospitality facilities.

Obviously, this will enhance the asset value of the Football Club and its shareholders immediately, which has some obvious benefits, but also some risks. Can you reassure the supporters that there is no intention to separate the Home Park stadium from the Football Club into different companies with potentially different owners?

If any of you have your own questions to ask, you have until 5pm on Wednesday September 21st to submit them, by email to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], writing ‘Fans’ Forum Question’ in the subject box

Hallett - what did you do during the administration period to help the staff who weren't getting paid?

Jones - will you be resigning like you did last time when the club wanted to buy the ground?

Wrathall - what lessons have you learnt from the last time you were trusted with making decisions that affect the future of the club?

Brent - no questions

The other guys - do you actually exist?

Will the board/shareholders charge the football club rent for use of the stadium?

In their statement on Tuesday August 30th, in response to [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.], the club had this to say about rents payable:-

Q6: Is PAFC buying the freehold the same as James Brent buying the freehold?

A6: No, the benefits of ownership (described below) go to PAFC. James Brent is currently the majority shareholder in PAFC, but there are also significant minority investors. If PAFC buys the freehold, no rent will be payable to James Brent or, indeed, to anyone.

Q11: Would the repurchase of the stadium be solely to save rent?

A11: No. The Board believes that this alone is a persuasive argument but it is not the only one. The stadium needs investment, most obviously in the form of a new grandstand. It is much easier to justify investment in your own property, than one owned by a third party.

Q‎12: How much has PAFC been paying to rent the offices, classrooms, shop and car-park at Higher Home Park?

A12: No rent, or other payments, has been paid to anyone for any of these assets other than rent previously paid to a third party for the rent of Portakabins. No rent, or other payments, is contemplated.

Read more at [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Cheers.

Sorry john but i dont believe them.........

No-one is asking anyone to believe anything.

If the last few years has taught us anything, it is that evidence is required to support fine words.

And the directors of the club, just like any other privately owned business will ultimately do whatever they want.

But that is not to say we shouldn't be watchful of our club. A football club is a little different to any other privately owned business, in that it depends on the fans for revenue. Almost exclusively so.

I'd presumed that the previously sold HHP area was gone for good. Is there any realistic prospect of it reverting to the "club's" ownership.

Elias wrote:

Sorry john but i dont believe them.........

Absolutely likewise. Brents been shown to be inherently devious to date in everything he's touched

Charlie Wood wrote:

I'd presumed that the previously sold HHP area was gone for good. Is there any realistic prospect of it reverting to the "club's" ownership.

When the council loaned the club £800,000, it was secured against the HHP land which was valued at £400,000 when it got transferred over from club to HHP.

Cerbera wrote:

And the directors of the club, just like any other privately owned business will ultimately do whatever they want.

But that is not to say we shouldn't be watchful of our club. A football club is a little different to any other privately owned business, in that it depends on the fans for revenue. Almost exclusively so.

Depends where you are in the food chain, at Manchester United only a quarter of its £515 million income last year came from match day revenue. Half of it came from its commercial activities from suppliers such as Nissin Foods Group, Official Global Noodle Partner of Manchester United.

We on the other hand negotiated a 3 year deal with Ginsters worth £150,000 last summer.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Hallett - what did you do during the administration period to help the staff who weren't getting paid?

Jones - will you be resigning like you did last time when the club wanted to buy the ground?

Wrathall - what lessons have you learnt from the last time you were trusted with making decisions that affect the future of the club?

Brent - no questions

The other guys - do you actually exist?

here!! here!!...well said frank

harvetheslayer wrote:

Elias wrote:

Sorry john but i dont believe them.........

 Absolutely likewise. Brents been shown to be inherently devious to date in everything he's touched

same here dont believe a F#@King word they say specially from a ex merchant banker

Hugh Watt wrote:

Cerbera wrote:

And the directors of the club, just like any other privately owned business will ultimately do whatever they want.

But that is not to say we shouldn't be watchful of our club. A football club is a little different to any other privately owned business, in that it depends on the fans for revenue. Almost exclusively so.

Depends where you are in the food chain, at Manchester United only a quarter of its £515 million income last year came from match day revenue. Half of it came from its commercial activities from suppliers such as Nissin Foods Group, Official Global Noodle Partner of Manchester United.

We on the other hand negotiated a 3 year deal with Ginsters worth £150,000 last summer.

Yes, sorry. Completely agree. Didn't make myself clear. A L2 club depends on its fans for most of its revenue. Proportionately that is mostly gate money and sales of replica kit, etc. A global entity like Man U has companies queuing up to be associated.

Two questions I just emailed to the club :



1. The Green Taverners over the last five years have given money to the club and it is understood this debt has to be repaid in either cash or 'kind'.

What is the current amount owed to the GT's and what is the plan to repay them? What are the tax consequences of the arrangement?


2. Who were the five winners of the Peter Hartley 'Wembley Pilgrimage' giveaway, what 'sacrifice' did they make to make them the winners, and what was the prize they won?

What the hell has got into Andy S on Pasoti over the venue change thread.....??  Telling Graham Clark to get his head out of his arse !!
Clear reason why not to post when you're pissed

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

IJN wrote:

I am a trifle confused as Bob Foale, Chairman of the AFT is a under signatory of NAG.

Still, they can ask their questions on Saturday and we can all hear what the Board Members have to say.

Heres the statement from the ATD from last week.

Trust wrote:

The AFT Board, therefore, is in principle in favour of Home Park remaining in Council ownership

Thats one less thing he can be "a trifle confused about"

harvetheslayer wrote:

What the hell has got into Andy S on Pasoti over the venue change thread.....??  Telling Graham Clark to get his head out of his arse !!
Clear reason why not to post when you're pissed

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Don't fink ee's pissed................More a case of a typically fick janner, wiv a whiff of the directors' box in his snout.

And of course someone else has got all moralistic on that thread.

I'm restricted and can't post on that board.
Because of my 'past posting history'.

BBC1 wrote:

And of course someone else has got all moralistic on that thread.

I'm restricted and can't post on that board.
Because of my 'past posting history'.

Dont worry Bhey, I've done five years of my six hundred year ban from Knobbers site!

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Hallett - what did you do during the administration period to help the staff who weren't getting paid?

Jones - will you be resigning like you did last time when the club wanted to buy the ground?

Wrathall - what lessons have you learnt from the last time you were trusted with making decisions that affect the future of the club?

Brent - no questions

The other guys - do you actually exist?

what the hell do they do? in fact that can be a quesyion too from me

Wot did Hallet do during the wor? did'nt see him in the trenches with Private xthrobber.

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

BBC1 wrote:

And of course someone else has got all moralistic on that thread.

I'm restricted and can't post on that board.
Because of my 'past posting history'.

Dont worry Bhey, I've done five years of my six hundred year ban from Knobbers site!

Oh i'm not worrying.
I spend (or have spent) too much time wasting my time on certain social media sites.
That is all changing.

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Wot did Hallet do during the wor? did'nt see him in the trenches with Private xthrobber.

He was 'busy' elsewhere he says.........