I posted this on the 606 board earlier today, but it was suggested that it might be worth a new thread. I do not subscribe to the on-line Times, so cannot check this out. It was posted today by a member of WML. "The Times reports this morning (in the Business Pages) that the club will run out of money in two weeks unless Ashcroft dips his hand into his pocket or the takeover goes through. It also describes as a "mystery" where Thomas & Bassini's money for the takeover is coming from." I have wondered how we would manage without any player sales in January, but then we have been told, that no club bid for any of them. I am also surprised that the WO has not done any follow up to their interview with Bassini. Unless they have been told to lay off by the club, or Bassini himself, why have they not provided even a small piece on the proposed takeover?
Bazini money I reckon is a non starter(although i would love to be wrong), am hoping this is more sensational journalism,although am mightily worried its from the times business section! Player sales in Jan I thought at the time it was strong management hanging on to our on field assets, now I`m not so sure, yet apparently from RM`s latest podcast stuart Timperly and the management are happy with the way the takeover is going!!! with a guy who changes his name after a bankruptcy 3 or 4 yrs ago!!!!!!! I must admit to being very confused but in GT we trust.
I was under the impression that the finances were good until the summer. If we had sold any players in January that would have been a bonus.
I don't believe we can suddenly have run out of money - we have not committed any new unexpected funds recently - smacks more of soemone trying to leak insolvency rumours to help a failing deal
As far as I remember, the money raised from the bond issue did not give the club a great deal of extra cash, and not enough to see us through the season. Additional funds would still be required. When in December it came out that a possible takeover was in the offing and then no players were sold, it led me to think that maybe the club believed that money would be available before very long and maybe we should look to keep the team together as it was performing so well at that time. Reading tonight about Plymouth and their troubles brings it home to you that the days of people throwing some money at a lower league club have well and truly gone. Peter Ridsdale is an extremely wealthy man, yet will do nothing there to see that the players get paid. Let the club suffer the indignity of administration, then hope to pick up a bargain, maybe not himself but someone who is touch with the situation.
I think our outgoings still exceed our revenues, not taking into account player trading. Since we have not sold any players recently, I would not be surprised to hear that we need to borrow more for working capital to get us through to the summer--will Ashcroft provide it? If it means keeping the club going till player sales or a takeover or new investors come to the rescue, why not? No-one would gain if the club failed financially at this moment, mid-season. The big decisions will have to be made in the summer, when the bonds have to be repaid/rolled over, and if a takeover has not been achieved. The Bazini takeover looks (to us outsiders) like a disaster waiting to happen; what we must hope is that Ashcrofts' eagerness to get rid of his investment in Watford is tempered by his willingness to find the "right" buyer.
There are so many ifs and buts surrounding the club at the moment, things we can only speculate about with the lack of hard information. Certainly the interview given to the WO raised more questions than it answered, and there has not been anything since. Still in the middle of March the half year accounts should be published and we may get a better idea then at how well we have managed to trade this season.
I do agree that the WO is letting us down somewhat on the takeover topic. If the paper has been asked to "be quiet" by the club, or by the odd couple purportedly planning the takeover , then it should not comply. It should be doing a proper journalistic job of finding out what is going on and reporting it. The club could not object--GT of all people knows that--and it is the least the fans expect. Sure, they carried an "exclusive" interview with Mr B. but that seemed more arranged to serve his purposes than being the result of a journalistic coup--- but the fellow was so naive in what he said that it backfired on him. Nevertheless, Frank Smith let him off the hook very easily. If these people are still in the picture as contenders for ownership of the club, then we have a legitimate interest in knowing a lot more about them. The WO should be leading on this story. Why the reluctance?
I cannot believe that Ollie would have been pleased with Frank Smith. A chance to put some good questions seems to have been lost. Respect the SE rules by all means, listen to what the board say about breaching confidential information, but find things out and put them in a format that will give some idea of what is happening. Sorry Frank, I think you could try harder.
I agree - I cannot believe that the Watty Obs has just dropped the whole story. It used to publish "fair" stories even if it did upset the club. Now it seems that they are just an extension of the propaganda arm of the club - shame on them
seems to have been a serious amount of nothing coming from the club and the wobby about loanees in/out ,takeovers or anything important!
If MM and SD have signed new 3 year contracts............they wouldnt have done that if the club was going tits up next week
All is way to quiet to be normal journalism so yes I reckon theres a gagging order in place but what its covering your guess is good as mine. Like you say Norway signing new contracts isn't something that would be offered by the board if we were not able to honour them next week!!! If we're on the business plan either the bank, Fransen or Ashcroft should be happy to forward the cashflow required (if thats the case) as it will be sound business.
