As the most used BWFC fan site, we'd like to gauge opinion

I have my own business and sole director - no one ever told me I was breaking some sort of law

All I'm suggesting is that it is not exactly good corporate governance to run a company with a Board of 1 (i.e. KA), contrary to Company Law and without a Finance director. Moreover, do we know exactly what has been settled with Blumarble?

Do we know exactly what has been settled with the EFL?

I am prepared to give the guy the benefit of the doubt but his history with Vantis etc goes before him.

Could you suggest an alternative to KA ?

2003

 

You aren't so far as I can see

 

But this is repeated so often by shortland Smurf and co that I'm starting to think theres something we are missing

Edited November 3, 20178 yr by Casino

When it comes to ST and KA I sit somewhere in the middle. But have the 'watch this space' types actually got any info. I could believe it but nothing ever gets said.

Because the  "space to watch" is empty

I understand it perfectly.

 

They want the club to go tits up so they can get their hands on it and play football manager for real.

 

They were gutted when Anderson saved the day and have done nowt but make his life as difficult as possible ever since.

Who wants the club to go tits up? Who was gutted when KA saved the club, name names? No one from the Trust as far as I can see has made his life difficult, name 1 thing that has made his life difficult? Please don't say the ACV as that makes no difference whatsoever despite Kens insistence. You have to actually post some facts and not just believe KA spin unconditionally.

 

Don't think you have any actual facts just believing Kens rhetoric, you have to cut through his bullshit. I'm a fan of what Ken has done but can see quite clearly there is a dividing line between what he says and the truth on certain matters.

 

My view is Ken wants complete control to maximise his profit for himself and the likes of the Trust just just get in the way of him reaping maximum reward for himself and not necessarily for the good of BWFC, the Trust gives us a little bit of insurance not a lot but at least it's something, those who Trust Ken unconditionally better get used to being disappointed and in my opinion are living in cloud cuckoo land.

Edited November 3, 20178 yr by Mounts Kipper

On the last para, you pretty much agree that the mistrust reduce the value of the club

 

How can that be beneficial

On the last para, you pretty much agree that the mistrust reduce the value of the club

 

How can that be beneficial

As much as I support Ken I don't want him to milk BWFC, maybe your happy if he does? Thankfully there are many fans that think the opposite to you and are prepared to take the flak to protect the club and I salute those fans.

Edited November 3, 20178 yr by Mounts Kipper

Aye thankfully they are taking the flak on my behalf

 

Well fcuking done them

Aye thankfully they are taking the flak on my behalf

 

Well fcuking done them

Good job they are because you are wrong if you unconditionally back Ken and In my opinion you are in the minority if you do.

Edited November 3, 20178 yr by Mounts Kipper

The oxygen that feeds them is their lies and spreading of fear

 

Fear built on the thinnest of ice

 

Give me some evidence and I'll back em

 

But it's all about 'we know better than you, just wait and see'

 

Utter bollocks

The oxygen that feeds them is their lies and spreading of fear

 

Fear built on the thinnest of ice

 

Give me some evidence and I'll back em

 

But it's all about 'we know better than you, just wait and see'

 

Utter bollocks

I had you down as more intelligent than to believe every word out of Kens gob, looks like I was wrong. You can unconditionally support him I'm happy that there is a trust in place that can challenge him if necessary, shame wasn't in place through Eddies reign. Ken gets my support but given his past record it'll be never unconditionally.

Edited November 3, 20178 yr by Mounts Kipper

I had you down as more intelligent than to believe every word out of Kens gob, looks like I was wrong. You can unconditionally support him I'm happy that there is a trust in place that can challenge him if necessary, shame wasn't in place through Eddies reign. Ken gets my support but given his past record it'll be never unconditionally.

 

Blackpool fans have a ST - how have they protected their club from the Oyston's?

 

Coventry fans have a ST - how have they protected their club from having no 'home' ground next season?

 

United fans have a ST - have they got rid of the hated Glaziers yet?

 

 

You really need to give your head a good shaking if you truly believe an ST can protect any club from a determined owner.

 

ST's are like Community Support Officers - the 'plastic policemen' - the ones that many people thought were a good idea at the time but in reality have no power to do anything much - apart from strut around and act big.

 

 

 

As for one of your earlier comments today asking who in the ST wanted to own the club...

 

...the Steering Group featuring Smith (aka Josh8), Izza and Rigby did - three of the four current ST Board Members!

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35437564

 

http://www.bwfcst.co.uk/update-from-the-bwfc-supporters-trust-bwfcst-steering-group/

 

Seeing that this took place only last year that you must have some short term memory issues?

 

If so, my condolences.

Who wants the club to go tits up? Who was gutted when KA saved the club, name names? No one from the Trust as far as I can see has made his life difficult, name 1 thing that has made his life difficult? Please don't say the ACV as that makes no difference whatsoever despite Kens insistence. You have to actually post some facts and not just believe KA spin unconditionally.

 

Don't think you have any actual facts just believing Kens rhetoric, you have to cut through his bullshit. I'm a fan of what Ken has done but can see quite clearly there is a dividing line between what he says and the truth on certain matters.

 

My view is Ken wants complete control to maximise his profit for himself and the likes of the Trust just just get in the way of him reaping maximum reward for himself and not necessarily for the good of BWFC, the Trust gives us a little bit of insurance not a lot but at least it's something, those who Trust Ken unconditionally better get used to being disappointed and in my opinion are living in cloud cuckoo land.

 

 

Don't say the ACV? Why the fuck not?

 

The facts.

 

• He wants to sell the club
• The stadium is part of the club.

 

Stick an ACV on the stadium and it adds an an unnecessary complication to the whole process of selling the club.

 

They wanted to buy the club. Ken did and they've done nowt but piss and whine since.

Edited November 4, 20178 yr by mickbrown

I'm a simpleton so would you point me to the law that states we need more than one director

 

If you don't or can't you are signing off

To be fair, Josh is the sole director (including a number of defunct companies.) Surely a ST Board member wouldn't be breaking the law ?

Or is it only a law when Smurf says so ?

Blackpool fans have a ST - how have they protected their club from the Oyston's?

 

Coventry fans have a ST - how have they protected their club from having no 'home' ground next season?

 

United fans have a ST - have they got rid of the hated Glaziers yet?

 

 

You really need to give your head a good shaking if you truly believe an ST can protect any club from a determined owner.

 

ST's are like Community Support Officers - the 'plastic policemen' - the ones that many people thought were a good idea at the time but in reality have no power to do anything much - apart from strut around and act big.

 

 

 

As for one of your earlier comments today asking who in the ST wanted to own the club...

 

...the Steering Group featuring Smith (aka Josh8), Izza and Rigby did - three of the four current ST Board Members!

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35437564

 

http://www.bwfcst.co.uk/update-from-the-bwfc-supporters-trust-bwfcst-steering-group/

 

Seeing that this took place only last year that you must have some short term memory issues?

 

If so, my condolences.

You are right Sluffy...some people do have short memories...or suffer selectivereading disorder... 

 

 

The trust has never expressed an interest to buy the club, and I have never stated anything like that to anybody either on twitter or privately...lets be realistic here...the trust could never raise the kind of money needed to run a club like ours

 

What really happened was the trust was approached by a local Consortium who wanted to bring together a number of High net-worth individuals, along with a couple of institutions to make a local community bid for the club,(on a similar lines to the Portsmouth model)  which would allow supporters to raise capital through the ST and purchase a stake in this Model... like Swansea, Portsmouth, Wimbledon and many other clubs... 

 

Don't forget, the vultures where circling as the club was on its knees... the Judge in the winding up proceeding had run out of patience with the club and HMRC where confident that we where going to be the example to all other clubs throughout the country and be the first since Accrington Stanley to be liquidated

 

After meeting the High-networths, the institution (who I'm not at liberty to name, but can assure you they where serious and pledged big money) and the consortium, it was decided that the community partnership would be led by the ST,

 

I might point out here, the inclusion of the Supporters Trust was actually a condition of the 2 main institutions and as such it was decided that the ST seek preferred bidder status, the problem we had was that we where prevented from disclosing the full facts surrounding this, which left us open to the ridicule we received and the perception that the ST wanted to own or run the club, this was never on the cards... we would merely have had a small stake in our club, which is something I think all supporters should have and is the ultimate objective of all ST's..(as set out in the ST model rules).

 

It was also stated to Trevor Birch that due to the amount of debt left in the club, this model could only ever go forward if the club went into Administration, as  Eddie was adamant he wasn't going to allow the club to go into Admin, our involvement and perceived owner ship bid came to an end...

 

 

Was the community partnership a good idea ?.... I think so.

 

Where we naive ...?    yes

 

Was Preferred bidder status a good idea...?    I don't think so

 

Does the trust have any ambitions of running or owning the club...?  definitely not

 

Would the trust like a stake in the club...?    definitely

Edited November 4, 20178 yr by josh8

I had you down as more intelligent than to believe every word out of Kens gob, looks like I was wrong. You can unconditionally support him I'm happy that there is a trust in place that can challenge him if necessary, shame wasn't in place through Eddies reign. Ken gets my support but given his past record it'll be never unconditionally.

What would the trust have done during Eddies reign to stop us ending in the shit like we did?

 

Stopped him from pumping millions into the club??

What would the trust have done during Eddies reign to stop us ending in the shit like we did?

 

Stopped him from pumping millions into the club??

“No Eddie, don’t sign Anelka... we might be in financial trouble in a few years if you do.”

Advised Eddie Davies to keep money to pay the tax bill rather than sign Ben Amos ?

A company has a requirement to comply with its Articles of Association. In the Club's case, the Articles state that there must be a minimum of two directors.

Advised Eddie Davies to keep money to pay the tax bill rather than sign Ben Amos ?

Hahaha. You can't say that about the saviour

A company has a requirement to comply with its Articles of Association. In the Club's case, the Articles state that there must be a minimum of two directors.

Hardly the crime of the century but at least you've come back with something

 

What is the procedure for changing the articles and how much notice need be given

 

Is it possible there is a delay in a change being public

 

Let's not forget the twitterati usual suspects told us Anderson hadn't increased his shareholding and we hadn't submitted accounts just cos it wasn't on the internet

 

This 'breaking the law' is obviously very serious as can be seen by the number of times the club have been in court defending this heinous crime

 

Or not

The Articles of Association also make provision for the event in which the club has a sole director.

A company has a requirement to comply with its Articles of Association. In the Club's case, the Articles state that there must be a minimum of two directors.

Except where, in the case of the number of directors being reduced below this minimum number, the remaining directors can act for the purpose of filling up vacancies to fulfill their number.

There is no time limit put upon this.

 

Therefore the articles are still being adhered to.

 

However if you are a member, feel welcome to call a general meeting, and overrule Kens 95% of voting power to put your own person on the board.

A company has a requirement to comply with its Articles of Association. In the Club's case, the Articles state that there must be a minimum of two directors.

You just seem determined to find fault with KA.

 

Like most people I am wary of his involvement but can see a lot more positives than negatives.

 

If you have a viable alternative please put it forward if not surely you can see all your sniping is not helpful ?

 

Serious question do you think there is more dodgy stuff going at the club than when Sam was here ? Do you think anything dodgy goes on at other clubs.

 

I appreciate you have a big secret about the some future news but for those of us less itk can we just have a view on the last 12 months. How would you rate him out of ten.