Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

Bristol Rovers Dustbin Thread


Recommended Posts

On 12/10/2020 at 21:07, Rudolf Hucker said:

The article was written on 23 June 2020 by James Piercy, the Post’s sports editor and claims to have received 189K ‘likes’, unless I’m reading it incorrectly. It seems that delusion is not confined to the 15ers. 
 

The article states “It’s impossible to pinpoint exactly when a deal will be "done" in the formal business sense but a more realistic timeline would appear August, at the earliest.” thus I think that it’s merely a reprint of an earlier article which contained a complete load of bollocks that has never come to pass. 

Well, he was right.

August at the earliest - but could be June 2025, or more likely not at all.

Absolutely no way they will get a stadium on that site plus housing, plus giving AlQadi a slice of the cake.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the new ground is a dead duck, the training ground is a tip and the current ground resembles a 1050s camp site.  As for the current squad, it looks non league and the manager has won 3 games in god knows how many.  The Chairman is a fraud with a nice watch who is more interested in Chelsea' they were losing thousands of £ a week even before the pandemic and the unwashed, contaminated virus spreading fans (sorry, rabble) number around 7,000 at best.

That about sums up their current plight.

The sprinklers may be championship ready, but everything else looks like somewhere between non-league or extinction.

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

So the new ground is a dead duck, the training ground is a tip and the current ground resembles a 1050s camp site.  As for the current squad, it looks non league and the manager has won 3 games in god knows how many.  The Chairman is a fraud with a nice watch who is more interested in Chelsea' they were losing thousands of £ a week even before the pandemic and the unwashed, contaminated virus spreading fans (sorry, rabble) number around 7,000 at best. And they they still think they can laugh at us.

That about sums up their current plight.

The sprinklers may be championship ready, but everything else looks like somewhere between non-league or extinction.

 

Added to that for you.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, East End Old Boy said:

D77D263C-BD82-4B94-8F43-9CCF88F6F840.thumb.jpeg.b108ad5a6345adeddb0ed657ce04650a.jpeg4916455A-49AB-4959-95BB-CBA3568CCC02.thumb.jpeg.06d6b2c2c29ad73852a30c3b713125a9.jpegThe following has just been lodged at Companies House, can anyone put it into plain English please? 🙄

Looks like the director(s) plan to convert loan(s) of ~£500k to shares. Writing off debt in exchange for increased ownership/equity in the company, in other words.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This loan to shares thing really doesn't make any difference at all, as the person owning those shares has his debt covered by the assets. What it does to the share value as I understand it, is reduce it. That doesn't matter either, if you own them all but, if you only own say 8%, like the supporters club do, then it reduces their value and influence, even if they had no influence on decision making. So, he could increase the shares by 100% and the supporters shares would then be worth only 4% of their current value. That's how I understand it and what has happened at AG over the years. Only benefit to the supporters shares would be if their value increased along with the issue. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but be gentle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Rich said:

This loan to shares thing really doesn't make any difference at all, as the person owning those shares has his debt covered by the assets.

Only if the assets are worth more than all debt, especially preferential...... Not sure this is the case at The House Of Tents.

Remember loans MUST have a repayment schedule, including end term (else they aren't loans.) One of the main reasons for converting loan to stock is when there are 'obstacles' in taking out replacement loans. Another option, as with Mr Lansdown, is it's a mechanism to ensure any 'investment' (sic) may eventually be 'written off'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The shares are 10p each so this new resolution allows the company to allot 4.95 million more shares.

In June Mr Al-Quidi said he had swapped the Dwane Sports loan for shares in BRFC 1883 Ltd, which had capitalised the loan, but he hadn't.

When eventually the Bristol Post was pressured into confronting the club about this false statement Mr Starnes response was that they first needed to have an AGM to pass a resolution to allot more shares.

The AGM took place on September 28th and the resolution was passed but no new shares have been allotted to Dwane Sports and the loan remains in place as does the charge over the Memorial Ground.

We constantly hear that Mr Al-Quidi has saved the club by capitalising the debt. 

But he hasn't.   

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, phantom said:

Crikey - don't let the Lemmings on Gaschat hear you use language like that

They already think that @bert tanntann is one of us in disguise anyway, therefore they will discard anything he says as another example of our apparent jealousy.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BTRFTG said:

Only if the assets are worth more than all debt, especially preferential...... Not sure this is the case at The House Of Tents.

Remember loans MUST have a repayment schedule, including end term (else they aren't loans.) One of the main reasons for converting loan to stock is when there are 'obstacles' in taking out replacement loans. Another option, as with Mr Lansdown, is it's a mechanism to ensure any 'investment' (sic) may eventually be 'written off'.

Any preferential debt would be to HMRC or a bank, correct? As he's the main lender, I'm sure the tented rugby ground has a worth more than the debt owed to himself, which is an inflated self incurred debt anyway. So the only other preferential debt would be HMRC, if anything was owed.

An obstacle to taking out a replacement loan would mean having another party with a charge on the asset, so he wouldn't do that, would he?

The picture as I see it is, he owns all the assets and has spent money to acquire those assets, charged interest on that money spent and increased a fictional debt. It would only go tits up for him if the value of his assets decreased, which it would appear aint happening at the moment. And the day to day running costs increased, which is probably happening at the moment, which is probably giving him a nervous indigestion problem.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Rich said:

Any preferential debt would be to HMRC or a bank, correct? As he's the main lender, I'm sure the tented rugby ground has a worth more than the debt owed to himself, which is an inflated self incurred debt anyway. So the only other preferential debt would be HMRC, if anything was owed.

An obstacle to taking out a replacement loan would mean having another party with a charge on the asset, so he wouldn't do that, would he?

The picture as I see it is, he owns all the assets and has spent money to acquire those assets, charged interest on that money spent and increased a fictional debt. It would only go tits up for him if the value of his assets decreased, which it would appear aint happening at the moment. And the day to day running costs increased, which is probably happening at the moment, which is probably giving him a nervous indigestion problem.

 

Not quite. Although those you mention take first dibs there are other forms of registered interest that may take likewise (anything with a charge, for example.) Ditto shares which may be preferential (i.e. must be repaid first - sometimes distinguished A,B,C....)

Gas net debt is circa £25m and the freehold and canvas assets are worth nothing of that quantum. If they shut up shop today the present owners would lose money, same as us. Inflating loan fees to self advanced loans has no merit once net assets turn red. Revaluing assets likewise leads to capital gain, hence the reason we went a couple of decades not revaluing AG. You only do so when you must.

Business loans are like any other forms of credit taken. Most will understand it's a pain having to fill in all those forms when seeking a loan, credit or mortgage but there is a good reason lenders are required so to do. They first must assure themselves that the entity taking out the credit is in a position to repay. That doesn't mean there's no risk of non-repayment, (that's why charges, arrangement fees and interest rates vary according to any likelihood of default.) Rather, if one lends money in the clear knowledge the borrower is unlikely to be in a position to repay there are solid legal grounds by which the borrower may apply to have such debt written off given they should not have been placed in the position of indebtedness in the first place. That's what I was alluding to. Say Wael's loan (secured against assets) was expiring and he needed to borrow a replacement sum for working capital. It could be commercially difficult (or mega expensive, see their Sainsbury's legal borrowing,) for him to arrange. Should he fund himself and if there's little prospect of repayment then he'd be at the bottom of the creditors pile given he should not have advanced himself monies he knew he couldn't repay. They wouldn't be secured and that's good money after bad.

Some folks on here may be aware of the Loan Charge (Rangers players for one,) in which punters instead of taking a salary were paid (or paid themselves,) a loan - no tax or NI arising. The scam was when they loan came to be repaid it instead was written off. HMRC won a landmark ruling in which because they'd demonstrated it was obvious the loans were never to be repaid de facto they could not have been loans.

The problem most folks have in grasping the concept of large debt is they think it doesn't count, that it doesn't need repaying. It does and the latter is only true when the owner of the debt writes it off as a loss. Now if you're as wealthy as Mr Lansdown, having monies owed when one dies isn't such a problem as such debt and losses written off are a useful way to reduce any tax burden payable upon death. I fully expect there's a planned element within our creative accountancy that has included such thinking.

I also suspect the value of Wael's assets are declining. The property sector isn't great and with Government pretty much giving free reign on planning to developers in an attempt to boost the economy, if anything, freehold prices are likely to drop. Recall there's a shed load of land developers are already sitting on which they thought they could turn a buck on in a growing property market, so whilst short term house prices have held up (bouyed by lower end tax concessions,) that's all going to cease. That land under certain regulations now comes with a 'use it or lose it' series of penalties. Even Sainsbury's sussed that out when pulling out of the Mem deal.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bert tann said:

The shares are 10p each so this new resolution allows the company to allot 4.95 million more shares.

In June Mr Al-Quidi said he had swapped the Dwane Sports loan for shares in BRFC 1883 Ltd, which had capitalised the loan, but he hadn't.

When eventually the Bristol Post was pressured into confronting the club about this false statement Mr Starnes response was that they first needed to have an AGM to pass a resolution to allot more shares.

The AGM took place on September 28th and the resolution was passed but no new shares have been allotted to Dwane Sports and the loan remains in place as does the charge over the Memorial Ground.

We constantly hear that Mr Al-Quidi has saved the club by capitalising the debt. 

But he hasn't.   

In six months time that would be a potential cause for worry. But not two weeks after the resolution was passed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rovers CEO on SSN saying Leagues 1&2 will need £250m at least, now prem clubs apparently are reluctant to help champ clubs as clubs like us have Billionaire owners and should see their clubs safe themselves, should Rovers rolling in their riches be held to the same standard.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Lrrr said:

Rovers CEO on SSN saying Leagues 1&2 will need £250m at least, now prem clubs apparently are reluctant to help champ clubs as clubs like us have Billionaire owners and should see their clubs safe themselves, should Rovers rolling in their riches be held to the same standard.....

They need that money to continue the folly they've constructed these past decades. There is a much easier and cheaper solution.

Have the whole EFL enter an agreed CVA putting the owners at the bottom of the pile and start from scratch. Establish an agreed wage and sustainability structure. Not good for players, managers, agents and hangers-on but best for fans and football.

Handouts will only line the pockets of those who've ruined the game.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lrrr said:

Rovers CEO on SSN saying Leagues 1&2 will need £250m at least, now prem clubs apparently are reluctant to help champ clubs as clubs like us have Billionaire owners and should see their clubs safe themselves, should Rovers rolling in their riches be held to the same standard.....

6th richest club in Britain apparently....that’s what their belter fans were saying. Talked about waving fivers at other L2 clubs fans when they came to the Mem.

Utter ******* pounders.

They don’t need any financial help, in fact, Rovers should be sharing some of their vast wealth around the lower divisions. It’s only fair.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

6th richest club in Britain apparently....that’s what their belter fans were saying. Talked about waving fivers at other L2 clubs fans when they came to the Mem.

Utter ******* pounders.

They don’t need any financial help, in fact, Rovers should be sharing some of their vast wealth around the lower divisions. It’s only fair.

 

Joking aside Peter, there is a feeling among the football elder statesmen I have spoken to that Rovers may have made a blunder in the way the new training ground is being paid for. The money is coming into the club from Mr Al-Quidi and then out again to pay the contractors working on the project. But to obtain funding under the rescue package individual clubs may be audited to determine their financial need. Which could lead to the question "If you are so desperate for cash to keep your business afloat why are you spending vast sums on a training ground which is not necessary for your survival but which is enhancing the value of land held independently by your owner ?"

For Rovers the EFL rescue package may open a Pandora's box of hornet's nests within a can of worms.

Edited by bert tann
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, bert tann said:

 

Joking aside Peter, there is a feeling among the football elder statesmen I have spoken to that Rovers may have made a blunder in the way the new training ground is being paid for. The money is coming into the club from Mr Al-Quidi and then out again to pay the contractors working on the project. But to obtain funding under the rescue package individual clubs may be audited to determine their financial need. Which could lead to the question "If you are so desperate for cash to keep your business afloat why are you spending vast sums on a training ground which is not necessary for your survival but which is enhancing the value of land held independently by your owner ?"

For Rovers the EFL rescue package may open a Pandora's box of hornet's nests within a can of worms.

See what you mean Bert.

Surely other clubs in L1 and L2 have also improved stadium and training facilities in the last 12 months though. Presumably, if your concerns are correct, those other clubs would also ‘forfeit’ financial help?

Edited by Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan said:

See what you mean Bert.

Surely other clubs in L1 and L2 have also improved stadium and training facilities in the last 12 months though. Presumably, if your concerns are correct, those other clubs would also ‘forfeit’ financial help?

 

Few would have suddenly embarked on such a project three months after the Government had invoked emergency powers which effectively shut down their business and even fewer would be pleading poverty while spending money to develop land which they didn't own and with no formal lease agreement in place.    

Edited by bert tann
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bert tann said:

 

Few would have suddenly embarked on such a project three months after the Government had invoked emergency powers which effectively shut down their business and even fewer would be pleading poverty while spending money to develop land which they didn't own and with no formal lease agreement in place.    

I do enjoy your posts, some cryptic hints of impending doom, some more straightforward, I have no idea of the  validity of the ‘facts’ you post and I really can’t be arsed to research them, I just hope all the prophecies of potential catastrophe are true.....

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bert tann said:

 

Joking aside Peter, there is a feeling among the football elder statesmen I have spoken to that Rovers may have made a blunder in the way the new training ground is being paid for. The money is coming into the club from Mr Al-Quidi and then out again to pay the contractors working on the project. But to obtain funding under the rescue package individual clubs may be audited to determine their financial need. Which could lead to the question "If you are so desperate for cash to keep your business afloat why are you spending vast sums on a training ground which is not necessary for your survival but which is enhancing the value of land held independently by your owner ?"

For Rovers the EFL rescue package may open a Pandora's box of hornet's nests within a can of worms.

Not doubting what you've written Bert but if it's true that's most odd (and I've delivered a few major building projects in my time.)

For those who don't understand Bert's subtleties. In normal practice were the land on which the training facilities to stand be owned by Wael (not the club,) the club would enter into a pre-lease or service supply contract with the owner who, through their contractor, would have constructed the facility at their risk in accordance with Rovers requirements (Design & Build.) No funding for Cat A & B works is payable until the facility has practical completion and lease commenced, though CAT C & D may be paid prior to use (then such assets may be removed and used/sold elsewhere ) No freeholder in their right mind would allow somebody to construct on their land without guarantees of completion or reinstatement and the price of such indemnities render such proposals unaffordable to the end user. 

The club wouldn't have an issue in explaining why they needed to fund the 'lease or service cost' of Training and Development facilities as Cat A&B capital costs would be recouped by the owner over the length of the contract (unless the lessee has time restricted cash to flash and that needs some me explaining.) Nobody in their right mind would finance improvements in an asset over which they have no control.

One point I'd take issue with is the notion that monies currently expended are 'enhancing the value of the land'. One assumes Use Case Consent does not allow for construction other than that for the purpose stated and building consent approved (one assumes minor sporting premises.) In such case the quality of the grass matters little to a developer other than he'd have turf to sell prior to breaking it. Land value is intrinsically linked to Use Case Consent.

From the pictures I've seen whilst the pitches look great there's otherwise a shipping container (for the groundsman's equipment?) and a canvas marquee (in which the players are expected to change?) Not exactly tangible assets in my book....

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bristol Rovers taken over by Gazillionaire Jordanians making them the 6th richest club in the country

 

memorial-stadium.jpg

The deal for the sale of 'on its arse' ragbag outfit Bristol Rovers to Middle-eastern football novices – the Al-Qadi family – has been completed.

It has been confirmed that current chairman Nick "Watertight" Higgs will 'leg it' pronto out of the back door and it is expected that all directors at the club will also disappear without trace.

The Al-Qadis, based in Jordan, had been in contact with Higgs since the autumn enquiring over the acquisition of the club. The senior figure of the family Abdulkader Al-Qadi founded the Arab Jordan Investment Bank in 1978, one of Jordan’s central banks that holds assets valued at £1.05bn by Forbes (2012) and a hundred thousand million billion quid by this pair of deluded drivel spouting bed wetters :-

Hello.thumb.jpg.d695724c92507b36329d934bd1852a34.jpg1459476622_Hello2.jpg.7b2daf2ec9340954d48ff65de99cc96a.jpg

Captain Pugwash and Semen Staines - Unlucky Da Shit!

Abdulkader Al-Qadi has three sons, the youngest of which, Wael (of fortune), is set to have the main involvement in implementing the Al-Qadi’s plan for the Gas in his role as President of Bristol Rovers.

Wael Al-Qadi was responsible for the campaign promoting the candidacy of FIFA Presidential hopeful and fellow Jordanian HRH Prince Ali Bin Al Hussein. The Prince is firmly expected to win next Friday’s FIFA election to held in Zurich.

In Bristol meanwhile, Wael Al-Qadi expressed his immediate ideas for the club, starting with manager Darrell Clarke.

“We will support Darrell by acquiring free transfers of journeymen and rejects from Poundland,” Al-Qadi said at a press conference.

He added: “We are here to build tents. We want this club to be like a circus in every aspect.

“We are here for the long term to cause maximum damage. We have no interest in leaving at all. These things take time you see. Do you like my watch?

“When we purchased the club we knew about the stadium issue so we mortgaged it to the hilt.

“Bristol Rovers has always been jokingly labelled as a family club and it is my family’s wish to install some cheap plastic garden chairs and sell fake fanta and out of date crisps.”

The outgoing and now less than watertight Chairman Nick Higgs expressed his relief at getting out of the tinpot club he had been taking backwards quicker than Marti McFly in a DeLorean. He was unavailable for comment on the club’s future in the hands of its new owners. His mobile was switched off and was jetting off to the Caribbean.

“Not my problem,” said Higgs when he eventually returned from a 6 month exile with a tan George Hamilton would be "prowed" of and certain to spark racist outbursts from the horse-punching faithful and true.

“At the end of the day, we have found the right people to turn the club into a village of tents and a complete laughing stock with everything done on the cheap and we cannot wait to see what gifts they provide the Ted's for their Bristol Rovers Dustbin Thread from here on,” Higgs concluded.

 

  • Haha 15
  • Flames 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...