Does the book explain that after robbing the club of all it had, why he fought hard to keep it when there was no more money left to steal?
Because he thought there was a shilling or two left probably.
Does the book explain that after robbing the club of all it had, why he fought hard to keep it when there was no more money left to steal?
Asset stripping continues in these circs right until the existence of the business is no more...The book will explain plenty for you.
I'm really struggling to understand how and why you are being so defensive of the actions those people took?
As I said in an earlier comment "My only interest in this is what the actual alternatives were, not the personal conflict. "
http://www.northstandchat.com/showt...Debate-Video&p=8068642&viewfull=1#post8068642
I will check the book out but the basics have to make sense too. There are lots of things that we all don't know about running a club 20 years ago. Which is why I am talking about the alternative options we had at the time, not specifically about what Archer did.
Because he thought there was a shilling or two left probably.
The alternatives were shown to be completely unviable during the planning enquiry for Falmer for various reasons. Numerous links via google...
http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/con...t.com/showthread.php?39859-New-public-enquiry ad infinitum
See also the Ed Bassford tribute threads on NSC for further links to the planning enquiry somewhere
That's the exact point. If he had got Toads Hall or Waterhall that would have been the money he would have had to have used towards a new stadium. He didn't have the backing of fans to get a new stadium though, we wanted him out so he left with the profit. Was this his intention or was it a self fulfilled prophecy due to the angst? Everyone was against him so finding a new site when he was at the helm would have made it impossible. He of course had to go at this point.
If we are saying that it was an intentional plan to run off with the loot, why would he have fought to keep a club that he had already robbed, and was worth nothing. The perfect crime would have been to just give the club to Knight because the crime had already been committed. To stay at a place you have robbed would be the work of a very stupid conman surely?
As I said in an earlier comment "My only interest in this is what the actual alternatives were, not the personal conflict. "
http://www.northstandchat.com/showt...Debate-Video&p=8068642&viewfull=1#post8068642
I will check the book out but the basics have to make sense too. There are lots of things that we all don't know about running a club 20 years ago. Which is why I am talking about the alternative options we had at the time, not specifically about what Archer did.
As I said in an earlier comment "My only interest in this is what the actual alternatives were, not the personal conflict. "
http://www.northstandchat.com/showt...Debate-Video&p=8068642&viewfull=1#post8068642
I will check the book out but the basics have to make sense too. There are lots of things that we all don't know about running a club 20 years ago. Which is why I am talking about the alternative options we had at the time, not specifically about what Archer did.
Link doesn't work.
I can't really search on NSC for specific details but I seem to remember the water table and the tunnel being too close to the stop being an issue. However this is more just down to our Brighton Council being the Brighton Council more than it being unviable. If the water table was such an issue, the A23 would be under water every time it rained.
No. I know the story as the story was written in the news at the time and since. Just like I know Dick Knights story without buying his book Mad Man, or even reading Blooms future book..
Whatever the actual debt was we were under pressure to pay the £millions that season. I can't remember exactly how it went but he sold it to himself to cover the immediate debt. That would have given him time to sell it to the highest bidder on the market so when he sold it and made a profit of say £13m, that would have given him enough money to spend on a new stadium at a new site. Riverside Stadium cost £16.m in 1995.
The Goldstone Ground back in the day when all standing was great, but the East Stand made it impossible long term. To have actually continued usage of it, all stands would have had to have been demolished and the Withdean seating setup without roofs would have been the only temporary solution. So if that was an option we would have still had to have raised the debt money to stop a winding up order, plus basic refurbishment to league requirements totalled could have cost £10m, so we still would have had to raise £10m. £10m back in 97 would be like £50m in today's money or even more.
I think you should be recouping from Lombard Direct and Neurofen, those mid 90s ads definitely got me itching for my wallet...Over 6000 views. I knew I should have added an ad. I could have bought an Albion Hat-trick lottery ticket or something with the proceeds. I could be getting free entry to the Sea Life Centre as we speak.
Hindsight is such a fickle mistress.