Went to a meeting with the Board and the Sponsors tonight...

[GUNTER]

I can only afford £110, that is what I will be sending next week.

Investors should speculate to accumulate.
For example, if we could sign Cullip, Knight and Nicolas on three year contracts, it is my firm belief that we would command decent transfer fees for all of them. At the moment, they are free agents (Cullip and Knight) at the end of the season and the club will receive NOTHING. One they are signed up, if we receive an attractive bid, them we are at liberty to accept, thus putting chunky amounts into the club coffers.

Nicolas will be a great player, we need to sign him very soon.

 

[The Large One]

FFS this wil NOT subsidise the shareholders. They are not going to get their money back. Clear?

 

[aftershavedave]

FFS this wil NOT subsidise the shareholders. They are not going to get their money back. Clear?

no, not clear at all.

1) a shareholder invests in shares, possibly additionally in repayable loans with or without a coupon

2) if things go badly, they lose their share value and possibly / probably their loans are not repaid

3) if things go well they have a valuable shareholding and/or a performing loan

4) if i donate cash i do subsidise the shareholders because i am enhancing the chances of 3 happening while having no chance to participate.

this is very clear.

 

[The Large One]

It's called a 'loan' for tax purposes. If it was considered anything else, it would be subject to tax and/or VAT. Therefore, it's a 'loan'.

They are not accruing interest, and Derek Chapman was very happy for me to put on here that he doesn't want his money back. He could ask for it back, but, he said, he knows he has no chance of getting it.

 

[Easy 10]

I'm not going to criticise or argue with anyone for not contributing, everyone has their own reasons. I think those who believe that this appeal is just another way to line the Directors pockets is a "misguided" view, but then they'll think those who do stump up some cash for the club are equally misguided.

What this boils down to is trust. Personally, I trust Dick Knight and Martin Perry. I trust their judgement and I trust their motives. Having spoken to them over a beer in the "hospitality suite" (I use the term loosely) at Withdean, their drive and passion for the Albion comes across loud and clear. If they say this money is needed to keep the club ticking over while we await the decision, then I believe them and will do what I can.

 

[The Large One]

Plus as I said on a thread yesterday, the investors have put in £7.1m, the club is asking for £2m. The figures re: the directors getting a return just don't add up.

 

[Brovion]

Still ends up in the same place.

All the directors know they have little chance of seeing their money again - and DEFINITELY not until we get Falmer. Our donation is not going into a black hole - it is stabilising the club. It's a pre-emptive strike against the situation getting any worse.

The first part is true, and I appreciate that I'm just indulging in a bit of semantic nit-picking, we'd be donating to try and reach a target, not just to fill a hole. Might make a difference to the way some people perceive it.

The second point raised by 3gulls and afters is more important. At the end of the day as you said these have to be 'loans' because that is the best way tax-wise to handle the directors contributions. However they are still 'loan' and while as you say there is 'little chance' of the Directors ever seeing their money again there is NO chance of me seeing my donation again. That's why, whilst I will be contributing to 'the cause'. it will be via more merchandise, the Comedy night, NSC meet-up etc - or ideally through the Supporters' Trust.

 

[The Large One]

The first part is true, and I appreciate that I'm just indulging in a bit of semantic nit-picking, we'd be donating to try and reach a target, not just to fill a hole. Might make a difference to the way some people perceive it.

The second point raised by 3gulls and afters is more important. At the end of the day as you said these have to be 'loans' because that is the best way tax-wise to handle the directors contributions. However they are still 'loan' and while as you say there is 'little chance' of the Directors ever seeing their money again there is NO chance of me seeing my donation again. That's why, whilst I will be contributing to 'the cause'. it will be via more merchandise, the Comedy night, NSC meet-up etc - or ideally through the Supporters' Trust.

Fair enough, but the main point of a 'donation' is - by its very nature - something you will not see again, apart from its impact or benefits.

 

[saafend_seagull]

There are at least half a dozen players in the squad that we wouldn't miss at all.

True, piercy, watson, beck (has he gone yet?), and oatway (as long as we can snap up nicholas on a year loan)

But it would create more cost to release them as we would have to pay them off, so i can only see us trying to loan out robinson and he cant be on much, and to try and loan out watson/piercy to league 2 clubs if they can afford most of their wages, as they would be useful to them.

 

[Easy 10]

And what then happens when we pick up injuries and suspensions ? Are we back to throwing in the kids ?

 

[The Large One]

And what then happens when we pick up injuries and suspensions ? Are we back to throwing in the kids ?

I could have sworn that half our current team is kids...

 

[rool]

Back to Brovian and Afters point though, IF Falmer is granted the Directors investments does look very good business for them though and, as businessmen, was obviously something they could afford and considered worth risking.

I don't buy 100% that it was just for the love of the club

 

[The Large One]

I don't buy 100% that it was just for the love of the club

Probably not, I don't think any of us would. But even if it was 95%, the reasons behind the other 5% makes it one hell of a risk to put a seve figure sum into, and not particularly sound business judgement.

But then we're back to Heads v Hearts.

No, Jambo, you know what I mean.

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Back to Brovian and Afters point though, IF Falmer is granted the Directors investments does look very good business for them though and, as businessmen, was obviously something they could afford and considered worth risking.

I don't buy 100% that it was just for the love of the club

Why the assumption that once we get planning permission verythings going to turn out rosy. It's still going to be a struggle.

 

[Mustela Furo]

There are at least half a dozen players in the squad that we wouldn't miss at all.

The problem is that they are under contract and so there is little we can do about that (we saw from Rod Thomas and David Lee that players won't leave the club for less money elsewhere - they will sit out their contracts instead )

So therefore we can't really cut back this season - but we can next - hence no new contracts being signed that go beyond the end of this season.

 

[Charlies Shinpad]

They are not accruing interest, and Derek Chapman was very happy for me to put on here that he doesn't want his money back. He could ask for it back, but, he said, he knows he has no chance of getting it. [/B]

Forgive me if I am wrong,but doesnt Derek Chapman run a Building Company called "Adenstar" and I would have thought they will have first call on building the new Stadium,therefore making him a pot of dosh??