Quote:Old 7
We hear that Allen won't sell to Griffiths but he would sell to Cecil. So the simple answer to me is for Cecil to buy the club and immediately sell to Griffiths. It could all be done by next season with everyone knowing well in advance what is planned. Some of Griffiths people could even be put on the board under Cecil to aid confidence that the deal will go through.
Other than Allen refusing to sell to Cecil if he knew the plan am I missing something? Seems obvious to me.
Quote:usa warrior
SRU would, presumably, also need a partner. Could Cecil’s consortium be in bed with them?
Quote:knightstemplar
As eluded to before 'the best' for the Club, Supporters, local Community would now be for Cecil and Co to buy it back short term and when/if ready to move on (again) sit down with EG and his investor and do the deal.
Quote:MoylesQuote:knightstemplar
As eluded to before 'the best' for the Club, Supporters, local Community would now be for Cecil and Co to buy it back short term and when/if ready to move on (again) sit down with EG and his investor and do the deal.
How can you possible know that is the best for the club when you don’t know all of the facts? You have taken what has been posted in various press articles and come to a conclusion that you have more fact based knowledge to sell an asset you have no ownership of.
How quick people are to criticise The Allens for the way they have handled this process - when there are no facts made public about the manner in which they have conducted the sale process.
Let’s remember they have spent their own money paying off the debt over the last 3 years, they haven’t borrowed it against any of the assets like the Glaziers at Man Utd - it is no surprise they want out with attitude if some of the fans.
Quote:Faithful_City
It is absolutely expected that paying supporters of any club would be asking(demanding) to be kept informed what is happening to THEIR club. If the club are not prepared then once again it shows lack of organisation and business maturity.
JP
Quote:knightstemplarQuote:MoylesQuote:knightstemplar
As eluded to before 'the best' for the Club, Supporters, local Community would now be for Cecil and Co to buy it back short term and when/if ready to move on (again) sit down with EG and his investor and do the deal.
How can you possible know that is the best for the club when you don’t know all of the facts? You have taken what has been posted in various press articles and come to a conclusion that you have more fact based knowledge to sell an asset you have no ownership of.
How quick people are to criticise The Allens for the way they have handled this process - when there are no facts made public about the manner in which they have conducted the sale process.
Let’s remember they have spent their own money paying off the debt over the last 3 years, they haven’t borrowed it against any of the assets like the Glaziers at Man Utd - it is no surprise they want out with attitude if some of the fans.
Do YOU know the fscts then??????????
Quote:Faithful_City
..... as have 100’s of other denture holders.
JP
Quote:Faithful_City
Abmatt I disagree.
We have invested much into the club, as a debenture holder I have invested a little extra as have 100’s of other denture holders. That is why the club use to hold debenture meetings to inform us of their plans.
We are not just customers we are their reason for being.
JP
Quote:TT
Re: Deadline new
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
14 December, 2017 09:03
Quote:
Faithful_City
Abmatt I disagree.
We have invested much into the club, as a debenture holder I have invested a little extra as have 100’s of other denture holders. That is why the club use to hold debenture meetings to inform us of their plans.
We are not just customers we are their reason for being.
JP
Oh come on JP, I can hear the violin section tuning up!
“The reason for their being”? .......Really......wasn’t it just 15 blokes who fancied a game in 1870 something or other....and it just sort of rolled on from there.
And did debenture holders really invest their little extra for anything much more than a decent seat, (with extra padding) a private bar, a few do’s which the proles couldn’t attend and a posh badge on a lanyard?
No, we’re customers plain and simple. Worcester Warriors as a pro side bears little or no relation to what it used to be even 20/25 years ago.
If I want club feel I’ll pop into Droitwich for a top up.
Quote:Faithful_City
Abmatt I disagree.
We have invested much into the club, as a debenture holder I have invested a little extra as have 100’s of other denture holders. That is why the club use to hold debenture meetings to inform us of their plans.
We are not just customers we are their reason for being.
JP
Quote:TeflonTed
Rollo we should start a small exclusive sub-group of Posters Who Really Don’t Know.
Or similar......better title/acronym anyone?
Quote:LatecomerQuote:TeflonTed
Rollo we should start a small exclusive sub-group of Posters Who Really Don’t Know.
Or similar......better title/acronym anyone?
Can I join your sub-group Ted ? (please) I do like your style.
It won't be so small a group then ......
Quote:TeflonTed
We must understand that the business people with sufficient assets to even begin to contemplate taking on Warriors are not simpletons.
Of course they know how much it will cost, and of course they know how much it currently loses. People on here keep ticking on about “investment “ in Warriors, do they think for one moment that any potential purchaser thinks he (or she) is likely to actually make any money in the near future?
We will end up being run by someone who has the best interest of the rugby operation as their driving motivation, along with their best view of how to minimise losses by off the field activities, including maybe, just maybe, a hotel and conference centre development. But their priority will be a DoR at the head of a revitalised structure that will deliver a team that actually starts climbing the table. Anyone who does purchase must believe this, otherwise they wouldn’t do it.
Talk of asset strippers who just want the acerage is, in my humble opinion, way off the mark.
We’ve had plan A, not sure about plan B, maybe, just maybe, a new Cecil led consortium may yet emerge.
Keep calm, keep the faith, wait and see.
Quote:Teflon Ted
We will end up being run by someone who has the best interest of the rugby operation as their driving motivation
Quote:Faithful_CityQuote:Teflon Ted
We will end up being run by someone who has the best interest of the rugby operation as their driving motivation
Why will we?
JP
Quote:Drutz
You may need a surveyors opinion over this. I do keep hearing about these 50 acres is the Sixway's site actually 50 plus acres?
If not where are they getting the figure from, bear in mind the Warriors do not own any land across the canal except for one pitch so would the whole site, removing the land owned by David Lloyd and the Duckworth Trust, be 50 plus acres?
Quote:TVM Rides Again
If one of my clients was going to tie up £16 million, in a parcel of land, with a green belt designation and zero certainty on its planning future - for up to 15 years - I would refer them to a psychiatrist.
Quote:Drutz
You may need a surveyors opinion over this. I do keep hearing about these 50 acres is the Sixway's site actually 50 plus acres?
Quote:Faithful_City
What makes you think we find out tomorrow?
JP
Quote:AbberleyQuote:Drutz
You may need a surveyors opinion over this. I do keep hearing about these 50 acres is the Sixway's site actually 50 plus acres?
According to Google Maps, this area is approx 27.43 Acres
I suspect the South Stand is owned by Duckworth Trust - but that would be cancelled out by the training pitch over the canal. Should any other areas be included in the 'Sixways Stadium' freehold?