rugbyunion
Latest News:
Come On You Warriors!

This message board is for all things Warriors' and Rugby.
When posting please be aware that posts may be read by youngsters and respect other posters.
Click Here for the Message Board Rules


MESSAGES->author
Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 17:09
Just a personal opinion I do not want this man to takeover OUR club.

JP

 
Warr-i-ors!
Re: Jed McCrory II
Warr-i-ors! (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 17:28
I second that sentiment.

 
Simba
Re: Jed McCrory II
Simba (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 17:52
Personally I don’t give two hoots who buys the club. I just want an end to this saga.

 
ROLLO on tour
Re: Jed McCrory II
ROLLO (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 18:03
Lets not just jump to conclusions, it is also worth noting that what we post on here is looked at , hence quiet rightly the thread deletion.
Personally I could have started a thread saying that I don't want the Scots here, which I don't , but what effect would it have?

 
BrumBrum
Re: Jed McCrory II
BrumBrum (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 20:13
Who would you prefer SRU or McCory?

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 20:44
I am not in the slightest who might or might not read OUR forum.

It is where we can meet and discuss our club, it is where we can openly debate our feelings with other supporters wether they live near us or miles awa, wether we know them or wether we don’t.

If we don’t say what we feel then what is the point in having a forum.

If anyone feels they don’t want to join a debate about any subject, then don’t take part. But please don’t denigrate others that do want to debate it.

JP

 
w4rriorz1980
Re: Jed McCrory II
w4rriorz1980 (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 21:04
Quote:
Faithful_City
I am not in the slightest who might or might not read OUR forum.
It is where we can meet and discuss our club, it is where we can openly debate our feelings with other supporters wether they live near us or miles awa, wether we know them or wether we don’t.

If we don’t say what we feel then what is the point in having a forum.

If anyone feels they don’t want to join a debate about any subject, then don’t take part. But please don’t denigrate others that do want to debate it.

JP
Well said JP!

 
WorcesterSauce
Re: Jed McCrory II
WorcesterSauce (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 21:19
His history don't look great, does it?

Having spoken to three very big Hereford fans i am inclined to believe it would be better for us if we sought investment from elsewhere.

If the SRU is the alternative then im out.

 
neiljk
Re: Jed McCrory II
neiljk (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 21:49
Neither option is remotely appealling. One has a controversial history to say the least and the second option of being an offshoot of scottish rugby does not appeal one iota. I'm not scottish and have no interest in supporting a scottish team.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 21:53
I also had a chat with a lifelong supporter of HUFC 60 yrs of supporting HIS football club he had nothing good to say and could not believe a club as big as Warriors would even entertain doing business with him. If they are?

JP

 
neiljk
Re: Jed McCrory II
neiljk (IP Logged)
17 December, 2017 22:52
Be nice to get something from the club. It seems incredble that is this would be entertained, so be nice to get a nice clear answer.

The silence and mounting speculation is not encouraging.

 
Moyles
Re: Jed McCrory II
Moyles (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 06:51
Quote:
Faithful_City
Just a personal opinion I do not want this man to takeover OUR club.
JP

The problem is it isn’t OUR club, not yours or mine. So we have no choice in the matter.
The other option is for the fans to all put some money in - and buy the club - it would be run perfectly then, chip prices would be reasonable, our star players would be retained, and there would be no parking or transport problems.

 
vigorniensis
Re: Jed McCrory II
vigorniensis (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 07:04
Quote:
Moyles
The problem is it isn’t OUR club, not yours or mine. So we have no choice in the matter.
The other option is for the fans to all put some money in - and buy the club - it would be run perfectly then, chip prices would be reasonable, our star players would be retained, and there would be no parking or transport problems.

Perfectly true in the literal sense Mr Moyles, but, just to be pragmatic for half a moment, a club with no supporters could hardly be called a club and would be unsustainable.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 07:12
Moyles, Of course it’s OUR club!

That does not mean we own it, it means we are committed to support it.

We say that England is OUR country, but we do not own it

We say Worcester is OUR City, but we do not own it.

Worcester Warriors IS our club!!!

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
knightstemplar (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 07:18
I think potentially the danger here is a Club with less supporters is very unsustainable.

Let's hope there may be a CD rescue plan.

I wouldnt support the two bids on the facts that have been reported.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 07:19
It maybe THEIR business but it definitely IS our club

Meaning of club!

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
knightstemplar (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 07:28
The pertinent deadline is the 20 odd players who are uncertain on ownership and DOR which will affect their decision to re-sign.

Something needs to happen fairly swiftly

 
Whispering_Death
Re: Jed McCrory II
Whispering_Death (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 08:20
I’m with WS, if SRU take over I’m out. No interest in watching or supporting Scotland. A minor share I have no problem with.

 
Southstand(again)
Re: Jed McCrory II
Southstand(again) (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 08:49
If I lived in Edinburgh, I would watch Edinburgh. As it is I'll be watching Munster in the New year.

I think Santa may have bought me a red shirt for Christmas but it is probably likely to get far less of an airing than my old "Pears" shirts.

 
GrubberKk
Re: Jed McCrory II
GrubberKk (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 09:15
Trust me, you do NOT want McCrory buying the club. Nor any of his 'friends'. You are better off with what you have than go down that route.

 
ROLLO on tour
Re: Jed McCrory II
ROLLO (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 09:39
JP you will know that I am all for debate, I just think that is has to be based on facts, of which there are some, but not hearsay from folk who may or may not have an axe to grind.
As it happens if either party takes over that will be the end of my constant support.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Powick Eastander (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 11:50
Also needs to stay with in the bounds of libel and defamation law.

This forum is under scrutiny so please keep all comments legal and relevant with regards to this subject or any other for that matter. What is written here is seen in the eyes of the law as the same as in any other media. It is in the public domain so therefore posters are subject to laws regarding libel and defamation.

Sportnetwork received a formal complaint about the previous thread of the same subject, the first we have had since I took over as moderator. I decided to take down the thread as a whole and will do so again if we have any further issues and ban the posters who are responsible.



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/130/130_0_1418121803.jpg Warriors Rugby Supporters Club http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/130/130_0_1418121803.jpg

 
B-road
Re: Jed McCrory II
18 December, 2017 11:55
Classic fake news.

Opinion and speculation is perceived as fact.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
knightstemplar (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:14
The High Court has ruled in 2009 that defamation on internet bulletin boards is akin to slander rather than libel.

Mr Justice Eady hearing a case regarding posts on a bulletin board (or forum) has said that such comments are not to be taken in the same context as a formal newspaper (etc) article and are more like slander due to the casual or conversational nature of them.

Mr Justice Eady stated that posts on bulletin boards "are rather like contributions to a casual conversation (the analogy sometimes being drawn with people chatting in a bar) which people simply note before moving on; they are often uninhibited, casual and ill thought out...Those who participate know this and expect a certain amount of repartee or 'give and take'."

As such "When considered in the context of defamation law, therefore, communications of this kind are much more akin to slanders (this cause of action being nowadays relatively rare) than to the usual, more permanent kind of communications found in libel actions...People do not often take a 'thread' and go through it as a whole like a newspaper article. They tend to read the remarks, make their own contributions if they feel inclined, and think no more about it."

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:14
I believe all of the info posted up was already in the public domain. Reported by professional journalists and much of it in print.

If it was myself that had created a libelous statement I would ask the moderator to PM me with the details, thank you.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:16
It is not fake news.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Powick Eastander (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:22
Quote:
communications of this kind are much more akin to slanders

Slander can still end you up on court..



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/130/130_0_1418121803.jpg Warriors Rugby Supporters Club http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/130/130_0_1418121803.jpg

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:24
Very very rarely and I doubt ever from a forum since the judges ruling.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Powick Eastander (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:27
I have fed back the info posted by Knights Templar via Sportsnet work to the complainant



http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/130/130_0_1418121803.jpg Warriors Rugby Supporters Club http://v4admin.sportnetwork.net/upload/130/130_0_1418121803.jpg

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:33
I am intrigued who that was, because if it was Mr McCrory or a club official it confirms he is an interested party.

JP

 
WorcesterSauce
Re: Jed McCrory II
WorcesterSauce (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:38
Hmm i wonder who would complain about a thread that was calling out Mr McRory on his past....

IMO the very fact that someone complained about it points to the fact that the speculation that's arrised around his bid has some substance attached to it.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:48
This is neither libellous or slander. It is a copy of the report from the Swindon Advertiser it is for anyone to read and make up their own minds

Quote:
Swindon Advertiser

EVIDENCE given by Swindon Town chairman Jed McCrory's was questioned by a High Court judge today.

On the second day of the hearing to determine who owns the club, Judge Nicholas Strauss QC said he did not believe McCrory's explanation of a three-year extension to Lee Power’s share subscription agreement at Town.

There are e-mail and text message exchanges between Power and McCrory which allude to a three-year extension of some sort involving the former.

McCrory suggested this was only an extension of Power’s tenure as director of football, and nothing to do with becoming club owner.

The former County Ground chief said his acknowledgement of an extension involving Power in April 2013, were not about lengthening the time frame for Power to become majority shareholder.

But Judge Strauss said: “I frankly don’t believe Mr McCrory’s evidence. I don’t think he failed to read it (an e-mail explaining the extension) and I don’t think he was referring to the position of director of football.”

In his evidence, Power said he and McCrory had agreed to extend the window for three years, in order to allow for all the necessary paperwork from the Football League to clear before exercising the agreement and taking control of Seebeck 87, the firm used to buy Town in early 2013.

The spotlight was also shone on the fateful meeting between the pair and Sangita Shah in December 3 last year which ultimately wrestled control from McCrory.

McCrory, throughout the case, has maintained the share subscription agreement Power signed, expired 14 days after he injected £1.2m into the club to lift its transfer embargo.

Using this logic, Hugh Jory QC, Swinton Reds 20’s (Power') counsel, asked McCrory why he walked away when Power told him to in that meeting, if he did indeed retain a majority shareholding.

“The one person who, in your case, can decide who the directors of the club are going to be, is you,” said Mr Jory.

“So you, at December 3, would have been quite able to turn around and say ‘you’re wrong, I own the shares, you’re out’.”

McCrory said: “There was (sic) other reasons for that. There were allegations, and they were only allegations, I brought up.

“I had asked for investigations into the allegations because my job was to protect the club at the time.

“That went on and it became a problem because we didn’t get the answers we wanted.”

He went on: “I decided to have a breather. I came away from it and press releases were made, which were inaccurate, otherwise we wouldn’t be here today.

“I took time to step back. I didn’t want to bring the club into disrepute and it became a sad place for me at the time because of all the issues.”

In his own time at the witness box yesterday, Power addressed match-fixing accusations which McCrory allegedly threw his way during the December 3 meeting.

The current chairman said: “The match-fixing was something that Jed brought up when we decided to part.

“Straight away, me and Sangita rang the Football League and the FA about these accusations.

“He (McCrory) even said the manager was in on it. The match we fixed changed four times and we won all the games we're supposed to have fixed.”


The Swindon Advertiser Article.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:55
Again in the public domain and openly available on the internet.

Someone set up a petition to get Jed McCrory back to Swindon Town. It target ws to get 1,000 signatures it got 48! Plus some comments

Petition

I make no comments.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
knightstemplar (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 12:59
Eady also said a Network or Operator has a responsibility to block or take down content if it is notified with a legitimate complaint about libellous material.


Legitimate complaint is a defamatory statement that is obviously fake or untrue and from it causes a person's reputation harm.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
West Brom Warrior (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 13:00
As long as people do not make personal statements about McCrory then everything should be fine in terms of slander/ libel.

Also worth pointing out to people who use social media to discuss the Warriors, especially relevant if the person who runs the Worcester Faithful twitter account uses this forum (I know it’s not JP who doesn't do twitter).

I will only state what I did on the previous forum, I will judge whoever takes over Worcester Warriors by what they do at Worcester Warriors not what they have done or not done elsewhere. While none of the current rumoured bidders would be my ideal candidate (I would prefer someone with a success record in top level sport to take over) I appreciate that the current owners can decide to sell to who they want.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 13:12
Once again this is from HUFC Official Supporters website news.

Quote:
Bulls News

Jed McCrory has joined the board of Solihull Moors who play in the National League.

“It’s always nice to be involved with a local club, and, with the strong community links that Solihull Moors has developed within the town," said McCrory on his appointment.

It's understood that McCrory has joined the company that rruns the football club but not the company that owns the ground.

Both companies are CICs (Community Interest Companies). One company rents the ground to the other. That way if the football company should go bust, the ground is not lost.

McCrory became known to Hereford supporters when BN revealed that he had met former chairman David Keyte in March 2014.

Later it was revealed that McCrory along with Keyte had met Geoff Hughes from Herefordshire Council on February 24th 2014.

For reference here's an article published by BN on March 19th 2014

It's understood that one of the two possible investors in Hereford United that have talked to chairman David Keyte is a consortium headed by Jed McCrory who has been involved with Swindon Town.
It's not known whether talks are continuing but it is known that McCrory has been in Hereford in the last week.
BN was told of his interest over two weeks ago and posted a 'speculative' article mentioning McCrory on March 3rd.
The following morning BN was contacted by someone close to the club and asked to take the article down. BN refused citing the view that taking the article down would provoke more not less interest in what had been written.
This week another person close to the club asked BN how they had heard about McCrory's interest. Suffice it to say it appears that the name was talked about in the VP club after the home game against Wrexham.
Another name is that of Jed McCrory formerly chairman of Swindon and before that 'owner' of Banbury Town. 43 year old McCrory recently tried to buy into Kidderminster Town but failed.

McCrory was chairman of Swindon Town until he sold his stake to Lee Power. The Evesham based businessman led a consortium, Seebeck 87, which purchased 99% of Swindon from BetFair co-founder Andrew Black just over twelve months ago. However Power bought some of McCrory's shares last April and the remainder in December.

Whilst buying Swindon, McCrory was also talking to Cheltenham according to the Bath Chronicle.

"We did have an approach from the consortium who are now at Swindon, but we weren't convinced and you have to be very careful. You have to be very thorough with your due diligence and the fact they wanted to become the controlling stake holders was a problem," said chairman Paul Baker.

Not long after McCrory met Kidderminster chairman, at the time, Mark Serrell. However, later, the board of directors at Aggborough turned down McCrory despite his claim to be have access to £5m of funds possibly from a company called iQuest Capital Ltd who are based in Cheshire.

"The board did meet with Jed and he put his proposal to us which we decided to decline," said Ken Rae the new Kidderminster chairman.
McCrory has also looked at a takeover of Barnsley.

In late January it was suggested by the Barnsley Chronicle that a deal to buy the club for £5M could be 'just days away'. But it didn't happen.
Owner Patrick Cryne later said he would only sell to someone who he believed would build the club in the future.


No comment.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 13:22
Banbury United AGM In the Public domain freely available on the net

Quote:
Banbury Guardian

Mr Dumbleton told the meeting some the club’s financial woes date back to when it was sold to former owner Jed McCrory, whom he said signed a contract to pay the club £48,000 in four instalments in return for shares.

Mr Jones said Mr McCrory only made one payment of £12,00 and despite efforts to contact him by phone and email and to approach him through solicitors he had remained out of contact for some time.

The board said Mr McCrory is understood to have since sold on the club to his friend Martin King.

Banbury United secretary Barry Worsley said, in hindsight, the board regretted its decision to bring in Mr McCrory but said at the time promises he made to improve the club were convincing.

Mr McCrory recently lost a High Court battle for ownership of Swindon Town which left him with £50,000 legal fees.

Read more at: [www.banburyguardian.co.uk]


No Comment

JP

 
TVM Rides Again....Again
Re: Jed McCrory II
TVM Rides Again (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 13:28
Quote:
KenDoddsDadsDogsDead
Classic fake news.
Opinion and speculation is perceived as fact.

Quite. I have seen precious little actual evidence over what people are raising their blood pressure over - aside from them egging each other on. One article in TRP I believe? Not exactly proof positive.

I find that if you talk about it enough, you will convince yourself it is all done and dusted - so you talk about it more and get angrier and angrier and the cycle continues. Which seems to be happening here - but it's just pouring petrol on your own fire.

I will of course withdraw this statement and apologise if this all comes to pass. But I don't think it will.

 
WorcesterSauce
Re: Jed McCrory II
WorcesterSauce (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 13:47
I tend to agree TVM, but strange that we have had to take the previous thread down as a result of something that's been said, dont you think?

 
TVM Rides Again....Again
Re: Jed McCrory II
TVM Rides Again (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 13:52
There was an awful lot said - it's very easy to creep from looking at the public realm information and then trying elaborate on that to stray into something that could be construed as a libel. People may argue it is a logical inference - but unless it is portrayed as that it could be dodgy I suppose.

It's just sportnetwork protecting themselves I guess.

 
Patgadd
Re: Jed McCrory II
Patgadd (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 15:28
Quote:
West Brom Warrior
Also worth pointing out to people who use social media to discuss the Warriors, especially relevant if the person who runs the Worcester Faithful twitter account uses this forum
Oh, I'm sure he does. (Clue: his Twitter comments are invariably negative, as are those of his doppelganger on this forum)

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
knightstemplar (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 15:45
A person who takes another person’s statement as fact and repeats it can also be sued for defamation particularly if they didn't check if the statement was true and it is untrue.

Just saying

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
West Brom Warrior (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 15:50
Quote:
Patgadd
Quote:
West Brom Warrior
Also worth pointing out to people who use social media to discuss the Warriors, especially relevant if the person who runs the Worcester Faithful twitter account uses this forum
Oh, I'm sure he does. (Clue: his Twitter comments are invariably negative, as are those of his doppelganger on this forum)

I have my list of one name who I suspect it would be.

I should also state that its not Reggie as he often posts more than the word argh

 
worcestawarrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
worcestawarrior (IP Logged)
18 December, 2017 19:10
Quote:
knightstemplar
The High Court has ruled in 2009 that defamation on internet bulletin boards is akin to slander rather than libel. "

I think the new terminology is trolling so beware of trolls and trolls be aware.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
beav1s (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 10:38
It would appear I am the guilty one as my post has been deleted. My apologies to the moderators if I attracted unwanted attention but I needed to get the message out there. As a fan of both Worcester and Swindon I am aghast this may have even been a possibility. That is my personal opinion and not one held by sportsnetwork.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 11:36
I don’t suppose calling them “a bunch of weasels “ went down too well either.

However much one may have been tempted to agree!

 
Southstand(again)
Re: Jed McCrory II
Southstand(again) (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:05
He doesn't look like a weasel

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:05
Don't anyone think that these guys do not have the skills to dupe very skilled businessmen no matter how rich and successful they are.

I am not saying Mr McCory is about to nor am I saying he is that type of person that would dupe a whole sports club board. But the club has to be aware they are out there looking for soft desperate targets.

It has happened many times before to other clubs where a person has managed to do just that and get away with it mainly because the clubs are too embarrassed to admit they were duped. London Welsh and Orrell being two that come to mind.

There are some very clever people out there, even the governments around the world are not immune including our own, what was that charity?

I am not in anyway saying that Jed McCrory is interested in our club or that he is not absolutely "kosher". However I do hope that the club looks very deeply into every single aspect of any interested party as they surely did with Ed Griffiths.

If they do get it wrong then it is entirely THEIR fault and we end up without a Premiership Rugby Club here at Sixways.

Greg Allen, Bill Bolsover and the board be aware that we the supporters are aware also.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:19
His Director of Football Operations he brought into Swindon was a good friend who was a Swiss resident. I wonder if he knew the Allens?

Quote:
McCrory

“Lee’s a Swiss resident, he’s allowed in the country for 90 days of the year. He’s had plenty of chances to come back into football and it was only me pestering him that got him to come back,” he said.


He ran the football from Switzerland spending only 90 days in England and eventually through the courts to control of the club off McCrory. Good friend that.

Quote:
McCrory

“He’s got 90 days of the year and he decides to come here for probably 80 per cent of them. His phone bill must be huge.”


All available in the public domain on the link above from Southstan(again)

JP

 
Southstand(again)
Re: Jed McCrory II
Southstand(again) (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:21
I rather suspect that Jed McCrory is a bit of a "red herring" in this story and it is really about Mr. Allen playing a version of offshore Island "pass the parcel" with the Jersey business associates represented by Jed.

Just a bit of friendly business.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:31
I hope they are not from Jersey because they cannot even fund their own club which is in a desperate financial state.

JP

 
Latecomer
Re: Jed McCrory II
Latecomer (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:45
Quote:
Faithful_City

There are some very clever people out there, even the governments around the world are not immune including our own, what was that charity?

JP

Was it the DUP !!

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:46
Quote:
Faithful_City
I hope they are not from Jersey because they cannot even fund their own club which is in a desperate financial state.
JP

True, but Jersey has no chance of premiership status, and no P shares, and no TV revenue.

But presumably there’s lots of very wealthy people and businesses on the island, they’re just not interested in local rugby.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 12:52
There are a lot of very salubrious tax avoiding "business" men out there.

According to my contacts out there the business community has never wanted to support financially a Rugby or any other sports club.

Rip us off, get the money off shore...

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Fiver (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 17:50
Surely wealthy people go to Jersey in order to hold onto their money. As such, why would they want to give it away on rugby ownership, they clearly don't want to let the taxman near it.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 18:36
Richest 20 in Jersey

Quote:

1. Sir David and Sir Frederick Barclay (Brecqhou), £7.2bn – up £200m

2. Sir Philip and Lady Green (Jersey), £2.787bn – down £433m

3. Douglas and Dame Mary Perkins and family (Guernsey), £1.6bn – up £50m

4. Steve Lansdown (Guernsey), £1.48bn – up £80m

5. Simon Nixon (Jersey), £1.176bn – up £150m

6. Douw Steyn and family (Guernsey), £850m – up £150m

7. The Clarke family (Jersey), £500m – no change

8. Tony Buckingham (Jersey), £425m – no change

9. Graham Tuckwell (Jersey), £347m – up £74m

10. Ray O'Rourke and family (Jersey), £306m – down £24m

11. Guy and Julia Hands (Guernsey), £265m – up £5m

12. James Vernon (Jersey), £256m – up £6m

13. Ronnie Frost (Guernsey), £207m – up £47m

14. David Crossland and family (Jersey), £200m – no change

15. Derek Coates (Guernsey), £190m – no change

16. Richard Griffiths (Jersey), £180m– new

17. Gordon Crawford (Jersey), £122m – no change

18. Con Folkes and family (Jersey), £121m – up £1m

19. Brian de Zille and family (Jersey), £120m – no change

20= Roger Baines and family (Guernsey), £110m – no change

20= Nigel Jagger and family (Jersey), £110m – no change


Read more at [jerseyeveningpost.com]


Top 10 would be the only ones capable.

JP

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
TeflonTed (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 18:37
Quote:
Fiver
Surely wealthy people go to Jersey in order to hold onto their money. As such, why would they want to give it away on rugby ownership, they clearly don't want to let the taxman near it.

When the available resources reach a certain level it simply becomes a vanity project.

In the case of exceptional men such as Cecil, there’s a social perspective, for many others it’s essentially just a hobby! They can afford the losses if they choose to do so, and revel in the glory when winning.

 
FlipFlop
Re: Jed McCrory II
FlipFlop (IP Logged)
19 December, 2017 21:59
Well you can rule no 4 out as I think he is Brizz ‘deep pockets’. Rule Philip Green out as he’d sell us for a pound.

 
Warr-i-ors!
Re: Jed McCrory II
Warr-i-ors! (IP Logged)
23 December, 2017 11:15
Taken from the Beeb. I hope this doesn’t mean the writing is on the wall.....

‘Warriors are now understood to be close to agreeing a deal for the takeover of the club.

Worcestershire businessman Jed McCrory, a former owner of football club Swindon Town, has held talks with the club for several months’.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
23 December, 2017 11:19
Oh he is certainly in there still.

JP

 
neiljk
Re: Jed McCrory II
neiljk (IP Logged)
23 December, 2017 12:54
Not encouraged by that beeb report. Involvement is made as statement of fact. Based on reported track record I can’t see that would be a good outcome for us.

 
Warr-i-ors!
Re: Jed McCrory II
Warr-i-ors! (IP Logged)
23 December, 2017 13:26
Every article I’ve read about him details how much he lives and breathes football, how he is a football fanatic etc. So why on earth would he want to purchase a rugby club? Seems to me rugby will play second fiddle if he is successful in his bid.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
drifter (IP Logged)
23 December, 2017 13:58
perhaps WENDY ball and all the falling about has changed his mind!!

 
Sheldon
Re: Jed McCrory II
Sheldon (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 12:20
Anyone heard any snippets of information in the last week. It went very quiet on the ownership front?

 
usa warrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
usa warrior (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 12:29
Hasn't it just! Dragging on a bit now as well. Thought everything was to be done and dusted before Xmas?

The fact that Solomon's was appointed could also mean that they've hit a snag and couldn't wait for the sale to complete.

 
A38
Re: Jed McCrory II
A38 (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 12:36
Not surprising in one sense. Certain elements of the legal / accountancy world will be away from the office between Christmas and the New Year and it may well be that if technicalities are still to sorted that there will be a hiatus.

That said, I think that, whilst we must continue to be patient, we all wish that matters are resolved one way or the other before long. Things cannot be "up in the air" much longer for our collective peace of mind!

My New Year resolution therefore for the decision makers is that ownership for at least the next few years is sorted as soon as practically possible.

 
Abmatt
Re: Jed McCrory II
Abmatt (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 12:50
I have a feeling that there will be no decision until the end of the season.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 15:46
I have been assured that he and his consortium are the lead group.(only group)

Just need finalising.

JP

 
usa warrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
usa warrior (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 16:07
Heard anything that might ease your concerns JP?

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 17:22
No

However the consortium includes persons from Jersey.

JP

 
yellow450
Re: Jed McCrory II
Yeller (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 19:09
I'm not so disappointed that McCrory might be leading a consortium to take over, but more disappointed that our current owners are prepared to give the time of day to negotiate with him. I believe he would the kind of character that would have an office full of photographs of him shaking hands with (low level and desperate) celebrity types.

 
usa warrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
usa warrior (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 19:15
Quote:
Faithful_City
No
However the consortium includes persons from Jersey.

JP

Not entirely certain what that signifies, besides having enough cash to potentially evade UK taxes...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/01/2018 19:17 by usa warrior.

 
Warr-i-ors!
Re: Jed McCrory II
Warr-i-ors! (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 19:50
If true, I fear this marks the beginning of the end for rugby and WW at Sixways.

 
usa warrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
usa warrior (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 20:08
My hope is that there are rugby men behind him and that his primary role is bringing everyone together.

 
FlipFlop
Re: Jed McCrory II
FlipFlop (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 20:35
Why would Jed McCrory be a ‘circus ringmaster’ to Rugby minded, wealthy investors? He’s not exactly E Griffiths in rugby investment circles. Hope playing resource retention and acquisition doesn’t get held up while this drags on.

 
centrethere
Re: Jed McCrory II
centrethere (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 20:57
Meaning that the consortium includes Sixways Holdings, with owners including Cecil, I assume. - but in what capacity / control function time will tell. - BB on the Allen's instructions may have had no choice, other than receivership, so probably going to be better than a 'kick in the teeth' (to put it rather bluntly). Still think this is going to be a 'bridging' (holding) phase until next summer and another call for investors.

 
usa warrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
usa warrior (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 21:01
Sorry, not sure what you’re referencing there Centre.

 
centrethere
Re: Jed McCrory II
centrethere (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 21:34
Nothing, except that Sixways Holding Ltd are the present Jersey-based owners, and Cecil is part of that - the rest is pure speculation. But with no new funds found, and a business losing money, what tends to happen? The base value is against the asset value. I would go further and say part of the new bid could include Cecil's Southstand (land) as part of the collateral.

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
01 January, 2018 23:01
Walter Mitty comes to mind with desperate men following the fool.

JP

 
Southstand(again)
Re: Jed McCrory II
Southstand(again) (IP Logged)
03 January, 2018 12:44
Different opinion, I know John, but I think we need to move on from demonising McCrory.

As far as I am aware all the clubs he has been connected with are still in existence in exactly the same locations as he found them.

What is better than an owner who has lost interest ?

The easy answer is a group of owners who haven't.

We can sit around waiting for another Saint Cecil to ride over the Hindlip skyline on a white charger or we can accept we are where we are.

How many wolves fans would have envisaged, or welcomed, Chinese ownership a few short years back ?

They now sit twelve points clear in the Championship with a team worth £50 million.

I'm happy to shake hands with the Devil (If that's who he really is) to get away from this "Limbo" Allen's "loss of interest" has created.

 
shrewsburyman
Re: Jed McCrory II
shrewsburyman (IP Logged)
03 January, 2018 12:53
I think that it is the asset stripping reputation of McCrory which causes concern so if this can be removed some worries would vanish. Taking out loans against the assets of the rugby club and leaving us with huge debts would be worse than owners who have lost interest!

 
MESSAGES->author
Re: Jed McCrory II
Faithful_City (IP Logged)
03 January, 2018 13:06
You are absolutely correct Southstand(again), however just because we are in a hole does not mean we should keep digging.

He may be the devil incarnate or he could be our saviour, who knows how it will turn out. You can only make an opinion based on what you know not what you don't or what you would like to see happen.

Yes the clubs are all still in existence, however he left them all with bigger debts than they had when he took over AND for me the biggest threat comes from the size of the clubs he created consortiums to takeover. This time we are at least a tenfold increase in size and turnover maybe even 20 times the size. What experience has he at this level? Does he talk a good story?

Until it all come out and we are still in existence with NO DEBTS(as we are now) in 5 years time then we will know.

Until then I will continue to have major concerns.

JP

 
Sutton Warrior
Re: Jed McCrory II
Sutton Warrior (IP Logged)
03 January, 2018 13:11
A new owner with the right motivation and interests is what we need. I have no idea whether this guy fits that bill or not - some of what he is said to have done in the past seems to me a legitimate way of trying to fund a business but not everyone will like it. As an extreme example do we think that the purchase of Man Utd by the Glazers where they secured the funding on the assets is a good or a bad thing - yes, there are costs and it limits their risk but it is a business based approach rather than simple largesse; it doesn't seem to me it has inhibited their ground improvements or signing players and their problems over performance in recent years have been cause by the demise of a charismatic ( or was it despotic) manager and his replacement by one or more inadequates.

Anyway - once the fog clears and this private business has been sold we can decide how we want to proceed. Would any of us really stop going to games and supporting the team because of the person who owns/fronts the consortium?


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?