by Harpers So Solid Crew » 10 Jun 2014 07:26
by frimmers3 » 10 Jun 2014 07:35
by UpThePrem » 10 Jun 2014 09:19
Harpers So Solid Crew Perhaps the figures he spoke about relate to TSI rather than RFC, I have to say I dont understand all the figures, but from the last set of accounts we seem to have gone to a situation where JM is still owed about what he was, despite the last accounts showing he was paid back by TSI/Anton, and the debt having been transferred.
And now the debt seems to be nearer £50million, which is an increase in the region of £30 over the last season, despite the parachute payments.
by Royal Rother » 10 Jun 2014 09:24
Harpers So Solid Crew Perhaps the figures he spoke about relate to TSI rather than RFC, I have to say I dont understand all the figures, but from the last set of accounts we seem to have gone to a situation where JM is still owed about what he was, despite the last accounts showing he was paid back by TSI/Anton, and the debt having been transferred.
And now the debt seems to be nearer £50million, which is an increase in the region of £30 over the last season, despite the parachute payments.
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 10 Jun 2014 10:58
by Royal Rother » 10 Jun 2014 11:49
by Green » 10 Jun 2014 11:55
by melonhead » 10 Jun 2014 11:56
by BraisingsteakRoyal » 10 Jun 2014 12:03
melonhead changing a large area of ground from a golf course, to football training pitches and buildings......
seems pretty cheap to me
by Wycombe Royal » 10 Jun 2014 12:25
by PieEater » 10 Jun 2014 12:28
Green It's the "general development" that's staggering.
What are we talking? A changing room?
by Green » 10 Jun 2014 12:28
Wycombe Royal Loads of trees on the site and it isn't flat. To be honest I'm not sure why they bought it when it isn't really suitable for what they want to use it for.
by M Brook » 10 Jun 2014 14:09
Royal Rother :D
Cost of the land, "building" 17 pitches (a requirement if Cat 1) and general development of the site over the next couple of years.
by Wycombe Royal » 10 Jun 2014 14:14
GreenWycombe Royal Loads of trees on the site and it isn't flat. To be honest I'm not sure why they bought it when it isn't really suitable for what they want to use it for.
Yeh you wonder why they didn't go for one of the other 120 acre sites with appropriate planning permission that were for sale in the vicinity.
by Royal Rother » 10 Jun 2014 14:52
M BrookRoyal Rother :D
Cost of the land, "building" 17 pitches (a requirement if Cat 1) and general development of the site over the next couple of years.
The cost of the land was less than a million. Bearwood GC tried to match the price RFC (SJM) were paying for the site - they were needing to raise about £800K.
by Terminal Boardom » 10 Jun 2014 16:46
Uketidus_mi2"I'm aware of one party who are producing proof of funds," he said.
"They have submitted an offer with a timescale of it to be done very fast.
"They are an investment company and have substantially deep pockets. They have offered to clear the debt, buy the hotel and invest in the team so they can challenge for promotion and invest in the new training ground, Bearwood."
For all intents and purposes, and factoring in a slight distrust for CS, if what is said here is true then we'll have certainly come out of this whole farce in a very positive position, that hinges on these promises being delivered of course, it could always end up being Anton v2
TSI no doubt were able to show they had "deep pockets" and "funds"
Since when has being owned by an "Investment Company" ever turned out well for a club?
Alarm bells?
by Extended-Phenotype » 10 Jun 2014 16:49
by melonhead » 11 Jun 2014 19:05
by Royal Rother » 11 Jun 2014 19:36
by frimmers3 » 12 Jun 2014 07:02
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], skipper and 361 guests