Fight For Answers: A History of the Ken Davy Era

[fightforanswers]

1994
The new stadium’s objective
www.ajspecification.com/Buildings/Section_Page/?CI_Building_ID=315&CI_Section_ID=1256&CI_Article_ID=352

March 2003
A piece showing Davy from his business side.
blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigations/2003/03/ici-boss-creates-stinker.html

March 2003
www.examiner.co.uk/src/webroot/huddexaminer/huddersfield-giants/2003/03/13/mcalpine-stadium-a-symbol-of-pride-or-a-white-elephant-50060-12732758/

April 12th 2003
www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/tm_objectid=12840732&method=full&siteid=50060-name_page.html

April 30th 2003
ichuddersfield.icnetwork.co.uk/0400huddersfieldtown/0100news/2003/04/30/haigh-s-bid-is-now-in-motion-50060-12907024/

May 2003
The administrators, Begbies Traynor, state that there is one reasonable bid tabled for the club….the consortium lead by Paul Haigh.

May 22nd 2003
www.examiner.co.uk/src/webroot/huddexaminer/huddersfield-town-fc/2003/05/22/teamwork-pivotal-to-fisher-s-vision-50060-12986101/
Fisher’s five point plan includes: No 3 - "Strike a new deal with the stadium company over the McAlpine Stadium."

June 2003
Martin Byrne (local car salesperson) fronts a consortium with Terry Fisher (ex Town chairman & respected by the supporters) and Ken Davy (Huddersfield Giants chairman) in consortium to takeover club.
Paul Haigh steps down and tells one of us personally that he couldn't compete with Terry Fisher and his previous relationship with the club and it's supporters.
Martin Byrne’s consortium takes over. Begbies Traynor somehow value HTFC’s 40% of stadium shares at £8 and sell them to the consortium.

June 26th 2003
One week after the CVA was approved Terry Fisher pulls out of consortium.

July 16th 2003
Rental formula set in stone? Davy showing that he's got full control of KSDL?
www.examiner.co.uk/src/webroot/huddexaminer/huddersfield-town-fc/2003/07/16/town-launch-appeal-for-200-sponsors-50060-13185103/2/

July 31st 2003
Shareholdings in stadium to stay the same?
www.examiner.co.uk/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2003/07/31/deal-is-done-to-save-town-50060-13241524/

Aug 21st 2003
Kirklees Council pays £3m to cover the debts on the stadium and Ken Davy says that assures the safety of the stadium
www.examiner.co.uk/src/webroot/huddexaminer/news/local-west-yorkshire-news/2003/08/21/council-s-xa3-3m-for-stadium-50060-13319258/3/

December 2003
HTFC’s 40% stadium share transferred to Huddersfield Rugby League Club.

February 2004
Huddersfield Rugby League Club re-named Huddersfield Sporting Pride

February 2005
Supporters group check with Companies House and discover (18mths after the deed had been done) that the shares had been transferred to Huddersfield Sporting Pride

April 2005
Davy goes public to explain that he transferred the shares in order to protect Huddersfield Town from any unexpected financial disaster suffered by KSDL in the future.

May 6th 2005
Chief Executive ‘allays the fans fears’
www.examiner.co.uk/huddersfield-town-fc/huddersfield-town-news/2005/05/06/future-guaranteed-for-town-and-the-giants-at-stadium-50060-15486937/

April 26th 2006
Ken Davy’s answer to questions, by email, regarding stadium issues from HTFC’s Supporters Trust:

We have explained the facts of and reasons for the arrangements between KSDL and the Sporting Clubs at supporters meetings over the last three years and in the Examiner, programme and website.

First of all Huddersfield Giants Ltd do not own any shares in KSDL and they would not receive any benefit at the expense of the Huddersfield Town. The KSDL shares, other than those in the name of Kirklees MC, are owned by Huddersfield Sporting Pride Ltd. Huddersfield Sporting Pride is not the new name for the Giants but it is used to promote joint initiatives by both clubs, Town and the Giants, such as the shop in the town centre.

The shares previously owned by the Company (Huddersfield Town AFC Ltd) which ran Huddersfield Town Football Club went into administration in 2003 and the Administrator valued the total of 40 shares in KSDL at just £1 when he sold the remaining assets to Ken Davy. With KSDL’s debts of £8m, Ken Davy sought to protect Town from these debts. Town did not own the land on which Leeds Road was built, the Council did, and it was the Council and grants that largely funded the Stadium, not Town.

Galpharm Stadium, which is run by KDSL, has for 12 years since it was built had the two clubs, Town and the Giants, as tenants. If they had not wanted a new Stadium it would not have been built nor would it be financially viable. For this reason the parties, including Kirklees MC, were bound together by a legal agreement for the use and running of the Stadium. The rent formula and its allocation were fixed under this agreement and continue unchanged.

The old company which owned Town had taken responsibility for part of the loan originally set up to build the North Stand. KSDL had been used to build the Sports Barn which was an essential FA requirement to ensure that Town’s Academy could continue to exist as Town were not in a financial position to do it themselves. It was necessary for Capital Reward Ltd and Ken Davy on buying the assets of Huddersfield Town to negotiate with KMC and KSDL and join in the agreement for the running of the Stadium. In addition it is to be noted that the donations from the Yorkshire Building Society are made to the Development Association, not the club, following an arrangement made by the old company and they were to be used to fund the repayments on the £650k loan for the Sports Barn. The Giants have no ownership of the Sports Barn and pay a fee per session when they use it to the Council who fund the running costs of the Barn.

From the KSDL Accounts you will have noted that the borrowings are a little under £8m and that it will be a considerable period of time before these are repaid with profits of £250k. The finances of KSDL are far from robust and it is important that all the parties involved work together to improve the use and profitability of the Stadium. Without any major work on the Stadium it is unlikely there will be any surplus in the near future after repayments of loans.

I trust you now understand the need for all companies to work together to promote and make a success of the Stadium in line with the vision of the local authority and the clubs 12 years ago.

February 13th 2007
Supporters group FightForAnswers get a meeting with Ken Davy as the club is struggling in the league and crowds start to dwindle. Ken Davy, and HTFC, then publishes the full questions & answers on their website.
www.htafc.com/page/FromTheBoardroomDetail/0,,10312~986789,00.html

October 1st 2007
Davy gives Huddersfield Giants £400k to loan to Huddersfield Town
www.examiner.co.uk/huddersfield-town-fc/huddersfield-town-news/2007/10/04/supporters-together-50060-19894359/

The Future
www.thehdone.com/

Ralph Rimmer (formerly Sheffield Eagles, now chairman of KSDL) said:

Snowflex slope for Huddersfield

Galpharm Stadium in Huddersfield today unveiled a major development expected to create more than 720 jobs and turn Huddersfield into a top tourist destination.

They have announced plans for a £100m-plus scheme to put the Galpharm at the hub of a major leisure and commercial complex designed to attract visitors to Huddersfield and help it compete with attractions in Leeds and Manchester.

The ambitious scheme will include building 9,500m2 Snowflex ski slope facility, two nightclubs, a casino and bingo hall, a music venue, a pool hall and a 10-pin bowling alley. The new proposals also include 144 apartments, 21 restaurants, cafés and bars, a 150-bedroom hotel, a convenience store and sports shop, an estate and travel agency, office space and a multi-storey car park with 1,754 spaces.

The ski slope would be built against the slope of Kilner Bank, avoiding the need for a towering, free-standing structure. Stadium managing director Ralph Rimmer said a planning application for the scheme would be submitted this month, in July 2008.

Work is planned to begin by the end of next year and is due to be carried out over 40 months in four phases.
Mr Rimmer stressed: "The stadium operates 12 months of the year and remains the heartbeat of the complex. The work will be done in phases, to avoid disrupting the work of the stadium."

The stadium and current attractions on site would all remain in operation throughout the work. Mr Rimmer said the development scheme, named HD One, aimed to turn Huddersfield into a leisure destination for people living outside the town and surrounding districts. "This is an attempt to bring in new and interesting things to the town. We have tried to be innovative and make it an attractive proposition for everyone. This scheme also goes some way to helping the local authority meet its targets for jobs and investment in the Kirklees Strategic Economic Zone, which centres on the Leeds Road corridor."

Mr Rimmer said the scheme had its origins four years ago when the Kirklees Stadium Development Company Limited (KSDL) began considering ways to upgrade the stadium and make greater use of the 54-acre site. He said: "The stadium was ground-breaking when it was built in 1994 and it has added massively to the Kirklees area in general. The KSDL board is keen to do something ground-breaking once again."

He said the new development would complement existing attractions, including the Stadium Health and Fitness Centre and the neighbouring Odeon multiplex cinema. The development was welcomed by Councillor Robert Light, leader of Kirklees Council. He said: "This is a great proposal which will further enhance the position of Huddersfield in the region and link the Leeds Road stadium complex to the town. The development will offer facilities not presently in Huddersfield and help to widen the appeal of the area beyond the traditional area.
"This will help develop… the stadium as a key leisure facility."

www.propertyweek.com/story.asp?storyCode=3119267

[Scissett Terrier!]

although i think the HDone project will be great for huddersfield i think i will alway resent it being there because of they way its come about and whoose pockets it will line.

the shares have to be given back this development should be lining the pockets of huddersfield town!!!!!!!!!

pressure must be brought on the council to act!

[bluearmy86]

The Hdone thing looks exciting. Two night clubs AND a casino? I'm in.

[pozza]

Is the HDOne project gone through then? Or is it still in planning stages?

[Scissett Terrier!]

Mar 5, 2009 22:32:18 GMT 1 pozza said:

Is the HDOne project gone through then? Or is it still in planning stages?

if it is still in planning it should be rejected until HTAFC is ones again a 40% share holder of the ksdl

[thrice]

Very much still in the planning stages. Planning permission should not be a problem but funding most defiantly will be in the current climate.

[queensburyterrier]

"Giant plans for Huddersfield rugby stadium"

That makes me feel sick.

[Scissett Terrier!]

thats your point of pressure on the council then proptest against this development until the 40% is returned

[mids]

Does this piece regarding Wrexham strike any similarities?.....

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4802966.stm

“But Mr Hamilton launched an appeal and on Tuesday three judges dismissed it, saying he "did not act in good faith" in a transaction critical to the club's future and plans to realise the ground's development potential.

But the judges acknowledged there was "some evidence" that Mr Hamilton and his joint venture partner, Mark Guterman, thought the club would "obtain a benefit" from the fulfilment of development plans they called "The Wrexham project".

[Scissett Terrier!]

Mar 5, 2009 23:20:36 GMT 1 @mids said:

Does this piece regarding Wrexham strike any similarities?.....

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4802966.stm

“But Mr Hamilton launched an appeal and on Tuesday three judges dismissed it, saying he "did not act in good faith" in a transaction critical to the club's future and plans to realise the ground's development potential.

But the judges acknowledged there was "some evidence" that Mr Hamilton and his joint venture partner, Mark Guterman, thought the club would "obtain a benefit" from the fulfilment of development plans they called "The Wrexham project".

interesting ruling that

could the administrators be done for negligence and sued?

could the transfer of shares be made void and the shares returned?

could Davy be sued?

[terryya]

As much as I'm pissed off with the shares issue I'm not too bothered about HDOne as there is absolutely no chance that anything will be built on anything like that scale, credit crunch or not.

[bro600]

For the £2 he paid for the shares it's worth a shot though don't you think Terryya? ;D

[terryya]

£2!? He could probably have Iceland for that. The country, not the supermarket.

[mattyterrier2k8]

look at the picture with the the stadium in the background look whats above the direct golf sign, a big picture of the giants and no huddersfield town picture or owt in sight the guys just an old creep

[Deleted]

It's all propoganda...

How long did the Kingsgate take to sort, how long has the Piazza/Library fiasco taken to sort.

For a 4* rated council they ain't half slow at embracing "exciting" opportunities. Personally I really don't think Huddersfield will ever realise it's true potential because they've never made any investment in making arterial routes wider or encouraged brownfield development that might actually attract some big players who are sick of getting shafted by high rates in Leeds & Manchester.

I love Huddersfield, born, bred, lived here all my life, but we are always going to be "nearly getting there" rather than actually arriving...

[townfanjamie]

Mar 6, 2009 0:02:11 GMT 1 mattyterrier2k8 said:

look at the picture with the the stadium in the background look whats above the direct golf sign, a big picture of the giants and no huddersfield town picture or owt in sight the guys just an old creep

Agree he is an old creep... But I think that is a giant TV screen showing a Giants game and that there are 2 flags above the direct golf stand... one Town one Giants.

[Dell12]

Mar 5, 2009 23:20:36 GMT 1 @mids said:

Does this piece regarding Wrexham strike any similarities?.....

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4802966.stm

“But Mr Hamilton launched an appeal and on Tuesday three judges dismissed it, saying he "did not act in good faith" in a transaction critical to the club's future and plans to realise the ground's development potential.

But the judges acknowledged there was "some evidence" that Mr Hamilton and his joint venture partner, Mark Guterman, thought the club would "obtain a benefit" from the fulfilment of development plans they called "The Wrexham project".

Very interesting, it appears that Wrexham Council were on the ball and managed to do what we've failed to do.

[gingerc]

Working in the planning department of a property firm (well at least for the moment anyway...) I reckon that based on our experience of similar retail / leisure schemes that were in the pipeline HDone will almost certainly have been shelved for the moment. If not then, I'd love to know where the finance is coming from...

If anyone is interested some of the planning application material relating to HDone is available to view online at the Council's website:

www.kirklees.gov.uk/business/planning/Details.asp?ID=2008%2F92864

In particular it is worth reading the Planning Statement:

www.kirklees.gov.uk/business/planning/Scanned_Applications/Applications%202008/92864/2008_92864_T06_0004.pdf

Page 11 - indicates that the Stadium Site is on 150 lease from the Council and if the proposals go ahead KSDL will seek to change this to freehold.

Page 35 - one and half pages for a section on 'Justification, Benefits and Conclusions'. No mention of the benefit to the club whatsoever. For such an important scheme for the town this is a pitiful length and inclusion of detail for such a section.

On a pedantic note I hate the fact that the author's not used paragraph numbers in any of its documents as it makes referencing them difficult. Maybe that was deliberate...

Anyway, I might go through the application in a bit more detail over the w/e. If so I'll let people know if I find anything interesting.

[TomTheTerrier]

Fight For Answers, Is it ok if I sticky this, alongside the other thread to make sure it gets attention?

[Captainslapper]

Mar 6, 2009 0:50:50 GMT 1 Dell12 said:

Mar 5, 2009 23:20:36 GMT 1 @mids said:

Does this piece regarding Wrexham strike any similarities?.....

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/north_east/4802966.stm

“But Mr Hamilton launched an appeal and on Tuesday three judges dismissed it, saying he "did not act in good faith" in a transaction critical to the club's future and plans to realise the ground's development potential.

But the judges acknowledged there was "some evidence" that Mr Hamilton and his joint venture partner, Mark Guterman, thought the club would "obtain a benefit" from the fulfilment of development plans they called "The Wrexham project".

Very interesting, it appears that Wrexham Council were on the ball and managed to do what we've failed to do.

Is that because they weren't in bed with the man screwing the club over ,like our council is?

[Dell12]

Exactly, although reading the article it does say that he intended the ground to become housing! Davy has taken a more subtle appoach.

[johnnyzero]

Just to clarify my understanding of a couple of points:

<<December 2003
HTFC’s 40% stadium share transferred to Huddersfield Rugby League Club.
February 2004
Huddersfield Rugby League Club re-named Huddersfield Sporting Pride>>
The company, HRLFC, mentioned above is the company that used to be what we knew as Fartown. The Club currrently contesting SuperLeague is what we formerly knew as Sheffield Eagles.

<<Town did not own the land on which Leeds Road was built, the Council did, and it was the Council and grants that largely funded the Stadium, not Town.>>
Town didn't own the land that Leeds Road was built on, but is crucially not mentioned here is that Town owned the long LEASE for that land. The lease was sold for (if my memory serves me correctly) £7m which was a major part of the funding of the new Stadium. Town previously paid a peppercorn rent, as opposed to the significant current rent. The original raison d'etre was that this would be offset by Town's share in the profit of the new complex.

[Captainslapper]

Or that it was George Binns of HTFC that got so much more than the expected £4m for the land, or that the grants were largely because of Town.
How much did Davy or the Giants contribute for what they now own 60% of? Slightly less than BUGGERALL perhaps!

[pozza]

On a simpleton scale for my own mind, on a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being the club will eventually go under without some sort of serious imcome from somewhere) if we dont get the shares back, where abouts on the scale are we in terms of a futrue for Huddersfield Town?

[In sooth- -]

As a matter of interest, I remember all shareholders(I think I had 48) were given a list of all other shareholders and their addresses. Some interesting names AND addresses.
I threw the list away after a few years and possibly the share certificate.

I should have framed it. !!!!

[Dell12]

Mar 6, 2009 10:33:40 GMT 1 pozza said:

On a simpleton scale for my own mind, on a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being the club will eventually go under without some sort of serious imcome from somewhere) if we dont get the shares back, where abouts on the scale are we in terms of a futrue for Huddersfield Town?

I think with Dean Hoyle propping us up we won't have any problems, but I think without the shares we're unlikely to ever be self sufficient. In theory we get very decent crowds for this division so there's no reason we shouldn't be self sufficient at some point in the future but with a rent formula which penalises us for getting bigger crowds and us not getting any procedes from the increased catering sales the larger crowd brings I'd say personally without a sugerdaddy we're at about 9!

[pozza]

Mar 6, 2009 13:18:43 GMT 1 Dell12 said:

Mar 6, 2009 10:33:40 GMT 1 pozza said:

On a simpleton scale for my own mind, on a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being the club will eventually go under without some sort of serious imcome from somewhere) if we dont get the shares back, where abouts on the scale are we in terms of a futrue for Huddersfield Town?

I think with Dean Hoyle propping us up we won't have any problems, but I think without the shares we're unlikely to ever be self sufficient. In theory we get very decent crowds for this division so there's no reason we shouldn't be self sufficient at some point in the future but with a rent formula which penalises us for getting bigger crowds and us not getting any procedes from the increased catering sales the larger crowd brings I'd say personally without a sugerdaddy we're at about 9!

Christ

From my very rough calculations, to operate on a non-profit basis and to break even, I reckon HTFC needs to make approx £3.5 million a year (i've just gone with the £900k rent per season, and the wge bill) in monies, would I be correct, or even in the right area, with that figure?

Now I dont know how much we make in shirt sales, sponsorship etc, but that seems a lot of money for a club in the 3rd Tier to have to re-coup on a regualar yearly basis.

[Captainslapper]

All this really does hammer home how lucky we've been to have someone like Hoyle step in. There is no doubt at all in my mind that had he not and we'd remained under the full control of Davy we would have been consigned to lower division football for ever.
You only have to look at the state we were sliding into prior to Hoyles involvment to see how bad is was about to get

In the fullness of time, when everything comes out 'officially', which it will, then the name Ken davy will always be remembered with contempt as the man who screwed this club over.
Mr Sport in Huddersfield my chuffing arse!

[mids]

Mar 6, 2009 13:29:37 GMT 1 pozza said:

Mar 6, 2009 13:18:43 GMT 1 Dell12 said:

I think with Dean Hoyle propping us up we won't have any problems, but I think without the shares we're unlikely to ever be self sufficient. In theory we get very decent crowds for this division so there's no reason we shouldn't be self sufficient at some point in the future but with a rent formula which penalises us for getting bigger crowds and us not getting any procedes from the increased catering sales the larger crowd brings I'd say personally without a sugerdaddy we're at about 9!

Christ

From my very rough calculations, to operate on a non-profit basis and to break even, I reckon HTFC needs to make approx £3.5 million a year (i've just gone with the £900k rent per season, and the wge bill) in monies, would I be correct, or even in the right area, with that figure?

Now I dont know how much we make in shirt sales, sponsorship etc, but that seems a lot of money for a club in the 3rd Tier to have to re-coup on a regualar yearly basis.

I reckon the loss this year will be in the region of £3.5m when the cheap tickets, increased wages, severances etc are taken into account.

Dean (and KD this season) will have to cover them as best they can....but rest assure even DH's financial reserves cannot, and possibly will not, overcome the financial obstacles that have been put in place during KD's ownership!! The simple truth is that KD's decisions and maneouvres need to be reversed, and asap!!

[bro600]

Mar 6, 2009 10:33:40 GMT 1 pozza said:

On a simpleton scale for my own mind, on a scale of 1-10 (with 10 being the club will eventually go under without some sort of serious imcome from somewhere) if we dont get the shares back, where abouts on the scale are we in terms of a futrue for Huddersfield Town?

There is no immediate danger but the way HTAFC is set-up means the infection as already started and we are on the slippery slope.
Dean Hoyles money can slow the process but the longer the status quo remains the more the debt mounts up and the less attractive HTAFC looks to investors and sponsors alike.