Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:23:33 GMT 1
www.htafc.com/page/FromTheBoardroomDetail/0,,10312~2572366,00.html FULL TEXT BELOW:It has been uncomfortable not responding to the supporters to date but the time is right for me to break my own personal silence on the share issue. A deal for the transfer of the shares was announced in December 2009 (link) and terms agreed in February 2010 - it was great news. Article continues Advertisement Since then, the deal moved slowly towards being completed. After February 2010 when the terms had already been agreed and the deal announced Ken Davy then proposed a further change. He wished that the formula for calculating the rent payable by Huddersfield Town and Giants be changed from what he had put in place, and had been the accepted practice by all parties for the previous seven years. The proposal in itself was not an unreasonable request and in financial terms immaterial. Rent is one of the many Stadium arrangements which could be considered in need of revision. Critically to single out just that one issue and then seek to change it after a deal had been agreed was unacceptable to me. It was something extra on top of all the other terms and conditions I had already agreed to. By December 2011 this rent change was still unresolved. In the interests of trying to complete the deal, I then backed the "final attempt" by KSDL, using arbitration, to break the deadlock over the rent formula. Sir John Harman imposed a deadline of close of business 16 December 2011 to agree. As Sir John Harman said in the KSDL statement: "Last month a final attempt to have the rental formula determined by a process of arbitration was unsuccessful." This arbitration process was agreed to by Huddersfield Town and supported by Kirklees Council, but was rejected by Ken Davy. Then inevitably with the passing of the KSDL deadline, after the "final attempt" had failed, the agreement of February 2010 immediately fell away. All the parties knew the consequences and implications of a failure to reach agreement at the "final attempt". It would now be easy for me and Huddersfield Town to be drawn into a war of words; seeking to challenge every fact and statement that has recently been issued. At this time, that would not be right for Huddersfield Town or anyone else. Every person involved, including me, will be judged on what they have done and said, and the truth will come out. We now have to focus on what is the right thing to do for the long term. I acknowledge this may leave many unanswered questions for the moment but whilst things may appear confusing and complex, when you cut through everything it is just about doing the right thing. Over the last four years Huddersfield Town has been referred to as a "Partner" in the stadium and there has been endless talk of everyone working together in "Partnership". I have been told it doesn't matter if we are a shareholder or not in KSDL - we are still a "Partner" - and that's all we should be bothered about. Huddersfield Town is a different kind of "Partner" to the Council and Giants - we don't have any shares or ownership in the Stadium. Major decisions which affect Huddersfield Town in the Stadium can be made by the other two shareholders. We used to have shares but they were transferred away for £2. All this matters to Huddersfield Town and its supporters greatly - the supporters tell me all the time! It will matter more in the future because the return of the shares was so close. Given the circumstances in which the agreement for their return has not been completed, this will now only worsen the feeling of injustice. Think of it this way: it is the simple difference between being a tenant paying rent on a property or paying a mortgage and ultimately owning it. Also crucially, it matters even more so to KSDL, because KSDL is so heavily reliant on the income from Huddersfield Town and its supporters to be successful, paying 75% of the rent and earning corresponding amounts from catering, beverage and events income - that shows how vital Huddersfield Town is. With no ownership interest but having such a heavy commercial impact this weakens KSDL. In a tough economic climate with big challenges ahead, Huddersfield Town and its supporters need to be on board for KSDL to prosper. The Council acknowledged this is a major problem. The ownership issue was addressed by the founders of the Stadium when they set it up. As Paul Fletcher said in May 2009 (link): "That (the current shares arrangement) was not how it was envisaged when it was set up. It was always intended to belong to the two clubs and the council, in those joint proportions. We believed it was a groundbreaking partnership, which would serve both clubs and the community." The vision of the Stadium was a joint sport, community facility with shared ownership between the Council, Huddersfield Town and the Huddersfield Giants. KSDL gained huge strength from this joint ownership structure, with all parties having a real ownership in the Stadium and all supporters feeling they, and their Club, could play a part in its success. In recent years, the clubs have funded major investments to the Stadium - such as the North Stand and the extension to the Direct Golf Stand offices, Stadium Superstore and Ticket Office - out of their own money. These are still being paid for today on top of the clubs' rents. A successful KSDL could instead pay for investments in the Stadium, relieving the clubs of this burden. The Stadium can function in the current arrangement, but will struggle to prosper and that is not in the interests of anyone. We want to help KSDL prosper and drive forward. As we now stand, Huddersfield Town is currently paying 75% of the total Stadium rent (this will only rise if Huddersfield Town progresses up the League ladder) plus extra contributions to fund past investments and improvements to the Stadium, whilst the Stadium continues to be just owned by the two other parties. For the good of the community and prosperity of KSDL, the shareholding needs to be restored as soon as possible to the position that was originally in place when the vision for the Stadium was created. Only this will give Huddersfield Town and its supporters an incentive to fully get behind and embrace the Stadium. Despite everything, we will still continue to work for a return of the shares in KSDL to Huddersfield Town. I hope the fans will understand and fully support me. As events develop I will continue to update the fans. Dean -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Larry David's post - " WE, THE FANS....now need to show support to our magnificent chairman about this issue now. the following would be useful...
- Placards - banners - letters to the paper - deputations on council - petitions to the council (i work for KC so know, they have to be dealt with and investigated thoroughly then cabinet have to approve etc!) - signs - protests at KSDL meetings - protests outside the kiosks before / half time - protests at giants matches - contact local / national media
the more we do the more it will make a difference. DAVY OUT!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:31:10 GMT 1
It don't sound great does it! We ALL support Dean and i'm sure he knows this! Davy and this whole situation is just a big mess... The Manx Army is being deployed as we speak!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:34:16 GMT 1
Don't buy anything else in that stadium that doesn't benefit Town.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:34:20 GMT 1
If only it was realistic to build a new stadium and f*ck the old git over.
|
|
|
Post by keepmoving on Jan 10, 2012 15:35:14 GMT 1
yep deanos been buttfucked!!!!
"As we now stand, Huddersfield Town is currently paying 75% of the total Stadium rent (this will only rise if Huddersfield Town progresses up the League ladder) plus extra contributions to fund past investments and improvements to the Stadium, whilst the Stadium continues to be just owned by the two other parties."
Thanks ken.
|
|
|
Post by stevvy on Jan 10, 2012 15:35:21 GMT 1
Basically confirms that Davy changing the deal was the reason he pulled out, particularly after Davy then refused arbitration.
|
|
|
Post by offtopic on Jan 10, 2012 15:36:44 GMT 1
Why not make people aware that Davy wants £3million for something he paid £2 for?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:37:02 GMT 1
Deano has basically said what we've all suspected... DAVY IS TO BLAME!
ALL THE FANS need to come together and arrange protests, action from Council etc? Boycott food and stuff that will benefit Davy?
|
|
dazbil76
Iain Dunn Terrier
[M0:1]
Posts: 428
|
Post by dazbil76 on Jan 10, 2012 15:38:33 GMT 1
I never liked the stadium in the first place!!!
|
|
|
Post by Frightened Corner Flag on Jan 10, 2012 15:38:42 GMT 1
Can someone past the text in here please?
|
|
|
Post by Underdog on Jan 10, 2012 15:39:35 GMT 1
Can we refuse t opay council tax til we get the shares back?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:40:31 GMT 1
Maybe build a stadium on the Isle of Man and pay no tax at all
|
|
|
Post by Doc Halladay 32 on Jan 10, 2012 15:40:57 GMT 1
Deano refused an amendment to the original deal of the rental formula and Ken refused to accept arbitration.
Therefore Ken loses his £3m loan stock windfall. The original deal is dead
Let's pressure the Examiner and the Council/Councillors for the immediate return of the shares for the original £2.
Let's see if the 'saviour' can escape this without referring to the £3m windfall he was due to receive.
An excellent statement IMO, no need for warts and all - as he said the truth will come out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:42:34 GMT 1
copied full statement at the top now
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 10, 2012 15:44:41 GMT 1
Think this thread should be pinned to the top of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by stevvy on Jan 10, 2012 15:46:21 GMT 1
Deano refused an amendment of the the rental formula Only because of when Kenocchio asked to change it. Had he asked for it to be changed in the first place, I think the chances of us having the shares in our possession now would be alot higher. It's basically Kenocchio's fault for wanting to change the deal at the last minute. To then refuse arbitration when everyone else agrees to it just makes him come across worse still. Just backs up my thoughts that Davy is nothing more than a lying little rat.
|
|
|
Post by seanyd1brit on Jan 10, 2012 15:47:01 GMT 1
Doesn't tell us much, but I think it's the right approach.
More patience required folks.
|
|
|
Post by Hellawell on Jan 10, 2012 15:48:34 GMT 1
Got to agree that if the whole buying for £2 selling for no less than £3million was pressed public pressure would definitely fall on deano's side
|
|
|
Post by Frightened Corner Flag on Jan 10, 2012 15:49:01 GMT 1
We are so lucky to have dean own our club! We need to make sure every fan that walks through the gate knows about this!! Leaflets, posters, blokes shouting from the rooftops!!!!
|
|
dazbil76
Iain Dunn Terrier
[M0:1]
Posts: 428
|
Post by dazbil76 on Jan 10, 2012 15:49:05 GMT 1
Can we not organise a protest for the Brentford game, in front of the Sky cameras, let the world know what Davy is doing?
Don't want anything that's gonna affect the team so Suggestions on a Postcard
|
|
dazbil76
Iain Dunn Terrier
[M0:1]
Posts: 428
|
Post by dazbil76 on Jan 10, 2012 15:50:59 GMT 1
How about Sky Bet posters with 'Bet £2 - Win £3m' that'll get them talking
|
|
|
Post by jkempf1 on Jan 10, 2012 15:52:37 GMT 1
Can't we just go back to Leeds Road?
The centre spot is still marked! Cars for goalposts, get some floor from the B&Q for line markings...get a few sofa's from Argos for the fans and we're sorted!
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Jan 10, 2012 15:53:01 GMT 1
Don't buy anything else in that stadium that doesn't benefit Town. Couldnt agree more - hence HTSA's leaflets and website detail! I think it sums it up when Clr Harman makes reference to that action being unhelpful in his article.............................................................................it certainly is, because without the revenue, KSDL struggles which means ultimately their losses have to be underwritten solely by an amalgam of KD and the council!!!!!! KDs actions here maybe those of a successful businessman wanting to make as much money as possible........but they stink morally given his repeated assertions of his pride in saving the sporting clubs of Huddersfield!!! If you have any sense of decency Mr Davy, then do the right thing and get the deal done!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
bigtruck
Frank Worthington Terrier
[M0:0][N4:#bigtrucktone#]
Posts: 1,825
|
Post by bigtruck on Jan 10, 2012 15:53:54 GMT 1
Very "professional" statement but you can see the anger when you read between the lines. Stating the fact Davy paid £2 for shares etc. It's obvious where Dean lays the blame and is even pragmatic when he suggests the original request by Davy wasn't a big deal.
Its the investment in the ground that really sticks when we get no benefit from it. Continuing Deans metaphor/simile, if you were renting a house you wouldn't pay for refurbishment work to be done, that's down to the owners of the property.
I would love it if we could get onto Calderdale Council and get our own Stadium built.
|
|
|
Post by keepmoving on Jan 10, 2012 15:54:04 GMT 1
so basically the old c*** is happy for deano to be losing millions while he sits there earning money for nothing?
Jeez.
Shame I dont have a few million cos what we really need is to move away from that white elephant that is milking our club dry while fuckface is laughing at every single one of us.
|
|
|
Post by iceman909 on Jan 10, 2012 15:59:08 GMT 1
Why not make people aware that Davy wants £3million for something he paid £2 for? Because its not true. He wants the £3m he put into HTFC as directors loans back. The shares were agreed to be transferred for £2 - their value has not changed. However all this (return of loans, transfer of shares) was agreed as part of a wider deal in Feb 2010 so in a sense the two things are linked.
|
|
|
Post by oldmanboothy on Jan 10, 2012 16:02:01 GMT 1
Calderdale Council still probably wouldn't agree unless there was something in it for them and I'm not sure i can think of a site for a stadium that would be acceptable. Does Dean even have that sort of money available to him? I'm not too sure. I think the chances of us leaving the Galpharm are pretty slim. Whether we are legally bounded to stay in the stadium or not i do not know but i think it's pretty clear that we need to get those shares back if the club is going to survive in the long term. If we were to depart the stadium for a temporary period of time, say 2 or 3 seasons, would that be enough to ruin Uncle Ken? Even if we don't plan to go through with such extreme plans, I think the time has come for these threats to be made.
|
|
|
Post by Larry David on Jan 10, 2012 16:02:09 GMT 1
WE, THE FANS....now need to show support to our magnificent chairman about this issue now. the following would be useful...
- Placards - banners - letters to the paper - deputations on council - petitions to the council (i work for KC so know, they have to be dealt with and investigated thoroughly then cabinet have to approve etc!) - signs - protests at KSDL meetings - protests outside the kiosks before / half time - protests at giants matches - contact local / national media - stop paying the rent and dare them to evict us!
the more we do the more it will make a difference. DAVY OUT!
|
|
cj01
Jimmy Nicholson Terrier
High above Huddersfield.
Posts: 1,595
|
Post by cj01 on Jan 10, 2012 16:03:22 GMT 1
I too wish that Dean had made it clear that the price of the £2 shares was £3M, then the refusal to alter the rental formula as an add on can be seen more clearly as the straw that broke the camel's back.
Goodness knows where we go from here, other than perhaps being patient? If Ken is not now going to get his £3M; if Dean is not going to fund any more improvements to the stadium over and above his rent (which I presume he won't - but shame there's probably nothing else that needs doing); then presumably we just have to wait until the financial pressure forces KSDL (i.e. Ken) back to the negotiating table? If and when that happens we may be in a stronger negotiating position.
However I'm not sure how sufficient financial pressure can be brought to bear on this. We can't stop paying the rent and presumably as long as we pay it, KSDL can scrape along. I'm quite happy to refuse to buy a pie and a pint along with everyone else, if that will actually have any effect. Won't KSDL just put the rent up to cover that loss?
|
|
mickyk
Chris Hay Terrier
[M0:0]
Posts: 87
|
Post by mickyk on Jan 10, 2012 16:06:06 GMT 1
So HTFC are still contributing to additional payments for the office/shop extension to the riverside stand ? How much rent does Davy's SimplyBiz company pay for use of "our" office extension ?!
|
|