Questions to send to Roy and co

[OmmerEmCradley]

Come on keep up Norton

[OmmerEmCradley]

Did the club own Fellows Park or was it owned by the main shareholder. there is a difference!

You mentioned earlier that when we moved we gained a new debt of £1.6 million. Well with your work contact you can then review the accounts for all the years leading up to the move to Bescot and put the info on here. surprised you havn't done it before TBH

[Nortoncanesred]

The Ltd company owned Fellows Park, it doesn't now. It isn't relevant who the major shareholder is as the limited company is the entity.

I don't need to "keep up" :?

Since all these things have been debated already maybe you should already know them? I can totally accept that you see it differently to myself or that some people don't care and just want to go to the football and not worry about it, their choice.

However my choice is that I simply don't agree with what Mr Bonser has done in relation to the freehold and rent and nothing you say or no matter how long we debate it will change my mind, I very much doubt yours could be changed either.

It's not a competition or a war of attrition, at the end of the day we both want WFC to succeed and prosper, I no longer believe that Mr Bonser is helpful with that aim in mind and that's the long and short of it.

[Exile]

Nice of you to not take the original post in context, but I can't apologise if you don't read through posts correctly.

Also nice of you to be pedantic at part of one of my posts. when i mentioned about different foundations for different ground bearing, then you could have helped the discussion for all by adding a post along the lines of:

"OEC I can see what you are trying to say about the actual foundations used at Glanford and Bescot. FYI I have studied elements of Geology as part of a degree. I think what you were trying to explain was that both grounds may have used different foundation systems based on the make up of the strata benaeth the two grounds. You may have a point that one ground may have been built with a simple pad or raft foundation whilst the other may have used extensive, and deep, pile foundations. This wouldn't necessarily be dependant upon whether it was built on a brownfield or greenfield site, as the underlying sub-base would be more important in the decision of what kind of foundation was used. I do take your point though that the type of foundation used at both grounds may account for some of the difference in cost. I hope this helps take the discussion forward"

But you didn't, shame that

I'd have thought it clear that by selectively quoting parts of your post I either couldn't be bothered with the rest, or I agreed with it. Didn't realise there was some internet messageboard protocol that meant I had to quote the whole thing.

Good of you to pick up on one small point out of the many I made and then try to big it up. Still, I can't apologise if you don't read through posts properly and stop after two lines.

I'm sure you could have helped the discussion along by refuting a few more points instead of trying your condescending best to put words into my mouth that I don't want there.

But you didn't. Shame that.

[Pedagogue]

... I can totally accept that you see it differently to myself or that some people don't care and just want to go to the football and not worry about it - their choice.

However, my choice is that I simply don't agree with what Mr Bonser has done in relation to the freehold and rent and nothing you say, or no matter how long we debate it, will change my mind, I very much doubt yours could be changed either.

It's not a competition or a war of attrition. At the end of the day, we both want WFC to succeed and prosper. I no longer believe that Mr Bonser is helpful with that aim in mind and that's the long and short of it.

That also encapsulates my attitude. I understand that many (the majority?) of Saddlers' fans are not bothered about the boardroom politics and financial history of the club and I respect that. Similarly, there are a few (and getting fewer by the day) people who actively support Bonser and his actions. I respect, but do not share, the views of those people, also.

Like Nortoncanesred, I do not agree with Bonser's actions and no amount of counter-argument is likely to change my mind. Were he to donate the freehold back to the club when he finally quits then I would feel more favourably towards him but, as we all know, that ain't gonna happen. We are up faeces-creek without a paddle and things will only get worse, not better.

[swiftyboy]

... I can totally accept that you see it differently to myself or that some people don't care and just want to go to the football and not worry about it - their choice.

However, my choice is that I simply don't agree with what Mr Bonser has done in relation to the freehold and rent and nothing you say, or no matter how long we debate it, will change my mind, I very much doubt yours could be changed either.

It's not a competition or a war of attrition. At the end of the day, we both want WFC to succeed and prosper. I no longer believe that Mr Bonser is helpful with that aim in mind and that's the long and short of it.

That also encapsulates my attitude. I understand that many (the majority?) of Saddlers' fans are not bothered about the boardroom politics and financial history of the club and I respect that. Similarly, there are a few (and getting fewer by the day) people who actively support Bonser and his actions. I respect, but do not share, the views of those people, also.

Like Nortoncanesred, I do not agree with Bonser's actions and no amount of counter-argument is likely to change my mind. Were he to donate the freehold back to the club when he finally quits then I would feel more favourably towards him but, as we all know, that ain't gonna happen. We are up faeces-creek without a paddle and things will only get worse, not better.

The more i think about it Ped, the more i believe that most of the people who continually try to counter "facts" are just in it for a wind up. They cant all be so pig-headedly stupid surely?

[ShropsSaddler]

... I can totally accept that you see it differently to myself or that some people don't care and just want to go to the football and not worry about it - their choice.

However, my choice is that I simply don't agree with what Mr Bonser has done in relation to the freehold and rent and nothing you say, or no matter how long we debate it, will change my mind, I very much doubt yours could be changed either.

It's not a competition or a war of attrition. At the end of the day, we both want WFC to succeed and prosper. I no longer believe that Mr Bonser is helpful with that aim in mind and that's the long and short of it.

That also encapsulates my attitude. I understand that many (the majority?) of Saddlers' fans are not bothered about the boardroom politics and financial history of the club and I respect that. Similarly, there are a few (and getting fewer by the day) people who actively support Bonser and his actions. I respect, but do not share, the views of those people, also.

Like Nortoncanesred, I do not agree with Bonser's actions and no amount of counter-argument is likely to change my mind. Were he to donate the freehold back to the club when he finally quits then I would feel more favourably towards him but, as we all know, that ain't gonna happen. We are up faeces-creek without a paddle and things will only get worse, not better.

The more i think about it Ped, the more i believe that most of the people who continually try to counter "facts" are just in it for a wind up. They cant all be so pig-headedly stupid surely?

And there we go, in that one reply you have perfectly summed up the reason that I rarely use this board these days. When I do, it tends to be just to keep up with news.

Pedagogue had summed it quite perfectly, without any suggestion of who is "right" or "wrong" in this situation, just a simple acknowledgment that people have different viewpoints, which he doesn't agree with.

Whereas you have to wade in suggesting that anyone who doesn't see the evil deceit and fraud that you do must be "pig-headed" and "stupid" :roll:

I'll disappear into real life again now.....and await someone coming up with the tangible evidence that is really needed to expose the freehold situation for what it really is.

[aaaae]

And there we go, in that one reply you have perfectly summed up the reason that I rarely use this board these days. When I do, it tends to be just to keep up with news.

Pedagogue had summed it quite perfectly, without any suggestion of who is "right" or "wrong" in this situation, just a simple acknowledgment that people have different viewpoints, which he doesn't agree with.

Whereas you have to wade in suggesting that anyone who doesn't see the evil deceit and fraud that you do must be "pig-headed" and "stupid" :roll:

I'll disappear into real life again now.....and await someone coming up with the tangible evidence that is really needed to expose the freehold situation for what it really is.

But there are more viewpoints that are well informed and reasonable than not - you cite Pedagogue for example, you can add Norton, Geoff Whiting, tinned and others. Why let the few posters at the far end of the spectrum push you out of the debate?

[swiftyboy]

... I can totally accept that you see it differently to myself or that some people don't care and just want to go to the football and not worry about it - their choice.

However, my choice is that I simply don't agree with what Mr Bonser has done in relation to the freehold and rent and nothing you say, or no matter how long we debate it, will change my mind, I very much doubt yours could be changed either.

It's not a competition or a war of attrition. At the end of the day, we both want WFC to succeed and prosper. I no longer believe that Mr Bonser is helpful with that aim in mind and that's the long and short of it.

That also encapsulates my attitude. I understand that many (the majority?) of Saddlers' fans are not bothered about the boardroom politics and financial history of the club and I respect that. Similarly, there are a few (and getting fewer by the day) people who actively support Bonser and his actions. I respect, but do not share, the views of those people, also.

Like Nortoncanesred, I do not agree with Bonser's actions and no amount of counter-argument is likely to change my mind. Were he to donate the freehold back to the club when he finally quits then I would feel more favourably towards him but, as we all know, that ain't gonna happen. We are up faeces-creek without a paddle and things will only get worse, not better.

The more i think about it Ped, the more i believe that most of the people who continually try to counter "facts" are just in it for a wind up. They cant all be so pig-headedly stupid surely?

And there we go, in that one reply you have perfectly summed up the reason that I rarely use this board these days. When I do, it tends to be just to keep up with news.

Pedagogue had summed it quite perfectly, without any suggestion of who is "right" or "wrong" in this situation, just a simple acknowledgment that people have different viewpoints, which he doesn't agree with.

Whereas you have to wade in suggesting that anyone who doesn't see the evil deceit and fraud that you do must be "pig-headed" and "stupid" :roll:

I'll disappear into real life again now.....and await someone coming up with the tangible evidence that is really needed to expose the freehold situation for what it really is.

Just because i let my anger and frustration spill over into my posts, doesnt make me any more right or wrong than any of the more articulate posters!!!!

Does it?

[bangsection]

And there we go, in that one reply you have perfectly summed up the reason that I rarely use this board these days. When I do, it tends to be just to keep up with news.

Pedagogue had summed it quite perfectly, without any suggestion of who is "right" or "wrong" in this situation, just a simple acknowledgment that people have different viewpoints, which he doesn't agree with.

Whereas you have to wade in suggesting that anyone who doesn't see the evil deceit and fraud that you do must be "pig-headed" and "stupid" :roll:

I'll disappear into real life again now.....and await someone coming up with the tangible evidence that is really needed to expose the freehold situation for what it really is.

Internet Messageboard Offends Man With Delicate Sensibilities.

Sorry about that, but that's generally how e-debate work these days. I can assure you that UTS is very much at the vanilla end of the spectrum - no swearing allowed, aggressive behaviour punished, generally fair moderators. Have you ever read the comments after 90% of posts on YouTube?

Never mind, as long as you let everyone else know that "UTS ISN'T AS GOOD AS IT USED TO BE" then we can all feel suitably chastised.

As for Swiftyboy's post, I actually think he has a point. Reread OEC's disingenuous, evasive exchanges with patient, courteous posters like Norton and Exile and one is perfectly entitled to characterise his/her behaviour in the way that Swiftyboy does. Not sure I'd have used those exact words but the general sentiment is hardly controversial.

And this question of "tangible evidence" regarding the freehold is a red herring. The facts that we have (JB acquired the freehold for £200k from STP in 1994 because, according to Roy Whalley, the club couldn't afford a mortgage) is more than enough grist for my mill. What other aspect of the freehold situation needs to be "exposed"?

[Young_Tong]

So far we have:

1) Why does the chairman of the board rarely attends AGMs, since they are scheduled well in advance of the date for the specific purpose that those who can answer the questions posed are both in the country and in attendance - Jorge 14

2) Can RW please clarify in general terms a point made about the purchase of the freehold of the Bescot site in 1994, namely "mortgage payments would have been much higher than the rent". Given that it is a matter of public record that the freehold was purchased by the current landlord for £200k (source UK Land registry), and also that UK base interest rates at the time of said purchase were 5.25%, (source http://www.houseweb.co.uk/house/market/irfig.html), and the rent payments were at the time £75k per annum (now £349k per annum). Upon what basis can the assertion that mortage payments would have been higher than rent payments be made? - GeordieSaddler

3) Can Mr. Whalley clarify a point made regarding the build cost of Bescot versus that of Glanford Park. Mr. Whalley asserts that the clean up costs of the site partly explained the higher cost of Bescot. However, a publication made by the club on January 12th 1991 details seperate cost for building the stadium (£4.1m) and cleaning up the site (£1.297M). Just to be clear on the difference in cost between the two stadia, Scunthorpe United's official website states Glanford park was built for £2.5m. If the club doccument of January 1991 is acurate, can Mr Whalley revisit the issue of the £1.6m difference in build costs and point to other reasons as to how this arose? - GeordieSaddler

4) Do Roy Whalley and Mr Bonser realise that if they spent a couple of hours over maybe a curry and a few beers with a small group which includes Pedagogue and Geordiesaddler (and a couple of others) then they may be able to clear up a number of issues which on communicating to fans via this board may result in a friendly relationship with the fans to everyones mutual benefit? Then maybe there would be closure and we could all get on with life. - Whitters (This is my favourite)

5) If Mr Bonser is serious about selling the club, is he prepared to accept a realistic value for the club excluding the land or does he still believe the club is worth several million pounds on its own? If so how did he arrive at this valuation as all valuation models based on the clubs accounts depict a very different picture. - CanadianSaddler

6) Can you provide assurances that the club is not in any danger of seeking bankruptcy protection in the next twelve months. - CanadianSaddler

7) There have been rumours that the clubs current financial state is far from rosy and that a significant portion of the recent transfer funds are to be used to pay the club's outstanding loans to it directors. Please can you provide clarity around this point. - CanadianSaddler

8) It has been stated many times by the board & chairman that Walsall football club is up for sale, and has been for many years. Based on this, can they explain why they have never once seen fit to announce in public or press what the asking price is? One would suggest, to sell anything you need a value / selling price, if the board are serious its an extremely odd sales strategy. - LarryHaggler

9) Is the freehold included in the sale price, or is it just the football club? The club itself is worthless - indeed, you would have to pay some-one to take it off your hands. Its "assets" comprise such things as the second-hand values of the fixtures and fittings, office equipment, gym equipment, playing/training kit, etc., the as yet unused portions of the leases of Bescot Stadium and the training ground and players' contracts (virtually worthless as they are all short-term). Off-set against these are the debts of £2.9 million (as at the last A.G.M. - but, of course, these may have been reduced by the recent inflow of money to the club). - Pedagogue

So we have 4 pages (over 100 responses) and 9 serious questions since last Wednesday. I'd argue that these questions here are the best we are likely to collate. I'd like to point out Ken's post from early in the thread:

"These questions have to be absolutely precise and must not allow ANY room for deviation from the question

At no point should anyone at the club be critisised, Im sure you know this already otherwise that is reason enough, as we have seen before for them to avoid the question.

Send a copy to the local press too

Good work if this is done cunningly and intelligently"

There are some good questions above that I'm certain EVERY Walsall fan be they pro/anti Bonser, stayaway/happy clapper or good/bad time supporter will want answered. These questions do indeed need to be clarified and I think it will take more than an email sent to the club as, if there are any dodgy dealings(as some believe), they won't surrender such information unless pushed like David Frost pushed Nixon. Each of the questions needs to indeed be worded correctly so that all confusion can be avoided.

Hand these questions out to the local and national press, hand them out in the town centre, hand them outside the ground, hand them outside opposition grounds, hand them out to hair dressers and travel agencies. Get the word out there and be seen to be doing something. Arguing with people like OEC (no disrespect intended) will advance the cause no further, action is what is required.

[Neuromantic]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

[Fray Bentos is God!]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Ok, were they checked too? If there's any gaps in the questions, the club will exploit them like an 11 year old Indian kid in a sweatshop.

[Neuromantic]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Ok, were they checked too? If there's any gaps in the questions, the club will exploit them like an 11 year old Indian kid in a sweatshop.

Yeah, all pretty waterproof I think.

[swiftyboy]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Ok, were they checked too? If there's any gaps in the questions, the club will exploit them like an 11 year old Indian kid in a sweatshop.

Yeah, all pretty waterproof I think.

Apart from the spelling! :D Although Royston wont notice! :lol:

[Fray Bentos is God!]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Ok, were they checked too? If there's any gaps in the questions, the club will exploit them like an 11 year old Indian kid in a sweatshop.

Yeah, all pretty waterproof I think.

Apart from the spelling! :D Although Royston wont notice! :lol:

Should've been checked to be honest - these questions probe some very sensetive issues. Wouldn't be surprised id he does pick up on it.

[SaddlerSteve]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

I have a feeling you might hit a brick wall straight away with those questions if you've put peoples usernames next to them. You may have the old "we don't take anything seriously from such luminaries as ......" line.

[Fray Bentos is God!]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

I have a feeling you might hit a brick wall straight away with those questions if you've put peoples usernames next to them. You may have the old "we don't take anything seriously from such luminaries as ......" line.

Also - who else has it been sent to?

[Neuromantic]

Local Press - and I have taken out the names of people.

[saddlerken]

which local press Metfanwy?

is it your name against the letter? sorry of its been said earlier

[Neuromantic]

which local press Metfanwy?

is it your name against the letter? sorry of its been said earlier

I said it was a group of people. =]

[saddlerken]

mate, send it to the national press, the Guardian would love that type of stuff

make it sound a bit 'the common man ripped off by right wing nutcase' and we are in

[Neuromantic]

Update:

Dan Mole has emailed me back today saying the questions have been forwarded to the relevant departments, and will have a response within 14 days.

[Plastic Hawk]

Update:

Dan Mole has emailed me back today saying the questions have been forwarded to the relevant departments, and will have a response within 14 days.

Does it really take that long to type "no comment"? :wink:

[Magic Man Fan]

Update:

Dan Mole has emailed me back today saying the questions have been forwarded to the relevant departments, and will have a response within 14 days.

Does it really take that long to type "no comment"? :wink:

No
























































































































































































































































































comment. :mrgreen:

[swiftyboy]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Still no reply from the club i presume Daz?

[Young_Tong]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Still no reply from the club i presume Daz?

I seem to be missing 14 days from last Tuesday :?

[swiftyboy]

Those questions have been sent by the way. Lets see what happens!

Still no reply from the club i presume Daz?

I seem to be missing 14 days from last Tuesday :?

:?

[Young_Tong]

Update:

Dan Mole has emailed me back today saying the questions have been forwarded to the relevant departments, and will have a response within 14 days.

Still confused??

[swiftyboy]

Update:

Dan Mole has emailed me back today saying the questions have been forwarded to the relevant departments, and will have a response within 14 days.

Still confused??

Nope! :D

Trouble is, i doubt there WILL be a response within 14 days. It took me nearly four weeks! And that was only because i mentioned it on here