Your Answers

[Neuromantic]

Without prejudice or commitment:

There are the Responses I received from Mr Roy Whalley - they were questions from a collective so here they are now.

[SaddlerSteve]

So you can see what he was replying to:


Questions:

Dear Roy and/or Jeff and/or Mr Mole

Below are some questions all Walsall fans want the opportunity for you to answer. I hope
the answers you may provide to the following questions clear up a whole host of matters.


1. Why does the Chairman rarely attend the AGM meetings? when the purpose is to provide
answers to shareholders - how is this possible when you are not in the country or in
attendance?

2. Can RW please clarify in general terms a point made in response to a question he
answered to Wayne Swift 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?

3. Can Mr. Whalley clarify a point made in response the build cost of Bescot vesrus 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?

4. Do Mr Whalley Mr Bonser realise that if they spent a couple of hours over maybe a
curry and a few beers with a small group of fans then they may be able to clear up a
number of issues which on communicating to fans via another medium or messageboard may
result in a friendly relationship with the fans to everyones mutual benefit?

5. Can you provide assurances that the club is not in any danger of seeking bankruptcy
protection in the next twelve months?

6. 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 clubs
outstanding loans to it directors. Please can you provide clarity around this point.

7. 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 ? Is the freehold included in the sale?



Thank you


Darren Rhodes

[philthesaddler]

Well done for posting them, at long last common sense prevails.

Now everyone can see what a blabbering, incoherent husk of a club we have become, where loyal fans questioning the history of the club are threatened with legal action.

[yoda]

Excellent news.

To redress the balance and show good spirit I'll now make a donation. I just didnt like being presured to.

[Geordiesaddler]

Its interesting that having originally cited "the clean up costs" as being a reason behind the huge difference in the cost of Glanford and Bescot, when asked to clarify whether this was indeed included in the build cost, (or as per a club document of 1991) was an additional cost in the sum of £1.297 m Whalley chose to not answer at all, but instead to now start whittering on about the Taylor report. the main reccommendation of the Taylor report that would have affected stadium build cost was of course that relating to all seater stadia. As Walsall were not at that time in the top two divisions they were not subject to this, and of course Bescot was built - as was Glanford Park - with two terraced ends. There were a few other reccommendations relating to gangways and fencing, none of which would have significantly increased the build costs. The only other stadium built around that time - ie. Mcdiarmid Park (St Johnstone) had a much higher specification than Bescot - eg all seater, higher capacity, cantilever stands etc etc and was fully compliant with the Taylor Report's final reccommendations. It was built for roughly the same as Bescot, but did not include the near £1.3m clean up element. So effectively taking all into account it cost LESS than Bescot and delivered a much higher spec.

In answer to the other question I asked he mentions purchase of the lease as being the factor that has made renting cheaper than buying. Of course he fails to mention what this sum was (how convenient). Assuming Jeff Bonser had the financial means to purchase both the freehold and the lease via his pension fund (which obviously he did), why didn't he, as the club's number one fan and club chairman choose to lend Walsall FC the money to buy it, and charge it a commercial rate of interest on the loan? That way the club would have become an owner occupier once more, and JB would have received a fair return for his investment in "the club he loves".

[Horozontal Harry]

Shock horror! Monkey defends Organ Grinder

Knowing that Roy was always going to be a mouthpiece for his boss I always made allowances for him, and actually used to quite like the guy. This doesn't sound like JB speak though - this sounds like the Real Roy coming through at last.

Another well thought out public relations exercise designed to alienate the more discerning supporter and to keep the stayaways staying away.

[swiftyboy]

Im glad the subject has been opened up again as a discussion.

I truly believe that Whalleys bumbling answers, again show a panicky and flustered response to all the questions asked. If there is truly nothing "untoward", then why does the club continue to make themselves look guilty?

[yoda]

Without him working behind the scenes... there would have been no move to Bescot Stadium

Small price to pay for freedom.

[WFC_Rob]

That's a typical Roy Whalley 'batten up the hatches' response.
Whilst questions needed to be asked, did anyone think he would give anything other than four pages of 'we don't care what you say or think'?
That bloke can blame the recession all he likes for a downturn in attendences, but he's just not doing his job - pure and simple.

[wfc_pleck]

owned by roy Whalley :lol:

[saddlerken]

More defensive than a Dicky Dosh team :wink:

That last paragraph is pathetic

[tinned]

How dare the fans question anything about the running of the club. They should just shell out and shut up.

I think he mentioned that we're a club transformed 3 times and that without Bonser there'd be no Walsall twice. He's like a broken bloody record.

Many, many fans used to believe these little soundbites, Roy. One by one they're eventually realising it's all hot air.

You've both been found out. Now get out!

[Jockey]

Open message to Mr Whalley and Mr. Bonser,

You are pathetic and have shown your true colours over the past few years and I honestly think our small success was through luck not good ownership.

Can you both fudge off now and give someone else a chance to turn this club we once loved, back into a football club.

No best wishes whatsoever,

Stayaway No 2,000

:mrgreen:

[Exile]

I thought it was good of Roy to take the time out of his busy schedule to write five pages in response to some vexacious internet pest* with all the tact of the SS on patrol. Did anyone, in all honesty, expect some grand gesture - an "it's a fair cop, guv, and we'd have got away with it if it wasn't for you meddling kids" type of response?

Far better to send him a list of questions asking why he's ignored all the great crowd/matchday experience ideas we've had on here over the years. That's where he could improve his standing, and that of the club. Fair enough, UTS may (to him) appear to be a "small group of people with their own agenda", but for the main, that agenda is seeing Walsall do good!!



* - sorry, Darren, only joking!

[Geordiesaddler]

I especially like the bit about how anyone questioning that any decision has been taken with the interests of the club at heart is being "contemptuous".

So just at random... its contemptuous to suggest.... that repeatdly refusing Jeff Bonser's business partner Paul Merson's regination as team manager was against the best interests of the club?

Or... (effectively) paying at least £1.3m for the clean-up of land we didn't own?

Or...facilitating the ownership of the freehold to fall into the hands of an entity which by law is compelled to charge "market rent"?

Apparently, all done in the best interests of Walsall FC, well there you have it :idea:

[martkrugeleysaddler]

He wont get his job back behind the bar...... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Whitters]

Well if some recalcitrant little whippersnapper had sent me questions about my business I doubt whether I would have made so much effort in replying.
And yes I do believe the Americans landed on the moon.

[1966]

Did you ask when chips are coming back Daz? :wink:

[Geordiesaddler]

Well if some recalcitrant little whippersnapper had sent me questions about my business I doubt whether I would have made so much effort in replying.
.

But on the other hand, if you were a paid employee of a business whose customer charter states it will endeavour to respond to communications from customers within 14 days, you may consider yourself duty bound to do so. (see section 2.4 of WFC Customer Charter)

[landywood]

the letter raises some thoughts:
did Boner and the board save walsall some 20 years ago-yes
would some other buyer purchased the club - don't know

has boner feathered his own nest whilst walsall have enjoyed there most successful period in history- yes
has he filtered part of his amast wealth gained from walsall f.c backinto the football club - not since colin lee left (correct me if i'm wrong)

if boner had welcomed colin lee's investment oppertunity would the club have stayed in the championship - I feel we would
would we still be there now- ?

how are walsall f.c intending to bring back or entice new supporters to the club
surely the current squad isn't good enough to play attractive or winning football , what are the club going to do about it?

i feel after the colapse of the itv deal the club panicked and we are now suffering for it , we might have had the most successful period in the clubs history but i feel at the moment we are possibly in the start of one of the worst

[Ulster Saddler]

What I would like to know is simply:

What did we sell Fellows Park and its grounds for?

What did Bescot Stadium cost to build?

How much would the freehold have cost to purchase?

What was left out of the Fellows Park proceeds or what was the amount we needed to borrow to fill the gap.

When Whalley says no bank would have touched us it sounds like we sold Fellows Park for a couple of pounds and therefore had no assets to offer as security (e.g. cash or the freehold of Bescot itself)

The above is a very simple "back of the envelope" calculation which could be provided easily by the club. A four or five letter tirade from Mr Whalley is a complete waste of his time, leaves no-one the wiser and merely shows the distate he appears to have for the ordinary Walsall supporter who does not agree 100% with evetrything the club has ever done.

Finally, if as he implies in his letter all these questions were clearly answerered years ago, why have I never ever met anybody in the last 20 years who can explain it to me!!

UP THE SADDLERS

[Geordiesaddler]

OldPenkSaddler provided most of the information on the original questions thread.

Namley:

OldPenkSaddler wrote:
A few FACTS for you all:

The expenditure on the Stadium and the utilisation of the funds from the sale of Fellows Park was as follows:

£4.100,000 Stadium build costs
£1,297,000 Land reclamation and refurb costs
£ 500,000 Walsall MBC ranson strip
£ 276,000 Purchase of houses on site require to develop Bescot
£ 800,000 Construction of the Saddlers Club
£ 398,000 Paid to Terry Ramsden to satisfy his debt
£ 688,000 Used to pay off overdraft and professional fees on deal

£8,059,000 Total expenditure

£5,750,000 Sale of Fellows Park
£ 660,000 Other income including catering subsidies and brewery loans

£6,410,000 Total income

£1,639,000 Total excess expenditure.

Mr Maurice Miller introduced the Club to Denglen Limited whose directors were Peter Gilman ( director Leeds at the time) and M Morris ( director of Charlton Athletic). They could not be directors of Walsall because they already had other footballing interests. Ramsdens Shares were sold to Davenmanor of which Maurice Miller was the major shareholder.

In August 1988 at an EGM of the company a resolution was approved to enter into a development agreement with Denglen Limited and to dispose of Fellows Park, build a new Stadium and pay off major existing debts. The meeting also agreed to enter into an annual rent of £75,000 with RPI adjustments in respect of Bescot Stadium.

The contract for the construction of Bescot Stadium was awarded to GMI Construction Limited on a negotiated tender basis.

The value of Bescot Stadium, including the land value at the time was valued at £10,000,000. To have rented an equivalent stadium would have led to a rent of £1m pa subject to RPI. In order to reduce this rental figure the proceeds from the sale of Fellows Park was invested into the development. The rent of £75,000 pa was below the commercial value of the outstanding expenditure. A commercial rent would have been £300,000pa and so it was a good deal for the Club!!!

All the above is taken from a Media document released by the Club at the time and reproduced in the match programme on 12th January 1991.

End of Quote from OPS..

Now

The quesions Mister Whalley failed to answer is why did we spend circa £1.3m on cleaning up a piece of land we didn't own? And why in earlier answers (To Wayne Swift) did Mister Whalley clearly state that this expenditure accounted for (at least in part) the extortionate cost of Bescot compared to Glanford Park - WHEN IT CLEALY STATES HERE IT WAS AN ADDITIONAL COST!!! Hence Mister Whalley ignores the question and starts on about the Taylor report as to how the build cost of Bescot was £1.6m more than Glanford Park etc. He had in earlier correspondence claimed not to know the build cost of Glanford Park, and stated that nobody else could know - this information is actually on Scunthorpe's official website!!!

The freehold was purchased for 200k.

The new deal-breaker (according to Whalley) ie the cost of purchasing the lease and hence assumes the role of the secret amount that we couldn't have afforded - but our chairman could!

[philthesaddler]

What did we sell Fellows Park and its grounds for?

£5.75m in 1989/90, with other budgeted income of £660k. Total income from the sale of Fellows Park, £6.41m

What did Bescot Stadium cost to build?

The final “stadium cost” was £4.1m, although another £1,297,000 was spent on “land reclamation, catering equipment, professional fees and furbishment of public areas”

However, there were further costs: £688k on "over drafts and sundry fees", £1,567m on "Site Assembly".

Total cost of the move to Bescot Stadium came to £8,059m, a loss of £1.649m.

Amazing considering we'd sold our only major asset, and other grounds at the time were being built for far less than our "stadium cost" (Huish Park, £3.2m, Glanford Park, £2.5m)

Somehow, Walsall FC conspired to spend £1.6m more than Scunthorpe, £900k more than Yeovil AND get a lower spec stadium, AND end up as tennants where before they had been owners.

How much would the freehold have cost to purchase?

Dont know

What was left out of the Fellows Park proceeds or what was the amount we needed to borrow to fill the gap?

None, we made a loss on the move.

When Whalley says no bank would have touched us it sounds like we sold Fellows Park for a couple of pounds and therefore had no assets to offer as security (e.g. cash or the freehold of Bescot itself).

It wasn't, we were cash rich, but the club spent £1m+ on preparing land to be built on that it would never own, and a further £3m on other costs. Our saviour conspired to get the club massively in debt and minus it's one major asset.

Finally, if as he implies in his letter all these questions were clearly answerered years ago, why have I never ever met anybody in the last 20 years who can explain it to me!!

Because the answers the club gives are never clearcut, always evasive and certainly not genuine. They always try and deflect the question with spurious other information with the purpose of confusing people (see the stuff about the club not being able to afford the freehold, but not mentioning any solid figures, and the stuff about no bank would have touched the club with a barge pole...really Roy?)

The club thinks they can fool people, but they cant, and thats why the club is so poorly supported now because those that werent fooled have given up on the club.

[aaaae]

But the bottom line, regardless of history, is that never in living history has the club been so impoverished, supporter numbers are in freefall and on the field we are no better than we have been, on average, throughout our history.

So what exactly have Whalley and Bonser have achieved?

[philthesaddler]

But the bottom line, regardless of history, is that never in living history has the club been so impoverished, supporter numbers are in freefall and on the field we are no better than we have been, on average, throughout our history.

So what exactly have Whalley and Bonser have achieved?

Simples, to get the club in more debt and asset-less.

[aaaae]

But the bottom line, regardless of history, is that never in living history has the club been so impoverished, supporter numbers are in freefall and on the field we are no better than we have been, on average, throughout our history.

So what exactly have Whalley and Bonser have achieved?

Simples, to get the club in more debt and asset-less.

Problem is Whalley and Bonser are delusional and complacent.

[Exile]

We're a club transformed!

[aaaae]

We're a club transformed!

Well that is true, we are a club transformed...........but into what?

[leics_saddler]

Hello, I'm back after a short absence.

There are some very puzzling things going on here. It's all very well for Roy to say he's covered this ground already but if he's so keen on the present and the future, he'd do well to remember that a significant proportion of our supporters were not even born in 1990, let alone be old enough to grasp financial transactions which are 'very complex'.

What is troubling is that a major building project was carried out on a negotiation. Whilst that is the club's perogative, this was probably to save money off tendering costs, which of course it was likely to lose hand over fist on build cost. I do wonder what a comparable competent contractor would have carried out the build cost for. :?

I am unclear about the question of land ownership before and after the stadium build. If £1.3million was required to deal with the land reclamation why was this paid by the club? Or if the land ownership was transferred around this time, why wasn't this reclamation cost factored into the sale price.

Of course it is very good of the club to separate this cost out of the build cost and show that 'compliance with the Taylor Report' and other stuff was more than the cost to reclaim a former sewage works! Even if the club had the foresight to plan with stadium for future expansion / refurbishment / seating installations, there is no way on God's earth that I can see £1.6m, 19 years ago.

They've tried to be open and look a bit silly. But the most disheartening thing is the tone of Roy's letter. Relations between the club and its supporters have deteriorated to this level (and we should not forget Jeff's outburst of March 2001) and 20 years of entrenched antagonism cannot be good for the club. The supporters are doing their best to leave, but it would be easier if the ownership changed.

[Jorge14]

And so the world keeps turning...

See my response to the last letter to Whalley/reply from Whalley thread, but yet again Whalley spends time writing a reply probably pushing 1500 words. If it isn't true, why respond and why put the effort in to keep a charade up when you will be retired in a couple of years?