Taunton Iron Cider wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:08 pm

pembsexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 11:41 am Well yesterday the club released the redacted minutes for January 12. Working on that basis, it there are meetings every month, it would seem that this months meetings missed the appointment of Jon Pratt as he only recently joined. That is my understanding anyway. So, the first opportunity to discuss his appointment and see what he has to offer would be the meeting in March. We would probably get the redacted info from that meeting in April.

That is of course unless the club wish to put out a statement, hold a public meeting or call on EGM to discuss the proposals for change.

Two observations from those minutes, firstly no discussion on finance or performance against budgets, secondly Gavin was in attendance.

I'm not sure that we should read much, if anything, into Gavin being at a meeting 6 weeks ago, Maybe his attendance or not at the match tomorrow would be a better measure.

I'm more interested in why the WRU are putting RP up for sale, if it is more valuable as houses as people keep suggesting......

Could it be that the upkeep is substantial and they would rather off load it, but as the Dragon's clearly can't produce a business case that an investor finds attractive, they have run out options.

Now as Stan clearly stated above NCAFC has in his opinion got the best of the deal.

My opinion is now we know what the full serving costs are for RP (if we are indeed paying half) then we can work out how much it costs to run it and Wether that is something that is affordable on our own. We may be able to factor in some rent and service monies from the Dragon's, but may not be able to guarantee that long term.

So let's just say it is affordable, but not while paying back a capital sum. Then the equation changes if the WRU want the service costs/ground off their hands, and offer it to us (the only party interested) for one pound.

Now let's say that the service costs alone are more than NCAFC can afford, then the equation changes to how much will the WRU offer us to take it off their hands (money towards future running costs).
Now I am not for one minute saying that this senario is at all likely, but those are the sort of factors that are needed to work out a valuation.

So, Jon Pratt has a business background in acquisition, and with that comes strong contacts in the financial world. So why not wait and see if he can put forward a proposal that works for all parties, before we think about spending Jon Pratt's money for him.

Stan A. Einstein wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:19 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:08 pm

pembsexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 11:41 am Well yesterday the club released the redacted minutes for January 12. Working on that basis, it there are meetings every month, it would seem that this months meetings missed the appointment of Jon Pratt as he only recently joined. That is my understanding anyway. So, the first opportunity to discuss his appointment and see what he has to offer would be the meeting in March. We would probably get the redacted info from that meeting in April.

That is of course unless the club wish to put out a statement, hold a public meeting or call on EGM to discuss the proposals for change.

Two observations from those minutes, firstly no discussion on finance or performance against budgets, secondly Gavin was in attendance.

Well I'm pleased. At least we now know Gavin hasn't been unwell.

Not necessarily as that meeting was 6 weeks ago.
I also note an addendum which states that redacted minutes cannot/will not be published until after they have been fully approved at the following months meeting.
Trust membership stood at 1049 at that time.

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:37 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:19 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:08 pm

pembsexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 11:41 am Well yesterday the club released the redacted minutes for January 12. Working on that basis, it there are meetings every month, it would seem that this months meetings missed the appointment of Jon Pratt as he only recently joined. That is my understanding anyway. So, the first opportunity to discuss his appointment and see what he has to offer would be the meeting in March. We would probably get the redacted info from that meeting in April.

That is of course unless the club wish to put out a statement, hold a public meeting or call on EGM to discuss the proposals for change.

Two observations from those minutes, firstly no discussion on finance or performance against budgets, secondly Gavin was in attendance.

Well I'm pleased. At least we now know Gavin hasn't been unwell.

Not necessarily as that meeting was 6 weeks ago.
I also note an addendum which states that redacted minutes cannot/will not be published until after they have been fully approved at the following months meeting.
Trust membership stood at 1049 at that time.

Minutes being approved at the next meeting is common practice for most organisations surely?
(And, yes, I'll stop calling you Shirley)

Stan A. Einstein wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:03 pm

pembsexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 11:41 am Well yesterday the club released the redacted minutes for January 12. Working on that basis, it there are meetings every month, it would seem that this months meetings missed the appointment of Jon Pratt as he only recently joined. That is my understanding anyway. So, the first opportunity to discuss his appointment and see what he has to offer would be the meeting in March. We would probably get the redacted info from that meeting in April.

That is of course unless the club wish to put out a statement, hold a public meeting or call on EGM to discuss the proposals for change.

Hi Mike,

Was anythingvsaid in the minutes about Darren Kelly leaving?

Hi Brendan,

Just checked. Nothing at all about Darren Leaving. Quite the opposite actually. There was a note that said the club group, him and GC met to discuss the transfer window. No details though.

Amberexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:31 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:08 pm

pembsexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 11:41 am Well yesterday the club released the redacted minutes for January 12. Working on that basis, it there are meetings every month, it would seem that this months meetings missed the appointment of Jon Pratt as he only recently joined. That is my understanding anyway. So, the first opportunity to discuss his appointment and see what he has to offer would be the meeting in March. We would probably get the redacted info from that meeting in April.

That is of course unless the club wish to put out a statement, hold a public meeting or call on EGM to discuss the proposals for change.

Two observations from those minutes, firstly no discussion on finance or performance against budgets, secondly Gavin was in attendance.

I'm not sure that we should read much, if anything, into Gavin being at a meeting 6 weeks ago, Maybe his attendance or not at the match tomorrow would be a better measure.

Well, I get your sentiment AE but not sure I agree. Putting emphasis on whether Gavin is there or not tomorrow will just lead to speculation. Speaking personally, I have had enough of that wrt Jon Pratt and I really know nothing about him. I would like him to say something. He is the key at the moment. Strong leadership and good communication at the moment is what we need.

Jonesy3 wrote: February 24th, 2023, 1:11 pm

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:37 pm

Stan A. Einstein wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:19 pm

Taunton Iron Cider wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:08 pm

pembsexile wrote: February 24th, 2023, 11:41 am Well yesterday the club released the redacted minutes for January 12. Working on that basis, it there are meetings every month, it would seem that this months meetings missed the appointment of Jon Pratt as he only recently joined. That is my understanding anyway. So, the first opportunity to discuss his appointment and see what he has to offer would be the meeting in March. We would probably get the redacted info from that meeting in April.

That is of course unless the club wish to put out a statement, hold a public meeting or call on EGM to discuss the proposals for change.

Two observations from those minutes, firstly no discussion on finance or performance against budgets, secondly Gavin was in attendance.

Well I'm pleased. At least we now know Gavin hasn't been unwell.

Not necessarily as that meeting was 6 weeks ago.
I also note an addendum which states that redacted minutes cannot/will not be published until after they have been fully approved at the following months meeting.
Trust membership stood at 1049 at that time.

Minutes being approved at the next meeting is common practice for most organisations surely?
(And, yes, I'll stop calling you Shirley)

I presumed it was common practice, but mentioned it as it was the first time I've noticed this addendum written in bold type. Was it in response to posters asking why it took so long for these minutes to be published.
You may call me Shirley if you wish.

Bangitintrnet wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:34 pm

So, Jon Pratt has a business background in acquisition, and with that comes strong contacts in the financial world. So why not wait and see if he can put forward a proposal that works for all parties, before we think about spending Jon Pratt's money for him.

My thoughts exactly.

That's the plan isn't it? And frankly you, unlike me, don't have the brains to work that out. So whilst I am delighted that you have come around to my way of thinking with respect to stadium control I am left pondering a very simple question.

Who told you?

Stan A. Einstein wrote: February 25th, 2023, 7:40 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:34 pm

So, Jon Pratt has a business background in acquisition, and with that comes strong contacts in the financial world. So why not wait and see if he can put forward a proposal that works for all parties, before we think about spending Jon Pratt's money for him.

My thoughts exactly.

That's the plan isn't it? And frankly you, unlike me, don't have the brains to work that out. So whilst I am delighted that you have come around to my way of thinking with respect to stadium control I am left pondering a very simple question.

Who told you?

What we don't know is if he can put something forward that is actually better than what we have.
That is the vital key.......

After 10 years of statements along the lines of we are being screwed by the Rugby, only yesterday, after another poster mentioned that the NCAFC are now paying half of the running costs of RP, do you concede that NCAFC have the best of the deal.

Likewise you keep saying that communication is a problem, but have to be told about the trusts communication's because you are not a member.

Finally mentioning that the WRU have asked the County if they would wish to purchase RP, is not something they would wish to be in the public domain, because it asks questions of David Buttress and the WRU that might not want to answer. It also puts unnecessary pressure on both sides, if any negotiations are continuing. The trust have to be sensitive and not put our landlords in a difficult position (assuming your information is correct)

My view is that NCAFC benefit more from the RP deal than the WRU/Dragon's, is the WRU's problem, not ours.

That's the starting point, can we find a way to get a better deal by taking on a large financial burden as well, is doubtful at this stage.

Remember it is financial problems that lead to clubs losing their grounds /going bust. So the financial security needs to be prioritised, not the legal security.

Bangitintrnet wrote: February 25th, 2023, 9:07 am

Stan A. Einstein wrote: February 25th, 2023, 7:40 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: February 24th, 2023, 12:34 pm

So, Jon Pratt has a business background in acquisition, and with that comes strong contacts in the financial world. So why not wait and see if he can put forward a proposal that works for all parties, before we think about spending Jon Pratt's money for him.

My thoughts exactly.

That's the plan isn't it? And frankly you, unlike me, don't have the brains to work that out. So whilst I am delighted that you have come around to my way of thinking with respect to stadium control I am left pondering a very simple question.

Who told you?

What we don't know is if he can put something forward that is actually better than what we have.
That is the vital key.......

After 10 years of statements along the lines of we are being screwed by the Rugby, only yesterday, after another poster mentioned that the NCAFC are now paying half of the running costs of RP, do you concede that NCAFC have the best of the deal.

Likewise you keep saying that communication is a problem, but have to be told about the trusts communication's because you are not a member.

Finally mentioning that the WRU have asked the County if they would wish to purchase RP, is not something they would wish to be in the public domain, because it asks questions of David Buttress and the WRU that might not want to answer. It also puts unnecessary pressure on both sides, if any negotiations are continuing. The trust have to be sensitive and not put our landlords in a difficult position (assuming your information is correct)

My view is that NCAFC benefit more from the RP deal than the WRU/Dragon's, is the WRU's problem, not ours.

That's the starting point, can we find a way to get a better deal by taking on a large financial burden as well, is doubtful at this stage.

Remember it is financial problems that lead to clubs losing their grounds /going bust. So the financial security needs to be prioritised, not the legal security.

No renters never get the better deal. It just doesn't happen. Now just try coming clean.

Your view that a person with business acumen who has contacts and a history of being involved in acquisitions, indicates that there is likely to be a concerted effort to develop a proprietary interest in a stadium is one with which I agree.

But the view you now express is diametrically opposed to that which you have been advocating for as long as I can remember. Which leads me to believe, and I stress that this is an opinion, that behind the scenes at Newport County there has been a massive change of direction. Whether this is connected to comments here and elsewehere about the absence of Gavin Foxall will no doubt become clear. Hopefully more quickly than when he went away to 'consider his position' only to reappear when results improved.

My view is clear. I am not spending anyone's money. I do though hope that Jon Pratt will want to at least examine the plausibility of County having a proprietary interest in a fit for purpose 21st century stadium. If he likewise is able to bring in investment from others then whilst on a personal level I would prefer a fans owned club, if that is what it takes to get Newport County to fulfil our potential, so be it.

So again, if I'm right, sorry if we are right, who told you?

"the WRU have asked the County if they would wish to purchase RP"

So when was this announced then, or is it just a rumour? It has been referred to a couple of times in this thread but no-one seems to have picked up on it - I can understand the WRU motives as the basket case/laughing stock of the sporting world.

If true, this could be most significant development opportunity since we moved there.

Anyone care to elaborate ?

Further to the above Banginternet, it two separate posts you have indicated the WRU are putting Rodney Parade up for sale. That's news to me. If I may ask. Assuming you are right, who told you?

whoareya wrote: February 25th, 2023, 9:44 am "the WRU have asked the County if they would wish to purchase RP"

So when was this announced then, or is it just a rumour? It has been referred to a couple of times in this thread but no-one seems to have picked up on it - I can understand the WRU motives as the basket case/laughing stock of the sporting world.

If true, this could be most significant development opportunity since we moved there.

Anyone care to elaborate ?

Bangitinthenet is a remarkably well informed fellow. My view is that he/they is/are someone who is being briefed by someone at Newport County.

His/their about face would seem to indicate major changes at board level either in direction, personnel or both.

whoareya wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 11:17 am

Bonson&Hunt wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 10:23 am Quote Whoareya - If this extract from his Facebook post is accurate then you have your reason why he initially got the cold shoulder:

I wrote the old fashioned way with 3 asks…
*1. A confidentiality agreement*
2. 4 years detailed income statements and balance sheets.
3. The minimum price for controlling interest.
*Then we can talk.*

Seems he asked for everything upfront, before he wanted dialogue.

What we have is someone who has, if the above extract is accurate, enquired about taking a controlling interest and now has a seat on the club board, without any details/plans/proposals being given.

My gut feel is that a lifelong County supporter who has carved a successful career in the US and who has apparently travelled half a million miles to watch the club play would have bought Trust Community Shares when there was an urgent need to save the club.

That does not appear to be the case.

So I'll continue to be cautious until its demonstrated otherwise, comfortable in the knowledge that he needs the support of the majority of Trust members to take a controlling stake in the club.

"would have bought Trust Community Shares when there was an urgent need to save the club."

Albeit vital for our future & you can include me but does this group think they are a cut above others who have become supporters since or more that just couldn't afford it!
Smacks of an unhealthy clique to me.

Well seeing as people on the bones of their arse managed to contribute, I am wondering why a successful business man and international superfan travelling half a million miles to watch his team doesn't seem to have done.
[/quote]
Ok but not a reason to doubt his intentions now.

Bonson&Hunt wrote: February 25th, 2023, 9:56 am

whoareya wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 11:17 am

Bonson&Hunt wrote: February 23rd, 2023, 10:23 am Quote Whoareya - If this extract from his Facebook post is accurate then you have your reason why he initially got the cold shoulder:

I wrote the old fashioned way with 3 asks…
*1. A confidentiality agreement*
2. 4 years detailed income statements and balance sheets.
3. The minimum price for controlling interest.
*Then we can talk.*

Seems he asked for everything upfront, before he wanted dialogue.

What we have is someone who has, if the above extract is accurate, enquired about taking a controlling interest and now has a seat on the club board, without any details/plans/proposals being given.

My gut feel is that a lifelong County supporter who has carved a successful career in the US and who has apparently travelled half a million miles to watch the club play would have bought Trust Community Shares when there was an urgent need to save the club.

That does not appear to be the case.

So I'll continue to be cautious until its demonstrated otherwise, comfortable in the knowledge that he needs the support of the majority of Trust members to take a controlling stake in the club.

"would have bought Trust Community Shares when there was an urgent need to save the club."

Albeit vital for our future & you can include me but does this group think they are a cut above others who have become supporters since or more that just couldn't afford it!
Smacks of an unhealthy clique to me.

Well seeing as people on the bones of their arse managed to contribute, I am wondering why a successful business man and international superfan travelling half a million miles to watch his team doesn't seem to have done.

Ok but not a reason to doubt his intentions now.
[/quote]

That's a matter of opinion, I cant see how a superfan either wasn't aware of our serious plight, or didn't think it serious enough to contribute.
Same applies to any other board member, co-opted or elected.

After all, the Trust fundraising - bringing collective ownership to the many rather than the few - was the only way the club would survive.

Or wasn't it....?