|
|
Post by Differentiabull on Oct 28, 2024 10:35:20 GMT
Another thing. The discussion about whether it makes sense, whether there's a justification other than 'it'd be nice'.
I personally think 'it'd be nice' is a perfectly good reason. We're talking about watching some blokes kick a football around in a regional league. If we all did the thing that made the most sense we'd be off watching Wolves or Villa or Man city. We find joy in following the story of our small but glorious team, where the lows are frequent, but every now and then there's a moment, a goal, a win, where - unexplainably - you get the highest of highs from watching what is often objectively terrible football. It makes no sense, but it doesn't need to - because it matters to us and that's all that important. We're all here for reasons other than just seeing football, we're here for the story behind it, and the name is an integral part of the story. Our story has always been called Hereford United.
|
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 10:58:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by statlerandwaldorf on Oct 28, 2024 10:58:27 GMT
"Vocal supporters" stumping up £9,570 for a name change. Christ, we are blessed. They didn't need much more to keep United going in the first place. Just a six figure sum if memory serves. 🤔🙄 |
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 13:09:19 GMT
via mobile
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 13:09:19 GMT
"Vocal supporters" stumping up £9,570 for a name change. Christ, we are blessed. They didn't need much more to keep United going in the first place. Just a six figure sum if memory serves. 🤔🙄 HUST had most, if not all, of the money required. All that was needed was an offer from HUST and the fans would've made up any difference. The whole thing was outrageous. It probably didn't help that the henchman was in control of the most popular forum for discussion at the time. That and that there was a mad thick bastard who liked shoving flowers up his arse turning every serious point into a sea of horseshit. |
|
|
|
Post by GRL on Oct 28, 2024 14:24:30 GMT
"Vocal supporters" stumping up £9,570 for a name change. Christ, we are blessed. They didn't need much more to keep United going in the first place. Just a six figure sum if memory serves. 🤔🙄
Previous wannabes like E****, Mc and S K had only 345 shares each.
The reason B******** would have only required £700k, and even then not necessarily on Day One is because the creditors were not trying to kill the club.
The timeline for fund was:
a) the unpaid wages and football creditors £148k to be paid by Conference AGM (7/6/2014);
b) the HMRC £120k - though DK had paved the way for a repayment plan with them;
c) other trade creditors £150k and other directors' loans to NN and DP (£105K) as and when.
Approx. half of the trade creditors needed to be paid immediately".
"The club's debts were used as the reason to kill HUFC (1939) Ltd. The club's debts were worse (£1.6m) in 2003 than in 2014".You're welcome. |
|
|
|
Post by eggchaserbull on Oct 28, 2024 14:35:54 GMT
Just a six figure sum if memory serves. 🤔🙄
Previous wannabes like E****, Mc and S K had only 345 shares each.
The reason B******** would have only required £700k, and even then not necessarily on Day One is because the creditors were not trying to kill the club.
The timeline for fund was:
a) the unpaid wages and football creditors £148k to be paid by Conference AGM (7/6/2014);
b) the HMRC £120k - though DK had paved the way for a repayment plan with them;
c) other trade creditors £150k and other directors' loans to NN and DP (£105K) as and when.
Approx. half of the trade creditors needed to be paid immediately".
"The club's debts were used as the reason to kill HUFC (1939) Ltd. The club's debts were worse (£1.6k) in 2003 than in 2014".You're welcome. I bloody hate algebra. |
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 15:09:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 15:09:10 GMT
The conclusion was that it would have cost B******** approx. £700k to gain 60% ownership of the club".(Taking out DK, DP, NN and GT shareholding). Another 8 or 9 significant shareholders - like (well-known names, here, et al), would have taken B******** up to 75%.
Previous wannabes like E****, Mc and S K had only 345 shares each.
The reason B******** would have only required £700k, and even then not necessarily on Day One is because the creditors were not trying to kill the club.
The timeline for fund was:
a) the unpaid wages and football creditors £148k to be paid by Conference AGM (7/6/2014);
b) the HMRC £120k - though DK had paved the way for a repayment plan with them;
c) other trade creditors £150k and other directors' loans to NN and DP (£105K) as and when.
Approx. half of the trade creditors needed to be paid immediately".
"The club's debts were used as the reason to kill HUFC (1939) Ltd. The club's debts were worse (£1.6k) in 2003 than in 2014".You're welcome. I bloody hate algebra. The answer of a man who can't be bothered to think. |
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 15:11:16 GMT
via mobile
GRL likes this
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 15:11:16 GMT
Basically, we could have saved United. But we couldn't be arsed.
So just sticking it on the end of the name a new club sounds like a pretty gutless approach.
|
|
|
|
Post by White Lightning on Oct 28, 2024 15:21:53 GMT
Just a six figure sum if memory serves. 🤔🙄
Previous wannabes like E****, Mc and S K had only 345 shares each.
The reason B******** would have only required £700k, and even then not necessarily on Day One is because the creditors were not trying to kill the club.
The timeline for fund was:
a) the unpaid wages and football creditors £148k to be paid by Conference AGM (7/6/2014);
b) the HMRC £120k - though DK had paved the way for a repayment plan with them;
c) other trade creditors £150k and other directors' loans to NN and DP (£105K) as and when.
Approx. half of the trade creditors needed to be paid immediately".
"The club's debts were used as the reason to kill HUFC (1939) Ltd. The club's debts were worse (£1.6k) in 2003 than in 2014".You're welcome. £1.6M surely? So a ton of cash reading that. |
|
|
|
Post by Incognito on Oct 28, 2024 15:31:12 GMT
So, how come Agombar bought it for a couple of quid?
|
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 15:51:47 GMT
via mobile
Post by tigerfeet on Oct 28, 2024 15:51:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 15:53:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 15:53:56 GMT
So basically, yes we could have bought it for a quid. |
|
|
|
Post by Barney still in B-Block on Oct 28, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
Looking back, there was a degree, perhaps not the same degree, but one nonetheless of mistrust between the owner of HUFC and HUST. Not forgetting that HUST was, as became obvious maybe a little too late, a two-tier board. Those who, in my view, represented the now owners (where are they now though?), and those who didn't.*
There was, also in my view, appalling behaviour by both parties, but we are where we are, and I can't see how minutely disecting things again, now, will either change that, or help.
* The didn'ts, fwiw, are currently much better represented at ES than those who did**
**Nowhere to be seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Barney still in B-Block on Oct 28, 2024 16:20:18 GMT
So basically, yes we could have bought it for a quid.If only. For a sale to proceed, the seller and the purchaser have to agree a price. Not easy when they wouldn't speak to each other. |
|
|
|
Post by White Lightning on Oct 28, 2024 16:26:29 GMT
This raking over the corpse of HUFC on the kiss goodbye to daylight day does wonders for my feelgood factor.
|
|
|
|
Post by MAXBULL on Oct 28, 2024 16:35:21 GMT
So to sum up.
We’re all United.
Yes?
|
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 16:40:36 GMT
via mobile
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 16:40:36 GMT
So basically, yes we could have bought it for a quid.If only. For a sale to proceed, the seller and the purchaser have to agree a price. Not easy when they wouldn't speak to each other. To be fair, you seemed to just sit there and refuse to disagree with the plan. I abstain all responsibility. |
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 16:58:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 16:58:42 GMT
Looking back, there was a degree, perhaps not the same degree, but one nonetheless of mistrust between the owner of HUFC and HUST. Not forgetting that HUST was, as became obvious maybe a little too late, a two-tier board. Those who, in my view, represented the now owners (where are they now though?), and those who didn't.* There was, also in my view, appalling behaviour by both parties, but we are where we are, and I can't see how minutely disecting things again, now, will either change that, or help. * The didn'ts, fwiw, are currently much better represented at ES than those who did** **Nowhere to be seen. I don't see the point in dissecting the Israel/Palestine conflict. What's the point in talking about it? You won't change the situation. Might as well stop talking about the US election and the long, long history of slavery as well. I mean, what's the point? |
|
|
|
Post by carrotcruncher on Oct 28, 2024 17:22:20 GMT
Looking back, there was a degree, perhaps not the same degree, but one nonetheless of mistrust between the owner of HUFC and HUST. Not forgetting that HUST was, as became obvious maybe a little too late, a two-tier board. Those who, in my view, represented the now owners (where are they now though?), and those who didn't.* There was, also in my view, appalling behaviour by both parties, but we are where we are, and I can't see how minutely disecting things again, now, will either change that, or help. * The didn'ts, fwiw, are currently much better represented at ES than those who did** **Nowhere to be seen. I don't see the point in dissecting the Israel/Palestine conflict. What's the point in talking about it? You won't change the situation. Might as well stop talking about the US election and the long, long history of slavery as well. I mean, what's the point? Good point. A good argument for reconciling the past and come together back as Hereford United. In the process we might resolve the Palestinian issue? Though, to mix conflicts, I guess there will always be real IRA types who just don't want that reconciliation. |
|
|
|
United?
Oct 28, 2024 17:26:48 GMT
via mobile
Post by Marty Kilpeck on Oct 28, 2024 17:26:48 GMT
I don't see the point in dissecting the Israel/Palestine conflict. What's the point in talking about it? You won't change the situation. Might as well stop talking about the US election and the long, long history of slavery as well. I mean, what's the point? Good point. A good argument for reconciling the past and come together back as Hereford United. In the process we might resolve the Palestinian issue? Though, to mix conflicts, I guess there will always be real IRA types who just don't want that reconciliation. Calling FC 'United' would be a like saying that the West Bank and Gaza are now just 'Israel'. Only you've already killed the Palestinians so there's hardly anyone left to complain. Get rid of the FC by all means. It's tacky and shit. Don't pretend to be something you're not. It's tacky and shit. |
|
|
|
Post by White Lightning on Oct 28, 2024 17:33:07 GMT
Good point. A good argument for reconciling the past and come together back as Hereford United. In the process we might resolve the Palestinian issue? Though, to mix conflicts, I guess there will always be real IRA types who just don't want that reconciliation. Calling FC 'United' would be a like saying that the West Bank and Gaza are now just 'Israel'. Only you've already killed the Palestinians so there's hardly anyone left to complain. Get rid of the FC by all means. It's tacky and shit. Don't pretend to be something you're not. It's tacky and shit. You are well versed in talking that. We are talking about a lowly English football club, one you don't even support, just whine on about continuously. Have for a decade. |
|
