Uncle Val

[Dave62]

I don't think he could have envisaged doubling his money (if that's the case) when he helped fund the building of the South Stand and the £500k purchase of Charlie, without which we wouldn't have been promoted. Also I am grateful to him for his indirect contribution towards us ending up with the best owner in my lifetime following an unfair prejudice case (that nobody else could have initiated realistically - Cartmell then Oyston ffs). Yep, he's done well out it, but our post Oyston progress simply wouldn't have happened without him. I will always remember him for the good he's done the club, not an absolute hero as some might say because he's had nothing to do with us since (?), but I'll always remember him as a good guy.

 

[Insider]

It’s a fact that he was all but ignoring SISA’s pleas to assist until SS contacted him about the prospect of getting his money back.

It’s a fact his ears then immediately pricked up and he couldn’t do enough to wine and dine Tim and SS.

It’s a fact that his objective was to gain damages from the Oystons and not regime change.

It’s a fact he did nothing to deal with the obstacles that prevented him from owning the club.

It’s a fact he didn’t end up having anything more to do with the club

And it’s a fact that he walked away with a substantial sum as a result, that he was fully aware that money had been removed from the club by Oyston and that he could have left some kind of legacy for the fans, had he wanted to.

Of course the rest is my opinion…

I'm pretty sure the list above that you post with so much authority (in your usual style) aren't (Edit: ALL) actual facts.
I don't think you know any more "facts" than I do and that's not much.
No more from me on this thread. I've got more important things to worry about now trying to second guess Critch's team selection for Stoke.
I might revisit it when I've read Foggy's book.

 

[SEASIDE2020]

I don't think he could have envisaged doubling his money (if that's the case) when he helped fund the building of the South Stand and the £500k purchase of Charlie, without which we wouldn't have been promoted. Also I am grateful to him for his indirect contribution towards us ending up with the best owner in my lifetime following an unfair prejudice case (that nobody else could have initiated realistically - Cartmell then Oyston ffs). Yep, he's done well out it, but our post Oyston progress simply wouldn't have happened without him. I will always remember him for the good he's done the club, not an absolute hero as some might say because he's had nothing to do with us since (?), but I'll always remember him as a good guy.

Yes, I'd go with all that Dave but I'd remember him more fondly if he'd left something behind for the club after his award.

 

[poolseasider]

I think Beds make a valid point further up the thread he came with the intention because Blackpool was odds on Fav for the Casino licence and being a part owner of a the local football was a foot in the door not that he wanted to be involved massively in the game or he could of bankrolled anybody it had to be one simple thing to make him even more money.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I'm pretty sure the list above that you post with so much authority (in your usual style) aren't (Edit: ALL) actual facts.
I don't think you know any more "facts" than I do and that's not much.
No more from me on this thread. I've got more important things to worry about now trying to second guess Critch's team selection for Stoke.
I might revisit it when I've read Foggy's book.

They are all facts Insider..

As is the fact that

a) VB’s investment in the team itself was modest in football terms

b) That our promotion to the PL had more to do with luck than judgement

c) That the bulk of his investment (apart from
the South Stand) was to fund purchase of shares off Oyston


I’ve no doubt Foggy’s book will regurgitate the same fairy tales that everyone has invested so much into.

Not my fault that people would rather believe in fairies than confront themselves with the truth.

 

[koudo]

It’s a fact that he was all but ignoring SISA’s pleas to assist until SS contacted him about the prospect of getting his money back.

It’s a fact his ears then immediately pricked up and he couldn’t do enough to wine and dine Tim and SS.

It’s a fact that his objective was to gain damages from the Oystons and not regime change.

It’s a fact he did nothing to deal with the obstacles that prevented him from owning the club.

It’s a fact he didn’t end up having anything more to do with the club

And it’s a fact that he walked away with a substantial sum as a result, that he was fully aware that money had been removed from the club by Oyston and that he could have left some kind of legacy for the fans, had he wanted to.

Of course the rest is my opinion…

"It’s a fact that his objective was to gain damages from the Oystons and not regime change"

Manchester High Court "I'll take his club off him"
London(ex Director) "We'll see regime change, one way or another"
He also had meetings with a potential partner. So why would he do that if the objective was solely to gain damages?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

"It’s a fact that his objective was to gain damages from the Oystons and not regime change"

Manchester High Court "I'll take his club off him"
London(ex Director) "We'll see regime change, one way or another"
He also had meetings with a potential partner. So why would he do that if the objective was solely to gain damages?

Like I said Koudo, he / they were playing to the crowd in my view.

As far as the legal action was concerned it was down to Oyston dragging out the payment of the award that resulted in his downfall…. He could have paid the debt and kept the club….

AND as I’m sure you’re well aware, settlements were offered to Oyston (much less than the eventual award if I remember correctly) in advance of the case being brought.

As for the meetings with a potential partner…. Who prompted that???? It wasn’t VB….

 

[koudo]

Like I said Koudo, he / they were playing to the crowd in my view.

As far as the legal action was concerned it was down to Oyston dragging out the payment of the award that resulted in his downfall…. He could have paid the debt and kept the club….

AND as I’m sure you’re well aware, settlements were offered to Oyston (much less than the eventual award if I remember correctly) in advance of the case being brought.

As for the meetings with a potential partner…. Who prompted that???? It wasn’t VB….

Those comments were quite late into the fight so they didn't need to play anyone by that point. They were both intelligent enough to know we were all in it for the long haul. I think there's a subtle difference in strategy and being played imo. And yes I'm aware of the £7.5m settlement but let's see what his explanation is when we read the book? Maybe at first he just wanted his initial investment back and couldn't be arsed with all the hassle especially with all the death threat mudslinging that was about to come his way? Doesn't really matter who prompted the early exchanges, fact is there was serious intention of taking over. It didn't happen and now we have a better owner than that particular partnership imo.

 

[TwelveAngryMen]

And for the record SS didn't write suggesting a route to getting his money back - at the point it was simply about SISA securing official recognition which the Oystons blanked
It was only when we met that the opportunities for collaboration became apparent

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Those comments were quite late into the fight so they didn't need to play anyone by that point. They were both intelligent enough to know we were all in it for the long haul. I think there's a subtle difference in strategy and being played imo. And yes I'm aware of the £7.5m settlement but let's see what his explanation is when we read the book? Maybe at first he just wanted his initial investment back and couldn't be arsed with all the hassle especially with all the death threat mudslinging that was about to come his way? Doesn't really matter who prompted the early exchanges, fact is there was serious intention of taking over. It didn't happen and now we have a better owner than that particular partnership imo.

I’m not saying that things didn’t work out that way in the end, but he didn’t set out to deliver regime change, he set out to get his money out. (You know as well as I do he wasn’t playing ball, until the contact from SS about getting his cash out…).The eventual ousting of Oyston was a very welcome added bonus, I’m sure, but it wasn’t the main objective and (as I said) had Oyston just paid up, he’d have kept the Club and VB would have tootled off into the sunset just the same.

And it does matter (a lot) whom prompted the early exchanges. As I said, it’s my belief that VB needed to keep the fans on side and strung along…. He could hardly have knocked back the introduction or the charade would have been over.

You’re right we have a better owner, but VB was never seriously interested in anything other than exiting in my opinion. TBH, I don’t blame him after his experience…..

Anyway it’s all academic… he’s gone…. He got a shedload of money… good business if you can get it.

And for the record SS didn't write suggesting a route to getting his money back - at the point it was simply about SISA securing official recognition which the Oystons blanked
It was only when we met that the opportunities for collaboration became apparent

baloney

It was contact from SS, which referenced the possible option to get his money that prompted the meeting in Riga (you told me that yourself at the time )

 

[voyeur]

Not sure it was ever about sentimentality

When SS and I went to Riga it became apparent that there were

It was my idea that we work together to achieve that objective and that's what we did - over five long years

Never in a million years did he think he'd get the award he did so to suggest that was his motivation is fundamentally wrong

VB was up for staying until a combination of factors made that impracticable

With the benefit of hindsight a clean slate was always the way to go but at the time we didn't know how it would play out and VB was the most important cog in the wheel

In my view we owe him a lot - he forced through regime change

The fact he ultimately did alright out of it himself ( at the Oystons expense ) is the icing on the cake

Great post. Thank you.

 

[voyeur]

They are all facts Insider..

As is the fact that

a) VB’s investment in the team itself was modest in football terms

b) That our promotion to the PL had more to do with luck than judgement

c) That the bulk of his investment (apart from
the South Stand) was to fund purchase of shares off Oyston


I’ve no doubt Foggy’s book will regurgitate the same fairy tales that everyone has invested so much into.

Not my fault that people would rather believe in fairies than confront themselves with the truth.

There's no hero worship and no believing in fairies. Your judgement is really poor on this issue in my opinion. Completely missing the point and ignoring the blatant facts with regard to how Belokon influenced the club from the day he arrived to the day he kissed goodbye.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

There's no hero worship and no believing in fairies. Your judgement is really poor on this issue in my opinion. Completely missing the point and ignoring the blatant facts with regard to how Belokon influenced the club from the day he arrived to the day he kissed goodbye.

I’m not ignoring anything….

He bought some shares off Oyston and invested a small amount of money in the Club. I don’t disagree he was a positive influence around the place, but we got extremely lucky to get to the PL…Teams invest substantially more year in year out and never get there.

Also his funding of the South was fantastic…..

As for my judgement I think it’s sound…. Im not slating the bloke, Im simply saying that some people choose to believe a very air-brushed version of reality.

He’d have my utmost respect had he chosen to leave a legacy for the fans. As it is…. He’s just a bloke who did very well out of his investment in our club by managing to walk away with a sack full of money and was actually thanked for taking it….That takes some skill

 

[SlaveToTheRythm]

Belokon -what a charlatan he turned out to be. Sniiff of a few quid and his ears pricked up. Courtesy of the much maligned SS btw.

 

[voyeur]

I’m not ignoring anything….

He bought some shares off Oyston and invested a small amount of money in the Club. I don’t disagree he was a positive influence around the place, but we got extremely lucky to get to the PL…Teams incest substantially more year in year out and never get there.

Also his funding of the South was fantastic…..

As for my judgement I think it’s sound…. Im not slating the bloke, Im simply saying that some people choose to believe a very air-brushed version of reality.

He’d have my utmost respect had he chosen to leave a legacy for the fans. As it is…. He’s just a bloke who did very well out of his investment in our club by managing to walk away with a sack full of money and was actually thanked for taking it….That takes some skill

He left a huge legacy. And made very little out of his investment, compared to what he put in. You choose to exaggerate.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

He left a huge legacy. And made very little out of his investment, compared to what he put in. You choose to exaggerate.

As TAM said, he doubled his investment net of costs, so stop with the fairy tales and get your facts straight

 

[King Billy]

I hope no one else invests in us and gets us to the premiership to make a profit on their investment. What a lowlife eh?

 

[Sooty59]

Not bothered anymore, his investment (whatever his motives) was instrumental in us having some exciting times & the fact he had the money to take on the bullies & push their self inflicted demise forward. I also thought he would have reimbursed those out of pocket.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I hope no one else invests in us and gets us to the premiership to make a profit on their investment. What a lowlife eh?

Like Oyston did for example?

 

[voyeur]

As TAM said, he doubled his investment net of costs, so stop with the fairy tales and get your facts straight

TAM is guessing and so what if he's right? As King Billy says, what a low life for coming along and investing in us and getting us to the Premier League with a new south stand that Karl refused to build and then taking Karl and his dad to court and removing them from the club. And shamelessly doubling his money. Shocking behaviour. Off with his head.

 

[20togo]

Oystons gone, VB has gone. It's all semantics about whose opinion is wrong and right, it's all sematics about which are facts and which aren't. BFC - our club - are now in a great place. Look forward not back, the dark period in our history off the field is over. and gone forever. Focus on the positives.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

TAM is guessing and so what if he's right? As King Billy says, what a low life for coming along and investing in us and getting us to the Premier League with a new south stand that Karl refused to build and then taking Karl and his dad to court and removing them from the club. And shamelessly doubling his money. Shocking behaviour. Off with his head.

He’s approximating based on the facts that are all publicly available (not guessing) and in all likelihood he’s underestimating the financial gain.

I’ve not called him a low-life, but I am realistic enough to understand that his involvement with our Club wasn’t borne out of a sense of altruism, that his investment involved buying shares off Oyston (and was therefore also Oystons investment), that Oyston has previously put huge sums of money into the club to keep it afloat (including rebuilding two new stands), that Oystons (Karl and Owen) oversaw the day to day running of the club (managerial appointments and player recruitment) and that they too played a fundamental role in our ‘lucky’ premier league experience.

Now you (and others) can rewrite history and airbrush the truth all you like. I was happy to do so in the midst of a war with Oyston…. However, if we cannot be honest with ourselves in acknowledging the facts as they were, then to me there’s no point having a discussion.

There’s no need to put Belokon into the same bracket as Oyston…. He didn’t sue fans and in all likelihood I think he would have continued to reinvest the PL money into the Club, had Oyston not done what he did.

As I must have said a dozen times, I don’t bear him any malice, I’m just not under any illusions either. He was part of one of the best periods on our history (as we’re the Oystons)…. He wasn’t responsible for it going sour, that was entirely the Oystons … Karl’s short term business methods, which had served him (and us) so well started to catch up with him, his penny pinching cost us PL survival and Owen’s greed was the ultimate downfall…

However, despite all of that…. Belokon’s willingness to get involved with SISA was sparked not out of any calls for help, but out of a potential option to retrieve his cash….. His subsequent pursuit of Oyston in the courts was about financial recovery (I acknowledge regime changes was an eventual by product) and despite an unexpectedly generous award from the judge, he has walked away with the lot.

We got our Club back, but to me, If we want to hold anyone up in the highest esteem for that, you can thank TAM for his genius in uncovering an angle than led to their demise…..As well as others who took bullets on behalf of the fanbase (Raggy, Afro, Jez etc..).

 

[rockontommy]

I'd also add that even after the award was made, VB did a deal with KO letting him off the hook. He gave the big O an inordinate amount of time to pay up and every opportunity to keep the club. It is only when he was knocked (again) that he finally pulled the trigger and called in the receivers. Overall he was good for the club but I really do not understand the love-in.

 

[SwannDangerous]

Yes maybe he took some money out of the club but he definitely but enough money into the club as well especially considering he wasn't a majority shareholder, and I'm sure the oystains would have fucked him out of way more than he was actually due. At the end of the day if he's invested he's gonna want to see some kind of return on that, BFC isn't a charity... compared to the oystons, who wanted a return without any investment at all

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Yes maybe he took some money out of the club but he definitely but enough money into the club as well especially considering he wasn't a majority shareholder, and I'm sure the oystains would have fucked him out of way more than he was actually due. At the end of the day if he's invested he's gonna want to see some kind of return on that, BFC isn't a charity... compared to the oystons, who wanted a return without any investment at all

This is precisely the kind of self-delusion that I’m talking about.

It’s alternative reality on a Putin-like scale.

 

[Mexboroseasider]

He’s approximating based on the facts that are all publicly available (not guessing) and in all likelihood he’s underestimating the financial gain.

I’ve not called him a low-life, but I am realistic enough to understand that his involvement with our Club wasn’t borne out of a sense of altruism, that his investment involved buying shares off Oyston (and was therefore also Oystons investment), that Oyston has previously put huge sums of money into the club to keep it afloat (including rebuilding two new stands), that Oystons (Karl and Owen) oversaw the day to day running of the club (managerial appointments and player recruitment) and that they too played a fundamental role in our ‘lucky’ premier league experience.

Now you (and others) can rewrite history and airbrush the truth all you like. I was happy to do so in the midst of a war with Oyston…. However, if we cannot be honest with ourselves in acknowledging the facts as they were, then to me there’s no point having a discussion.

There’s no need to put Belokon into the same bracket as Oyston…. He didn’t sue fans and in all likelihood I think he would have continued to reinvest the PL money into the Club, had Oyston not done what he did.

As I must have said a dozen times, I don’t bear him any malice, I’m just not under any illusions either. He was part of one of the best periods on our history (as we’re the Oystons)…. He wasn’t responsible for it going sour, that was entirely the Oystons … Karl’s short term business methods, which had served him (and us) so well started to catch up with him, his penny pinching cost us PL survival and Owen’s greed was the ultimate downfall…

However, despite all of that…. Belokon’s willingness to get involved with SISA was sparked not out of any calls for help, but out of a potential option to retrieve his cash….. His subsequent pursuit of Oyston in the courts was about financial recovery (I acknowledge regime changes was an eventual by product) and despite an unexpectedly generous award from the judge, he has walked away with the lot.

We got our Club back, but to me, If we want to hold anyone up in the highest esteem for that, you can thank TAM for his genius in uncovering an angle than led to their demise…..As well as others who took bullets on behalf of the fanbase (Raggy, Afro, Jez etc..).

I’m struggling to believe that VB hadn’t taken legal advice, and was well aware of what his options were, until he was contacted by SISA.

For me the bottom line is that the interests of VB and the fans were similar but not identical. You could say that we used him, and piggy backed the litigation, more than he used us.

He got the money. We got the club. Win/win.

 

[SwannDangerous]

This is precisely the kind of self-delusion that I’m talking about.

It’s alternative reality on a Putin-like scale.

If you're going to knock my post then, please, at least you could explain yourself?

You said that because belekon bought shares off oysten then it's still oysten money...? SS bought the club off of oysten, is it still oysten money now?

Seems to me like you want to tar all with the same brush. Belekon did a lot of good for us, why can't you see that?

 

[Adams Kebab]

Not good reading this thread, don’t like being reminded that SS did something good.

 

[Doc]

We would not be where we are now if it wasn't for uncle Val.
He'll always be welcome at my house for a brew.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

If you're going to knock my post then, please, at least you could explain yourself?

You said that because belekon bought shares off oysten then it's still oysten money...? SS bought the club off of oysten, is it still oysten money now?

Seems to me like you want to tar all with the same brush. Belekon did a lot of good for us, why can't you see that?

There’s no point…

If someone came into the club now and bought half Simon Sadler’s shares off Simon Sadler for £5M, who would the £5M belong to?

And I can see that he did some positive things for the Club, however, it’s not that simple… (as ROT has alluded to earlier in the thread, there are questions over Money Laundering, associations with other ‘unsavoury’ individuals etc).

FOR INFO

 

[Charlie Gracie]

If you're going to knock my post then, please, at least you could explain yourself?

You said that because belekon bought shares off oysten then it's still oysten money...? SS bought the club off of oysten, is it still oysten money now?

Seems to me like you want to tar all with the same brush. Belekon did a lot of good for us, why can't you see that?

Simon Sadler bought the club from the receiver…

 

[Mexboroseasider]

There’s no point…

If someone came into the club now and bought half Simon Sadler’s shares off Simon Sadler for £5M, who would the £5M belong to?

And I can see that he did some positive things for the Club, however, it’s not that simple… (as ROT has alluded to earlier in the thread, there are questions over Money Laundering, associations with other ‘unsavoury’ individuals etc).

FOR INFO

There’s two ways you can acquire shares.

You can either buy existing shares from a current shareholder in which case the money goes to that shareholder.

Or the company can issue new shares to the “buyer” in which case the money goes to the company.

I can’t recall without checking which route VB took.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

There’s two ways you can acquire shares.

You can either buy existing shares from a current shareholder in which case the money goes to that shareholder.

Or the company can issue new shares to the “buyer” in which case the money goes to the company.

I can’t recall without checking which route VB took.

It doesn’t matter either way….

OO still relinquished a 20% share (initially) to VB in return for the money invested.

The agreement (as presented to the court) for the further investment, was agreed on the basis that a further (Approx 30%) of the Club were to be relinquished to VB taking them to 50/50 owners.

 

[Bloomers123Be bop deluxe]

Is this true or is it a joke? Genuine question

got to be s joke

 

[poolseasider]

On the third anniversary of our comeback game after being Oyston free(thread down the board) and on match day we're still arguing with each other.
Time to move on.

 

[Mexboroseasider]

Simon Sadler bought the club from the receiver…

That’s right. And the receivers would have paid that money to VB to reduce OO’s debt.

Which is why it’s a bit simplistic to say VB walked off with all the PL money. A good chunk of it belonged to the new owner!

 

[bollieboy]

There’s two ways you can acquire shares.

You can either buy existing shares from a current shareholder in which case the money goes to that shareholder.

Or the company can issue new shares to the “buyer” in which case the money goes to the company.

I can’t recall without checking which route VB took.

I think it was the second case and the money was used to 1) bring in players to avoid relegation and 2) build a squad forpromotion the following season. Without VB's cash input in 2005/6 it is highly likely we would have been back in L2 at the end of that season.

 

[brightontangerine]

The simple fact is is that without belekon we would probably be in the national conference League now, if not worse like bury, and the oystons would have blamed us for boycotting as to how it got to that point. And supporting our club would feel like an act of suffering and forbearance. Instead look what we have today, it's beyond our wildest dreams going back a few years to where we were then NH.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

That’s right. And the receivers would have paid that money to VB to reduce OO’s debt.

Which is why it’s a bit simplistic to say VB walked off with all the PL money. A good chunk of it belonged to the new owner!

No it didn’t…

Owen Oyston took approximately £30-£40M out of the Club….

VB was awarded around £30M

Oyston Assets including the Club were liquidated to pay off his debt….You wouldn’t say that a good chunk of it belonged to other individuals who bought other Oyston Assets, that’s a ridiculous way of looking at it….

Sadler Bought the Club - He got something in return for his money, that up to that point belonged to Owen Oyston. He didn’t just gift Oyston the money for nothing

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I think it was the second case and the money was used to 1) bring in players to avoid relegation and 2) build a squad forpromotion the following season. Without VB's cash input in 2005 it is highly likely we would have been back in L2 at the end of that season.

So therefore it wasn’t VB’s cash input at all, it was OO’s cash input. He essentially liquidated his shares and reinvested the money…

VB bought shares and therefore got something of tangible value back for what he spent.

 

[Mexboroseasider]

I think it was the second case and the money was used to 1) bring in players to avoid relegation and 2) build a squad forpromotion the following season. Without VB's cash input in 2005 it is highly likely we would have been back in L2 at the end of that season.

I think you could be right. It’s slightly confused though as he also invested money in addition to payment for the shares and without checking I don’t know for sure.

And I haven’t got time to check as I’m off to catch a train to Stoke UTMP

 

[bollieboy]

No it didn’t…

Owen Oyston took approximately £30-£40K out of the Club….

VB was awarded around £30K

Oyston Assets including the Club were liquidated to pay off his debt….You wouldn’t say that a good chunk of it belonged to other individuals who bought other Oyston Assets, that’s a ridiculous way of looking at it….

Sadler Bought the Club - He got something in return for his money, that up to that point belonged to Owen Oyston. He didn’t just gift Oyston the money for nothing

£30k for a £6m outlay is a pretty poor return.

 

[TwelveAngryMen]

I’m not saying that things didn’t work out that way in the end, but he didn’t set out to deliver regime change, he set out to get his money out. (You know as well as I do he wasn’t playing ball, until the contact from SS about getting his cash out…).The eventual ousting of Oyston was a very welcome added bonus, I’m sure, but it wasn’t the main objective and (as I said) had Oyston just paid up, he’d have kept the Club and VB would have tootled off into the sunset just the same.

And it does matter (a lot) whom prompted the early exchanges. As I said, it’s my belief that VB needed to keep the fans on side and strung along…. He could hardly have knocked back the introduction or the charade would have been over.

You’re right we have a better owner, but VB was never seriously interested in anything other than exiting in my opinion. TBH, I don’t blame him after his experience…..

Anyway it’s all academic… he’s gone…. He got a shedload of money… good business if you can get it.

baloney

It was contact from SS, which referenced the possible option to get his money that prompted the meeting in Riga (you told me that yourself at the time )

Think you have misremembered
SS wrote off his own initiative seeking to make contact with VB as we couldn’t get recognition from the club
VB invited us to meet him and as he wasn’t due in the UK asked if we’d go there which we agreed to
No one even knew what the specific issues between him and the O’s were at that point
At the meeting the discussions that didn’t make the official minutes confirmed to us what the issues were
VB wasn’t sure what to do He said he’d thought about trying to get his money back but didn’t think that was possible
Based on what he said about not knowing about the £11m withdrawal / exclusion from management I suggested he get advice about a S994 petition
The first meeting with lawyers to get advice about that took place immediately after our next meet in London three months later - and that wasn’t even with Clifford Chance
Legal action only commenced 18 months after the Riga visit

 

[Mexboroseasider]

No it didn’t…

Owen Oyston took approximately £30-£40K out of the Club….

VB was awarded around £30K

Oyston Assets including the Club were liquidated to pay off his debt….You wouldn’t say that a good chunk of it belonged to other individuals who bought other Oyston Assets, that’s a ridiculous way of looking at it….

Sadler Bought the Club - He got something in return for his money, that up to that point belonged to Owen Oyston. He didn’t just gift Oyston the money for nothing

Apart from the figures your post is broadly factually correct. But equally my post is also factually correct.

Sadler paid the receiver a chunk of money for OO’s assets in the club.

The receiver would have paid most of that money to VB in reduction of OO’s debts.

Sadler’s money wasn’t PL money.

You could also argue that the rest of the money paid to VB wasn’t PL money. As you say it was derived from the sale of other OO assets. Some or all of those assets may have been acquired long before we were in the PL.

So when you drill into the detail it’s a bit simplistic to say VB has walked off with all the PL money. Although I agree that there wasn’t very much left in the club when Sadler took over.

 

[Stony Hill]

I'm pretty sure the list above that you post with so much authority (in your usual style) aren't (Edit: ALL) actual facts.
I don't think you know any more "facts" than I do and that's not much.
No more from me on this thread. I've got more important things to worry about now trying to second guess Critch's team selection for Stoke.
I might revisit it when I've read Foggy's book.

Succinct and amusing.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Think you have misremembered
SS wrote off his own initiative seeking to make contact with VB as we couldn’t get recognition from the club
VB invited us to meet him and as he wasn’t due in the UK asked if we’d go there which we agreed to
No one even knew what the specific issues between him and the O’s were at that point
At the meeting the discussions that didn’t make the official minutes confirmed to us what the issues were
VB wasn’t sure what to do He said he’d thought about trying to get his money back but didn’t think that was possible
Based on what he said about not knowing about the £11m withdrawal / exclusion from management I suggested he get advice about a S994 petition
The first meeting with lawyers to get advice about that took place immediately after our next meet in London three months later - and that wasn’t even with Clifford Chance
Legal action only commenced 18 months after the Riga visit

No I haven’t ‘misremembered’ at all. We discussed it then, we’ve discussed it since and I’m sure other mutuals will confirm.

As you say, SS wrote off his own initiative, but

a) It followed frustration from us as a collective with a lack of intervention and assistance / contact from VB despite us appealing to him.

and

b) After the seeds of an idea that was hatched regarding the minority shareholder issue, which we all discussed prior to the SS contact.

We knew perfectly well at that point that £11M had been removed from the Club and that there might be a possibility that there might have been prejudice to minor shareholders.

VB agreed to the meet, because SS went off piste and suggested that we had an angle to potentially get him his money back and you two were whisked off to Riga as a result…

The meeting there ‘confirmed’ that the idea would likely be a goer and we went from there.

No ‘misremembering’, my memory is perfectly fine….

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Apart from the figures your post is broadly factually correct. But equally my post is also factually correct.

Sadler paid the receiver a chunk of money for OO’s assets in the club.

The receiver would have paid most of that money to VB in reduction of OO’s debts.

Sadler’s money wasn’t PL money.

You could also argue that the rest of the money paid to VB wasn’t PL money. As you say it was derived from the sale of other OO assets. Some or all of those assets may have been acquired long before we were in the PL.

So when you drill into the detail it’s a bit simplistic to say VB has walked off with all the PL money. Although I agree that there wasn’t very much left in the club when Sadler took over.

It wasn’t the exact same banknotes no, but if you want to analogise it..

A burglar stole some money and then a Policeman clubbed the burglar with his truncheon, took a car off him, sold it for a similar amount of money that had been stolen and pocketed it himself.

 

[Wilburrabbit]

Despite everything said on here there is one indisputable fast. No VB court case, no regime change.

Businessmen are all the same in the main as they seek profits. Anything he received through the courts was money which would otherwise have ended up in the Oystons pockets.

Without his intervention for whatever motivation we would not have SS and we would not be where we are now.

For that we should be grateful.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Despite everything said on here there is one indisputable fast. No VB court case, no regime change.

Businessmen are all the same in the main as they seek profits. Anything he received through the courts was money which would otherwise have ended up in the Oystons pockets.

Without his intervention for whatever motivation we would not have SS and we would not be where we are now.

For that we should be grateful.

He should be grateful…

 

[td53]

I generally think we've got to keep owners and investors in perspective. Belakon brought some great times but in terms of the aftermath, whilst he played his part in ridding us of the Oystons, he was richly rewarded (rightly, he got his money back) whereas others fought long and hard to simply get back to watching a football club and took no reward other than that.

The richer people are, the easier it is to fight a legal battle and to have other people doing things on your behalf.

I think VB will be remembered fondly for the good stuff he brought and ultimately, the role played in the end of the evil empire but other people are my heroes I'm afraid.

He can draw the golden gamble one day, I don't mind that but to be honest, I'd have as big a cheer for, I dunno, Andy Gouck or someone. Don't really like the cult of ownership/investment and the worship that's grown around that in the game as a whole full stop.