[Darran]

Either the Chambers are very naive business people or AP and EM didn't disclose the debt it has to be one option or the other, unless some hidden debt occurred AFTER the take over of the football club.
What staggers me really is if the football side was a take over I can't understand quite how the ground owners can sack the apparent owners of the football side?
Seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors around and I can see ONLY a complete take over of the club including ownership of the ground asset is the way forward, I'm not holding my breath on the sale in total.
We see many clubs in difficult positions with a different ground owner to football club owner, in fact too many to mention sadly.

Pretty clear to me which one it was as I don't think Patrick was naive and Alex would have known if they knew about the debt they probably wouldn't have gone near the club.

[Tigermatty 2.0]

Either the Chambers are very naive business people or AP and EM didn't disclose the debt it has to be one option or the other, unless some hidden debt occurred AFTER the take over of the football club.
What staggers me really is if the football side was a take over I can't understand quite how the ground owners can sack the apparent owners of the football side?
Seems to be a lot of smoke and mirrors around and I can see ONLY a complete take over of the club including ownership of the ground asset is the way forward, I'm not holding my breath on the sale in total.
We see many clubs in difficult positions with a different ground owner to football club owner, in fact too many to mention sadly.

As per my post at no point did the Chambers own the club or claim to own the club. They were appointed directors of a company purporting to be GCAFC, with an option to buy outright in future.

[RJS]

As per my post at no point did the Chambers own the club or claim to own the club. They were appointed directors of a company purporting to be GCAFC, with an option to buy outright in future.

Worth noting they also, as far as I can tell own any shares in that company either. Hence why they could be removed fairly easily, as its in the powers of the shareholders to remove directors. Especially if those shareholder(s) deem (emphasis on deem) those directors to not be fulfilling their duties.

[Mr.Magoo]

Interesting stuff but the question remains/, will the club start next season debt free having apparently "cut back" this season, or will that be hanging over our heads in whichever division we play? Will next years season ticket be paying next year's players or last year's electricity bill?

[Darran]

Interesting stuff but the question remains/, will the club start next season debt free having apparently "cut back" this season, or will that be hanging over our heads in whichever division we play? Will next years season ticket be paying next year's players or last year's electricity bill?

My guess is that if Alex is still around then there will still be debt. The only way there will be no debt is if someone actually comes in and owns the club.

[Mr.Magoo]

My guess is that if Alex is still around then there will still be debt. The only way there will be no debt is if someone actually comes in and owns the club.

Those who speak with those in power, whoever that is. Please find out where we stand debt wise. If we're going down with a load of debt we could well be f"""""""ed before we start. It would be such a shame if AP having thrown substantial sums at the club for a couple of seasons has also landed us with handicapping debt. If that is the case then questions must be asked and I'd feel I have the right to be very disappointed in their business acumen to put it politely.

[RJS]

The major debt would be the ground build which I'm sure Alex said was originally funded by Directors loans.  If those still sit on the clubs balance sheet then it won't look an overly rosey investment position. However, I think he also spoke about converting said loans to share capital, which would erase much of that debt.

The last publicly available accounts shows creditors of about £1.3m, but they run to June 22. What the current position is would require someone more in the know.

[Darran]

Those who speak with those in power, whoever that is. Please find out where we stand debt wise. If we're going down with a load of debt we could well be f"""""""ed before we start. It would be such a shame if AP having thrown substantial sums at the club for a couple of seasons has also landed us with handicapping debt. If that is the case then questions must be asked and I'd feel I have the right to be very disappointed in their business acumen to put it politely.

The thing is it looks fairly clear that Alex's money ran out which is why he decided to get out of the club in the first place. Quite why he felt the need to then send Patrick on his way I don't know. He has no money to spend otherwise he wouldn't have left in the first place, because with King in charge we were in a good place and now it is obvious he has no money based on the lack of signings we have made. Again he had the chance to try and keep us up and it hasn't happened. If we do somehow stay up it wont have anything to do with Alex. There needs to be a huge change off the field at the club otherwise the crap will continue.

[Neil]

Didn't Alex post something a while back criticising people who were telling him how to spend his money? I know there's the old football phrase about the Chairman getting his cheque book out when fans wanted players to sign but I don't understand how people can come on here telling someone else how to spend their money.

[Darran]

Didn't Alex post something a while back criticising people who were telling him how to spend his money? I know there's the old football phrase about the Chairman getting his cheque book out when fans wanted players to sign but I don't understand how people can come on here telling someone else how to spend their money.

He can spend his money however he likes Neil, but I don't think he has any money to spend anyway. My point more is that he and EMG are the only ones who can spend money to try and save us from going down. If that isn't going to happen then why did they force Patrick to leave? Isn't a big part of the reason certain fans wanted Patrick out because they thought Alex had money to spend and that was going to save us?