Even setting aside his other issues and the pulling the rug, even taking account that you don't believe the transfer issues , forgetting that he sold players behind managers backs (look at John Gregory and Gordon Strachan version of events for example), setting all that aside, why do you think the gagging order remains in place? I'd love to hear a valid reason for that.
Completely agree Riyadh .I think many people owe BR a big apology but doubt he’ll get it. I mean to say some people think Trump tells the truth .Richardson, as he states in the podcast, followed an ambitious path to establish the club as a premier league force and oversaw a one of the best era's in my 54 years following the club, getting much better players in and doubling the gates in his ten years as chairman.
It is interesting to listen to him talk about this period and his obvious affection for the club and hurt over the outcome that transpired.
I remember the run up to the stadium announcements and he had communicated in forums, supporters club meetings and via the media why, how and what we needed to be a premier league regular for years to come.
As early as 95 he was of the opinion that Highfield Road could not sustain or even get anywhere near close to generating the income of our rivals.
He was plausible, ambitious and had a vision and set it out clearly. Ridicule came his way over the Wembley scenario, the roof and roll out pitch but the one thing it wasn't was bluster and bullshit, there was substance in why these versions came out and it wasn't in this case anything other than other parties wanting to join in the project.
Has it happened I believe he is damned for overseeing the relegation in 01 and the ignorance of fans looking for a scapegoat. Wrong target in my opinion.
Who is in the channel islands and how is that relevant?
Robinson was a lot more charitable towards Richardson in Gilbert's book than I'd expect. It's either the sign of a politician, or the passing of time (and McGinnity) has altered his perception.Richardson has come out and given his side of the story, for whatever reason the club's youtube page had him on. The only persons we've never heard any real description over what happened between the late 90s and 2007 are Geoffrey Robinson and Michael McGinnity.
Who is in the channel islands and how is that relevant?
At least with his build the shovels went into the ground.How is it based on hearsay? I was a supporter throughout his reign when he took a significant slice from our club on transfers in and out, put a gagging order on the staff and directors that remains in place today on the sale and still never offferd any details and was the one who sold Highfield Road from under us and rented back from the council. He may be spinning a good yarn to those who have conveniently forgotten now but he was the catalyst for all our problems and as bad as SISU are today.
At least with his build the shovels went into the ground.
Indeed! The point being that it was not all bluster.we'd be a lot better off if they hadn't.
All really pertinent questions OSB but the most important one in my opinion has always been “why sell HR before we actually had somewhere to go to?” I fail to see how that decision was in the best interest of the company at the time but perhaps that wasn’t a key consideration?I find it hard not to doubt what Richardson says. I may be wrong but thats my opinion of what he says
He became a director in 1991 and resigned January 2002
When he came in
CCFC
Accumulated losses £3m (since 1907)
Borrowings £2.2m
other creditors £3.8m
Fixed Assets £5.3m
Net Assets £1.5m
When he left
Accumulated losses 14.3m
Borrowings 26.3m
other creditors £11.2m
Fixed assets £13.5m
Net assets £2.1m
(just to be clear the creditors in 2002 were no longer included amount owed on the arena, it together with the £18.4m costs already spent on the project had been transferred to the joint venture with CCC as a net £4.4m investmet)
Yes i know he wasn't the only director but he was Chairman (leader). Hardly a success story off the pitch though is it, has been a big contribution 2012 and since
by the time he left the Board he led had spent £18.4m on the Arena project, and owed £14m of those costs. The rights to the development had been sold to the building creditor and CCFC had an option to buy back the site ......... that lapsed (ended, no longer existed) in the accounts year that he left.
So i have questions
- if the Tesco deal was so good and profitable why could the club not raise money against it. £20m to acquire, Move on part of the site to Tesco for £60m leaving a plot to use and include on the balance sheet
- if the deal was so good why couldn't these rich people raise funds to do it on the back of the proposed sale to Tesco - could it be it lacked real substance and was just a non contractual intention
- if the option had lapsed and no finance available how could a deal be sealed and signed with Tesco - CCFC no longer had a right to do so
- who actually bought the site if CCFC didn't (CCC) so how could CCFC do any deal
- why sell HR before we actually had somewhere to go to
- why spend £18m and put the club in to severe indebtedness on something they didn't own and couldn't finance or had no means to buy back
- who led the Board of directors that put us in a deep hole?
All under Mr Richardson tenure
I really have not seen any of those involved accept responsibility for what they did or apologise. (too late for some obviously). It is always someone else's fault, even amongst themselves
All really pertinent questions OSB but the most important one in my opinion has always been “why sell HR before we actually had somewhere to go to?” I fail to see how that decision was in the best interest of the company at the time but perhaps that wasn’t a key consideration?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?