Staff Repayments

Interesting thread on PASOTI

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

When I was a member I often asked the same question but like the current thread was not given a straight answer by anyone who would be "in the know". My concern is the Brent is getting a football club cheaper because of the genorosity of the supporters paying his debts. I'm all for supporters if they wish giving up their time to help however village it may seem to others.

It's like me buying a house and getting others to walk Kilimanjaro to pay my mortgage?

Is there a formal agreement in place?
Are the amounts of donations recorded?
Exactly who is tasked with spending the donation? I gather that the GT's are not registered as a charity.
How will this be audited?
What is to stop JB saying "I can give you this money or I can buy a striker?" Then he would be using charity to pay for a striker to further enhance his investment and not have to pay the liability of the staff wages?

I'm not for one moment criticising the GT's and I'm not disparaging the work of volunteers for the club. If they wish to help in anyway they can then that's for them.

What I'm naturally suspicious of (and by Christ after the last mob I'm alowed to be) is an owner using the genorisity of others to offset his obligations.

A prime example of the Unacceptable face of Capitalism

What did you do in the war is the only answer you will receive you freak.

I always believed that Brent had come to an accommodation where he would pay for certain community projects in return for Green Taverners help in paying the wages debt. I've never seen anything mentioned about this quid pro quo being acted out.

If the GasBoard comes to fruition it's exactly the type of enquiries they should be making. Unless the Trust can get answers first.

Bermudian Greens questions tie in very nicely with this thread:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

It will all end in tears....

I've noticed that lots of posters on the farm, have asked how much of the debt has been paid off, but have been met with deadly silence from the super fan brigade. if its all above board why cant they tell the fans?

Firstly, I'm a massive admirer of the GTs and all the effort that Gary & Co put in.

But why can't we be told what the actual figure owed to the staff is, and then at regular periods (perhaps monthly) be told how much has been raised towards paying off this debt.

The question has been asked on many occasions, but so far no answers.

Also a shame the ones made redundant are being shafted twice too.

Sufferedsince68 wrote:

I've noticed that lots of posters on the farm, have asked how much of the debt has been paid off, but have been met with deadly silence from the super fan brigade. if its all above board why cant they tell the fans?

Very true. There are without any shadow of doubt, a number of people who would have read that thread on pasoti, and would be in a position to shed some light on the questions asked - but choose not to. They have a problem now though, because it isn't 'the usual suspects', who are asking the questions.

As a general rule of thumb, people look to keep areas as grey as possible, if they think demonstrating clarity will show them in a bad light.

Does this answer the question?

This states that the money raised and used for accelerated payments are interest-free loans by the GTs to the club.

Tim

Tim Chown wrote:

Does this answer the question?

This states that the money raised and used for accelerated payments are interest-free loans by the GTs to the club.

Tim

The original question on the pasoti thread, was questioning the circumstances under which Brent intends on going about repaying all this money the Taverners are raising.

That article on the Taverners site doesn't give any detail on that.

The Taverners article doesn't give detail, but it does say that the loans will be repaid on the dates that PAFC would of made the staff payments.

I don't really see an issue with PAFC repaying The GTs.

The issue for me, is why the GTs should have to do this in the first place.

I think that theGT,s are going to land themselves in the crack with this if not careful. When this all started and I was allowed to post on pbay I asked the gt,s whether they were a charity, whether they were going to be liable for any tax and just generally warning them to be careful. The gist of what I was told was that their hands were full with the fundraising efforts and they would deal with these issues in time. It would appear that this is still the case and matters haven,t been dealt with. You try and go door to door and raise a 100k for charity without a licence and a badge, you would quite rightly have the law on you.
The other issue that concerns me is the transparency of the whole staff debt issue. I have long wondered whether the redundant staff would receive any money, it would appear not, why don,t he GT,s concentrate on these staff? I am sure that all but a skeleton staff were made redundant at the time which would considerably reduce the amount of the staff debt to repay. Also how much is owed in total? I noticed that Keepitgreen in his thread moaning about how badly treated Porkie is let slip that out of 450k the GT,s have paid back an amazing 100k. If this is the case why don,t they have a totaliser at the fan fests? It would keep the focus on what they are trying to achieve and maybe speed the process up a little.
I am sure that if fans (and I mean the multitude of real fans that are the lifeblood of this club not a handful of self promoting superfans) were more involved in the process they would raise the money that they are after, or it may show them up to be quite amateur and skating on thin ice when it comes to the law.
The final issue that I have with this is that if Brent then pays off the GT,s then the time that the club is saddled with Brent's pension debt payoff scheme is not going to be shortened at all, pasty anybody?

Is there a concern that once the staff have been paid, then what do they do then?

The first rule in business, put in as little as you can, take out as much as you can.

Everyone will wake up one day!

What we need is a board of straight talking fans that are prepared to ask these sort of tough questions and to question the club accounts. What's Tony up to these days?

i can see why jb has opted for the gts to pay back the missing salaries and for him to pay the gts, and it goes along this line: by the time the gts have made that final payment, argo will be a championship club again and brent will sell up having not paid the gts back. historical debt for the new owner. JB is a wily old coyote

Mapperley, darling wrote:

i can see why jb has opted for the gts to pay back the missing salaries and for him to pay the gts, and it goes along this line: by the time the gts have made that final payment, argo will be a championship club again and brent will sell up having not paid the gts back. historical debt for the new owner. JB is a wily old coyote

I suppose this would depend upon the exact wording of the written agreement between JB and the GT's regarding the whole fundraising/early repayment issue.

The GT's have got a written agreement with Brent concerning this, I assume?

Mapperley, darling wrote:

i can see why jb has opted for the gts to pay back the missing salaries and for him to pay the gts, and it goes along this line: by the time the gts have made that final payment, argo will be a championship club again and brent will sell up having not paid the gts back. historical debt for the new owner. JB is a wily old coyote

Thats right maps because it's percieved by Mr Brent as being the clubs debt and not his.

Iggy wrote:

I think that theGT,s are going to land themselves in the crack with this if not careful. When this all started and I was allowed to post on pbay I asked the gt,s whether they were a charity, whether they were going to be liable for any tax and just generally warning them to be careful. The gist of what I was told was that their hands were full with the fundraising efforts and they would deal with these issues in time. It would appear that this is still the case and matters haven,t been dealt with. You try and go door to door and raise a 100k for charity without a licence and a badge, you would quite rightly have the law on you.
The other issue that concerns me is the transparency of the whole staff debt issue. I have long wondered whether the redundant staff would receive any money, it would appear not, why don,t he GT,s concentrate on these staff? I am sure that all but a skeleton staff were made redundant at the time which would considerably reduce the amount of the staff debt to repay. Also how much is owed in total? I noticed that Keepitgreen in his thread moaning about how badly treated Porkie is let slip that out of 450k the GT,s have paid back an amazing 100k. If this is the case why don,t they have a totaliser at the fan fests? It would keep the focus on what they are trying to achieve and maybe speed the process up a little.
I am sure that if fans (and I mean the multitude of real fans that are the lifeblood of this club not a handful of self promoting superfans) were more involved in the process they would raise the money that they are after, or it may show them up to be quite amateur and skating on thin ice when it comes to the law.
The final issue that I have with this is that if Brent then pays off the GT,s then the time that the club is saddled with Brent's pension debt payoff scheme is not going to be shortened at all, pasty anybody?

They are registered company and not a charity Iggy

Name & Registered Office:
GREEN TAVERNERS LIMITED
c/o BENNETT JONES & CO
94 FORE STREET
BODMIN
CORNWALL
UNITED KINGDOM
PL31 2HR
Company No. 07761964

What are the puppets getting out of this beside a car-park space and a grandstand seat?

If clubs like Manchester United can be bought with the club's own money, then anything is possible.
Football was always been seen as a fairly dodgy industry with the bungs and brown envelopes, and we are seeing new derivatives of that... all sorts of games with all the future risk on the club, not the owner.

These clubs in their own little communities are often seen as 'too big to fail', and hence ripe for the plucking ... a quick in out, take what you want, and leave the 'fans' with the 'debt' in whatever form it takes. Not only that, while you're escaping with a nice cash or property earner, you can do a Ridsdale, refuse the guilt, and tell the fans it's their own fault and that they enjoyed the ride. The former owners still don't accept they have done anything wrong .. it's all our fault for wanting to have a winning team. Not a peep out of the likes of Stapleton or Gardner.
The last lot were gamblers and might have lost a few pennies, bar the Japanese guy who might have lost a lot. This latest banking character is starting from scratch, and hence little to no actual personal exposure, but with the local Council falling all over themselves to sweeten his tea 'for the sake of the city'. It's going to be an earner while the club continues to flounder under rather a lot of debt.

Tgwu wrote:

What are the puppets getting out of this beside a car-park space and a grandstand seat?

The positive feeling of helping their club and the staff who went unpaid for so long?

Whether you object to Brent's re-payment schedule or not, I think having a pop at the GTs like that is out of order. They invest hours of their own time and a lot of their own money into what they do, there's no self-serving motivation there whatsoever. They're all great people.

I'm not in the business of trying to force people's opinions, and I acknowledge the viewpoint that it's bad that they have to do it as Brent isn't originally paying in full himself, but I think that post is very cynical.

Instead of questioning each other on here why not contact the Gts themselves . You know where they are pre match .

If people want to contribute money whats the problem ? I think if someone wants to spend their hard earned money on anything they chose then that is their right .

People gamble , people drink heavily and buy tellys too big for their house but I see no problem with that - its their money .

GreenSam wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

What are the puppets getting out of this beside a car-park space and a grandstand seat?

The positive feeling of helping their club and the staff who went unpaid for so long?

Whether you object to Brent's re-payment schedule or not, I think having a pop at the GTs like that is out of order.

I think the puppets TGWU refers to, are two individuals, and not the Green Taverners.

GreenSam wrote:

Tgwu wrote:

What are the puppets getting out of this beside a car-park space and a grandstand seat?

The positive feeling of helping their club and the staff who went unpaid for so long?

Whether you object to Brent's re-payment schedule or not, I think having a pop at the GTs like that is out of order. They invest hours of their own time and a lot of their own money into what they do, there's no self-serving motivation there whatsoever. They're all great people.

I'm not in the business of trying to force people's opinions, and I acknowledge the viewpoint that it's bad that they have to do it as Brent isn't originally paying in full himself, but I think that post is very cynical.

Do Mr Web get paid by the BBC ?