S&S The Answers

Post by **uncovered** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:11 pm

Uncovered can now release the detail of the meeting with Philip Scott on Monday evening

http://www.darlofc.co.uk/news.php?NewsID=501

Spyman · Post by **Spyman** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:34 pm

No particularly surprising info in all that but good to see some of the detail about the loan payments, and to hear Mr Scott's honest intentions. I'm quite surprised he says he's willing to discuss options to help the club relocate - was there any indication what this help might entail?

Sounds like the money they loaned the club was wasted by Houghton and his only hope of paying them back was by us getting promoted, or him developing the land, but with the repayment due in Jan 2010, I'm not sure how he expected the company to become profitable in such a short space of time. This would lead me to think that once Houghton realised he couldn't get his contacts to invest in development, he decided he wanted out and that he could do this by securing a loan against the land, not repaying the loan, and then transferring the land to new owners while getting shot of the club.

divas · Post by **divas** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:40 pm

Yeah nothing groundbreaking, but in a way i suppose that's good as it shows that at least there's truth in the statements from both sides.

tdk1 · Post by **tdk1** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:50 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:Also, that last paragraph is a little unclear. Am I right in thinking S&S are basically offering to help us relocate if Raj gives up the stadium and land?

It does sound like that, I found that quite heartening, in what was otherwise quite worrying. It's clear PS has no particular desire to drive the club under, but no real responsibility to help us.

Spyman · Post by **Spyman** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:57 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:Clearly some "foul play" from Houghton and S&S in regards to paying Houghton £500,000 direct as opposed to paying the club the full amount?

Why would you do that? If you're loaning the club money then it should go straight to the club AND not straight to your best mate!

No, not 'clearly some foul play' The loan was made (that payment in particular) on contractual terms that the money would be put towards the football club, but Houghton was restructuring things so didn't want it all to go straight to the club. This doesn't mean foul play by S&S, as they stipulated the money had to go to the club. Whether Houghton broke that agreement or not remains to be seen, but given the sort of figures we were shelling out in wages, I expect it did go towards running the club.

Remember this money was loaned in 2007. Nearly 2 years before we went into administration with reported wage bill of over £2million a year was it that I read earlier?

quaker4life · Post by **quaker4life** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:10 pm

As has been said above although it was more in depth there wasn't really anything we didn't already know in that article, credit where it's due though well done to Phillip Scott for attending the meeting and producing evidence of the loan. But really I think there was only a small straw clutching few who doubted it's existance or of proof of it.

To be fair S&S made it clear they only wanted their money back and did not wish to jeopardise the club's future, but at the same time they obviously no interest in taking it on it would make little sense seeing as they are looking to recover a debt and not inherit a new one.

At least they are prepared to look for the best way forward for everyone concerned and it seems they are prepared to help the club relocate if they assume full control of the stadium and land.

It's basically a case now of if Raj won't pay they'll seek alternative development for the land to recover their debt.

gabbas · Post by **gabbas** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:15 pm

What's in it for Raj if we move stadium?

beatroute66 · Post by **beatroute66** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:46 pm

I'm not making any comments regarding this article until my solicitor - Mr. Wylam-Rangers - has poured over the document with a fine-tooth comb.

mobi · Post by **mobi** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:53 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:
gabbas wrote:What's in it for Raj if we move stadium?
Exactly. A new stadium could cost £20 million and I don't think we'd be entitled to anymore grants either.

Indeed, and how much would S&S contribute to that cost? S&S want to recoup their £2m, not lose £20m, yet they also tell us they want to help us relocate?

I think the idea of S&S helping us to relocate to new stadium is poppycock (yes, that's strong language for you). It's good PR in the sense that people are probably now quite hopeful that S&S could make their dreams of relocation come true. Take it with a huge pinch of salt however.

gabbas · Post by **gabbas** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:03 pm

S & S ' There's some land you could build on'

RS 'thanks for your help in relocating the stadium'

number_one · Post by **number_one** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:05 pm

beatroute66 wrote:I'm not making any comments regarding this article until my solicitor - Mr. Wylam-Rangers - has poured over the document with a fine-tooth comb.

There isn't really any comment to be made as the article covers more or less word for word what Darlo_Cockney said prior to the meeting.

Spyman · Post by **Spyman** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:08 pm

mobi wrote:
mrcoops1984 wrote:
gabbas wrote:What's in it for Raj if we move stadium?
Exactly. A new stadium could cost £20 million and I don't think we'd be entitled to anymore grants either.
Indeed, and how much would S&S contribute to that cost? S&S want to recoup their £2m, not lose £20m, yet they also tell us they want to help us relocate?

I think the idea of S&S helping us to relocate to new stadium is poppycock (yes, that's strong language for you). It's good PR in the sense that people are probably now quite hopeful that S&S could make their dreams of relocation come true. Take it with a huge pinch of salt however.

'Helping' might not be financial in the sense they give us money towards it. It might be that they use other factors to influence the council into letting us use some land in town.

divas · Post by **divas** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:09 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:
gabbas wrote:What's in it for Raj if we move stadium?
Exactly. A new stadium could cost £20 million and I don't think we'd be entitled to anymore grants either.

I imagine land would be the biggest issue for relocation - I can't see the council giving us anything on the cheap. Realisticly a new stadium could prob be built for 5m

RenoRaines · Post by **RenoRaines** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:11 pm

What I want know is who appointed the "Darlington supporter representatives"? No one represented me at any meeting. Frankly it's a load of bullshit. It's a group of property developers who have got together to develop some land, unfortunately the land just happened to have a stadium on it with a football club set up by Reynolds.

On top of that I am being told that unless I support the club more the owner is throwing the towel in.

Spyman · Post by **Spyman** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:14 pm

RenoRaines wrote:What I want know is who appointed the "Darlington supporter representatives"? No one represented me at any meeting. Frankly it's a load of bullshit. It's a group of property developers who have got together to develop some land, unfortunately the land just happened to have a stadium on it with a football club set up by Reynolds.

On top of that I am being told that unless I support the club more the owner is throwing the towel in.

Nobody appointed them, they volunteered on here last week, just as you could have. They didn't 'represent' anyone as in put views of the supporters across by the sounds of it, they just asked some questions, listened to some answers, and reported them back to the rest of us. I don't see why anyone has a right to have a problem with them for doing this, it was all handled quite transparently.

divas · Post by **divas** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:16 pm

I think the help would be monetary - it's a case of them saying to the council, if you lift the planning conditions on the land we'll help out your town's football team. The stadium would also be theirs - maybe there could be some way some of it could be re-used on a smaller scale which would cut costs

carver30 · Post by **carver30** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:18 pm

Reading between the lines S&S would probably settle for their orginal investment which is £1.7m, the interest is really irrelevant its their initial stake they want paying. It looks like Houghton shafted not only Raj but S&S as well.

mobi · Post by **mobi** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:45 pm

divas wrote:I think the help would be monetary - it's a case of them saying to the council, if you lift the planning conditions on the land we'll help out your town's football team. The stadium would also be theirs - maybe there could be some way some of it could be re-used on a smaller scale which would cut costs

Yes, it would have to be monetary. It sounds a nice idea, but it would obviously be a massive expense, and I don't know how keen S&S are on building £10m football stadiums.

I'm really taking it with a pinch of salt right now. They know what the fans want to hear, and any talk of relocation is bound to get fans interested (and on their side?). But, there is no flesh on the bones so to speak, and I'm not convinced there ever could be.

BishopQuaker · Post by **BishopQuaker** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:49 pm

Obviously we'd need something bigger than Bishop's but how much did that cost to build?

RenoRaines · Post by **RenoRaines** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:01 pm

Look, I am, like most people just fed up of all the squabbling over the land. Have any of the people who have owned the club ever wondered why over the last five years crowds have fallen? Maybe it's because people need something to believe in. I no longer believe anything.

Charlie_Darlo · Post by **Charlie_Darlo** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:26 pm

Just to add my bit here.

Philip Scott and Graham Sizer's first preference is to get back the loan and the interest that is theirs by right. It is the easiest solution.

The offer to help relocate is a possible alternative. Philip Scott did not go into any detail on this.

He also told me that he had not been in touch with Raj Singh for a considerable period of time prior to all of this blowing up and that he regreted the email comments, which he made in anger. He was surprised that Raj went to the press.

tdk1 · Post by **tdk1** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:43 pm

Looking again, if everybody involved keeps their heads, not to mention patience, this could well end up working out pretty well for everyone. There's a long road ahead if that is to happen though.

Allan Quatermain · Post by **Allan Quatermain** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:50 pm

divas wrote:I think the help would be monetary - it's a case of them saying to the council, if you lift the planning conditions on the land we'll help out your town's football team. The stadium would also be theirs - maybe there could be some way some of it could be re-used on a smaller scale which would cut costs

Or perhaps they have, or know of, land that can be offered in exchange

AIDO · Post by **AIDO** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:54 pm

tdk1 wrote:Looking again, if everybody involved keeps their heads, not to mention patience, this could well end up working out pretty well for everyone. There's a long road ahead if that is to happen though.

That is the best post on this thread ....

... nice 1

wylam_rangers · Post by **wylam_rangers** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:17 pm

A "loan" of 1.7m delivered in 3 stages. Of which a considerable amount disappeared into Uncle George's pocket!! We know what "restructuring" involved.

No mention either of where the "cash" came from. S&S were directors of Southern Cross at the time of the loan and didn't have access to their share windfall until several months later.

Still more questions than answers and it's hardly surprising that Raj is unhappy to clear up this mess at full cost.

Anyone who takes this explanation at face value is rather naive.

Darlo Cockney · Post by **Darlo Cockney** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:51 pm

number_one wrote:
beatroute66 wrote:I'm not making any comments regarding this article until my solicitor - Mr. Wylam-Rangers - has poured over the document with a fine-tooth comb.
There isn't really any comment to be made as the article covers more or less word for word what Darlo_Cockney said prior to the meeting.

So, Uncle George gets £500,000 in his back pocket and surprise, surprise doesn't pay back a penny. Raj is expected to pay this back. !!!!

There was no valuation of the Stadium / Land before the deal was signed - inflated price.

Who on earth gets 12% interest on loans nowadays. ?/

Like I said before - This deal stinks.

No wonder Raj is unwilling to settle with these guys.

DC

BeefSpud · Post by **BeefSpud** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:58 pm

Why don't you call the police then?

Charlie_Darlo · Post by **Charlie_Darlo** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:49 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:Does anyone know how much the club, stadium and land is worth if Raj was to pay off S&S?

It is worth between £1.5m to £2m as it stands, but the council get 75% of the profit. It would be worth more without the planning constraints.

S&S are due £2.4m due to the terms of their loan.

Charlie_Darlo · Post by **Charlie_Darlo** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:51 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:Is there any way we can view the football club's accounts for the last couple of years does anyone know?

You can buy documents filed at Companies House, including accounts, on the net.

divas · Post by **divas** » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:57 pm

mrcoops1984 wrote:Is there any way we can view the football club's accounts for the last couple of years does anyone know?

None yet published from DFC 2009 but I have the last ones published from the last company up to 2007 filed in 2008 if anyone wants them - I also have a number of other docs re the mortgage etc

Darlo Uncovered

S&S The Answers

S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers

Re: S&S The Answers