Smurfwaite / Nuneaton

[robf]

Some interesting comments from the new owner on the need for ground improvements:

 

"I'm not going to accept the condition it is in at the moment"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46059649

[Rampant Zebra]

Interesting that a semi professional footballer can afford to buy a football club with his spare change.

[RailwayRowdy]

As mentioned by ET1876, no mention of who this guy bought the club from.

 

As we know, Smurfthwaite is not backwards in coming forwards. Therefore if he didn’t own the club previously, it’s surprising that he isn’t already sticking two fingers up at all and sundry saying “I told you so”

 

Whether anyone other than those directly involved get to know the whole truth is highly debatable.

 

Anyway, congratulations to Nuneaton on surviving at least in the short term.

 

Unfortunately for them, Smurfthwaite appears to still own the ground.

 

Best of luck !

[Hagrid]

Very interested to see what Norm's involvement with Nuneaton is going forward.

[Fosse69]

Some interesting comments from the new owner on the need for ground improvements:

 

"I'm not going to accept the condition it is in at the moment"

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46059649

Usual tenant/landlord relationship? Not quite on the scale of West Ham ?

[Santa]

I'm glad to see they've got sorted out.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if the mystery about who owned the club between June and October was swept under the carpet. Which might not be a bad thing for Port Vale Football Club.

[Paul6754]

http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/nuneatontownfc/news/club-statement-introducing-our-new-owner-2363673.html

 

Thank goodness for that.

 

Best of luck to the guy, hope he truly makes a success of it.

[Inbothcamps]

My view/understanding is Lee Thorn passed his shares onto Smurf and believed that was the end of his involvement and hence resigned as director and person-with-significant control.

Perhaps Smurf wanted to own or was going to appoint someone else to do it for him. That fell through, so he never actually registered his/their ownership.

So, legally, I guess Lee Thorn was owner of the club and things being said, sort of, point that way.

 

As for new owner - good news in short term, but its anyones guess longer than that.

 

I do expect Angus and Calveley to return to PV when their loan agreement ends, which will be a shame as Angus in particular looks a class above this league.

[Fosse69]

My view/understanding is Lee Thorn passed his shares onto Smurf and believed that was the end of his involvement and hence resigned as director and person-with-significant control.

Perhaps Smurf wanted to own or was going to appoint someone else to do it for him. That fell through, so he never actually registered his/their ownership.

So, legally, I guess Lee Thorn was owner of the club and things being said, sort of, point that way.

 

As for new owner - good news in short term, but its anyones guess longer than that.

 

I do expect Angus and Calveley to return to PV when their loan agreement ends, which will be a shame as Angus in particular looks a class above this league.

What do you mean by passing shares? Smurf could not own the shares or have control of them, against league rules.

[Inbothcamps]

What do you mean by passing shares? Smurf could not own the shares or have control of them, against league rules.

 

I suspect Smurf thought the rule did not apply and/or was going to appoint people to own and run the club on his behalf.

Once he found out neither was possible the "who owns" argument started.

 

Its a bit like accepting an offer on your home when its not actually formal until completion (difference being you still live and maintain a home).

Remember, its believed the club was given away, so no waiting for money.

 

Thorn thought he had sold, but Smurf had not legally purchased.

[Jacko51]

So who signed the cheques?

[RailwayRowdy]

I suspect Smurf thought the rule did not apply and/or was going to appoint people to own and run the club on his behalf.

Once he found out neither was possible the "who owns" argument started.

 

Its a bit like accepting an offer on your home when its not actually formal until completion (difference being you still live and maintain a home).

Remember, its believed the club was given away, so no waiting for money.

 

Thorn thought he had sold, but Smurf had not legally purchased.

 

So if the above scenario was the intention, Smurfthwaite was either extremely blasé about the rules, or incredibly stupid in not knowing it was not possible.

 

Blasé or stupid ? Both I suspect.

[Fosse69]

I suspect Smurf thought the rule did not apply and/or was going to appoint people to own and run the club on his behalf.

Once he found out neither was possible the "who owns" argument started.

 

Its a bit like accepting an offer on your home when its not actually formal until completion (difference being you still live and maintain a home).

Remember, its believed the club was given away, so no waiting for money.

 

Thorn thought he had sold, but Smurf had not legally purchased.

I do not believe as the chairman of a FL club for 4/5 years that he was unaware of the rules, irrespective of peoples opinions of him, it is so basic.

[Inbothcamps]

So who signed the cheques?

That was the thing........ nobody; in fact its believed the club did not even have a bank account.

There was no landline or electricity (there was a generator which I believe Smurf purchased diesel for).

 

All transactions were cash, including Season Tickets.

I was told that Smurf went over to collect the Bradford gate receipts to be told he could not have them as he was not the owner (as he claimed) :)

There was also the situation about wanting to sack the manager.

 

Its believed that the football club have been acting illegally by having no-one in control.

[Inbothcamps]

I do not believe as the chairman of a FL club for 4/5 years that he was unaware of the rules, irrespective of peoples opinions of him, it is so basic.

 

I think Smurf thought he could get "puppets" to own the club for him and he claim that he had nothing to do with it.

There are also cases (eg Notts County & Ilkeston) where the owner has fingers in both pies. This was passed by the FA and its believed that if Nuneaton were not in the FA Cup and/or lower than the conference-north the FA would likely to allow.

 

No one knows Smurf logic/intentions BUT its believed that the football club have lease agreement with the ground owners that is probably not in Smurfs liking. In moving ownership from Boro-Leisure into a new company perhaps that lease would have been null-and-void (as was done by Boro-Leisure when it took over from Stadiasafe (the club till 2008) to the rugby club; that agreement was scrapped which led to Skips being erected by the rugby club in front of some entrances.