Robbing the blind to pay for PVFC.

[Adavale]

Obviously a Stoke supporter.

 

and a ****........

[saintvaliant]

Given the background of Mr Barnes, revealed by a quick google search, forgive me for not giving a monkeys about his opinion.

 

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/Labour-councillor-quits-BBC-inquiry/story-12532544-detail/story.html

[vale@rocks]

Short memories and double standards. We all pay council tax. Remember the vale market and the council?

[shitonthecity]

Obviously a Stoke supporter.

 

Hes a liverpool fan .

[billbee33]

Hes a liverpool fan .

 

Does he sit with Bratty.

[For Us All]

Does he sit with Bratty.

 

Probably on his knee.:D

[Ted]

His reputation does not need to be googled it all came out in the press. Very little moral fibre. His moral compass broken. Its interesting how he has come out and ex councillor tappin is headline on radio stoke expressing concerns- but never at the time. Only when the news is relevant they want to show- hey i know something on this topic! The stoke "community" stadium with an erotica conference being its first show s exactly the lazy monitoring such as the community sports facilities and swimming pool and gym etc etc. The council didnt chase them over these lack of community services! It was allowed. No follow up. But they did enjoy there invites. And this is not- as a vale fan actually blaming stoke for it- it was served on a plate for them. Ps- in response to another thread who sarcastically made side swipes dont attack the community angle associated with v2001-criticism of them and the club running is different- with many other community concerns might have given us that breathing space and not been liquidated earlier to get back the loan- social economic etc etc The council didnt even know how to deliver certain services/agendas without that vale input. And that includes hard hitting agendas. This man is unbelievable- such as his failed attempt to impersonate a press reporter to access information about a political figure. So now he s come out of the woodwork i would say- mike you re bitter about the labour party because you were frustrated at the lack of promotion within your politics.

[Santa]

The Council were also irresponsible to lend the club that sort of money. Bill Bratt overstretched himself when he committed the club to a mortgage they couldn't afford over 25 years. How on earth were the club ever going to afford £20,00 a month? Especially when the last three or four sets of accounts have shown six figure losses. The Council loan drove cashflow in the short term but now it's ran out the chickens have come home to roost.

 

Valiant 2001 bought Port Vale with borrowed money. A leveraged buyout. Like the Glazers or Hicks & Gillette but on a much smaller scale. In 2003 Charles Machin and Geoff Wakefield (I believe) arranged the original Trickett/Clarke loan.

 

By 2006 the balance of this loan I believe was

 

One rumour which has never gone away is that the Council borrowed money themselves from a third party at a lower rate of interest, and then lent the money to the club at a slightly higher rate of interest. I'm not sure on the legality of this sort of thing. Maybe Warren knows. Either way, there are massive failings all round and there's no doubt an inquiry ought to take place.

 

So there's the blame game over and done with. But that doesn't really help with how we get ourselves out of the situation we're in now. To quote Bill Bratt, "we are where we are".

 

Barnes' article is a bit of polemic which, sadly, is all to typical of the bunfight which local politics in Stoke on Trent has become. It doesn't really acknowledge that the Council were always in a lose-lose situation whatever they did here. Make no mistake, the only other alternative to putting the Vale in administration would have been to stand back and watch the club get liquidated. That would have meant a fire sale of assets, mainly involving a piece of land with a football stadium on it but no team.

 

As a secured creditor, throwing some money at the situation now gives the Council a greater chance of clawing back more money in the long run should the club be taken over as a going concern. The Council will no doubt have weighed up the pros and cons of each scenario.

 

Huge failures by the people running PVFC. Huge failures by the people on SoT CC (including Barnes himself). Tell us something we don't already know Mike. Like your namesake on the Vale board, you seem to talk a good game about what went wrong but when it comes to taking responsibility you wring your hands with the best of 'em.

[KEV.WILLIE]

The Council were also irresponsible to lend the club that sort of money. Bill Bratt overstretched himself when he committed the club to a mortgage they couldn't afford over 25 years. How on earth were the club ever going to afford £20,00 a month? Especially when the last three or four sets of accounts have shown six figure losses. The Council loan drove cashflow in the short term but now it's ran out the chickens have come home to roost.

 

Valiant 2001 bought Port Vale with borrowed money. A leveraged buyout. Like the Glazers or Hicks & Gillette but on a much smaller scale. In 2003 Charles Machin and Geoff Wakefield (I believe) arranged the original Trickett/Clarke loan.

 

By 2006 the balance of this loan I believe was

 

 

 

 

 

 

:clap::clap:

 

Very well said :yes::yes:

[Ted]

In reference to community- i was nt referring to structural facilities that would nt return the value.

[ontopgate]

The loan from the council was due to a bunch of councillorswho are vale fans trying to redress the community stadium fiasco for the lards and who votes in their constituency. Nick Salih, Neil Dawson, etc. with. Joan walley steering it.

[Lord P G Blakely]

Obviously a Stoke supporter.

 

No, just a fella who thinks there are other priorites for the council's money than a football club which ought to be able to run itself; perhaps such as blind people who've lost their bus passes in cost-cutting exercises.

[Loggerheads Sage]

"6 years later and hardly anything paid back" - stick to facts and opinions Mike, don't tell lies (leave that to the Vale boards) - the debt has gone down from 2.5m to 1.8m/1.9m in 5 1/2 years. Also the interest received by the Council has been at a fixed rate which whilst being fair at the time has proved to be very much in the councils favour. I'm sure the council have made the best of a bad situation here, and couldn't win whatever they did.

[bennymole]

No, just a fella who thinks there are other priorites for the council's money than a football club which ought to be able to run itself; perhaps such as blind people who've lost their bus passes in cost-cutting exercises.

 

No, its councillors trying and failing to redress the totally unfair stance favouring scfc, whom they GAVE the money, not LOANED.

[Ted]

I agree about services at risk and a badly run club. But there are many things that the port vale brand achieve. This is why i was worried in the financial climate that they could easily have pulled it. But in relation to stoke- think about the millions the council lost through the brit stadium.