Yep, but when we talk about “investment” what that would have to involve is many many millions of pounds. So that’s basically having someone come in with that kind of money has to be new ownership surely? Nobody’s going to come to Walsall, invest millions so that Stef Gamble can tell them what to say and when to say it. If Pomlett can be a vehicle for that and can get the club in better shape in the meantime (ie at least back in league one and getting decent crowds) then great. Let’s hope he also knows a bloke down the pub with a spare £20m.
So basically if I understand this correctly the powers that be at Walsall realistically need to start planning for the future of Walsall FC post Bescot. Suits me. The club itself is an entity that doesnt need to be chained to some one sided f**k job in staying at Bescot. Many businesses relocate when their circumstances and future plans and their current home becomes unsuitable. There is no reason in the long term for Walsall to stay at Bescot if the cards are always going to be stacked against the club.
F**k it, sod the lease and move on, if Uncle pension pot wants to fight a legal battle in his retirement years then sod him , daft sod. Walsall FC was around before him, it should be around after him. He can keep his ex sewage works plot and sell it commercially. No reason why the club should remain shackled to his land grab.
Nail. On. Head. Yours is the most accurate post on this forum in its history.
I have been a Saddlers supporter since 1987 and I was a regular at both home and away matches until I moved to Australia in 2001.
I will not be renewing my iFollow subscription next season and I will not be bothering to stay up beyond midnight to watch any more Saturday games this term.
It has taken 33 years of false hope but, finally, I am quitting Walsall and, unlike getting off hard drugs, I will not experience any withdrawal symptoms from ridding myself of the Saddlers.
The only thing more disgraceful than the Jeff Bonser/Leigh Pomlett era has been the lack of media scrutiny applied to the circumstances in which Walsall finds itself after leaving Fellows Park. I had a letter published in the Sports Argus in the early 1990s when I was a teenager in which I asked more questions than the likes of Joe Masi and Liam Keen have ever asked. If you think Pomlett is anything other than a Bonser stooge then you are living in cloud cuckoo land.
I would be interested in supporting an AFC Walsall-style phoenix club if one ever gets off the ground but, judging by the origin and content of this thread, I doubt one will because Saddlers fans are so splintered. For now at least I am going to concentrate on pursuits that do not take my support for granted.
Does anyone know if there’s a break clause in the lease and if so, when is it?
Next one is around seven years time
Reply for philthesaddler, it is a criminal offence
Need to be thorough in your research
You need to learn to read.
They say they “may” prosecute. They also “may” strike you off their register for the same offence.
Like I said, enough of the nonsense.
But it is a criminal offence not to submit accounts by the due date.
Like any criminal offence, the punishment is determined following due process.
If you’re a limited company, yes.
The trust is a not for profit mutual society, registered with the FCA, not a for-profit limited company.
The confusion on this thread is because people are talking about things they have no expertise in and are confusing limited companies with mutual societies voluntarily registered with the FCA, and the FCA’s rules around membership of that scheme.
And the penalties for non-submission of accounts if you’re a limited company are far more severe than £1000, believe me.
FCA records clearly state it is limited concern
Plus the FCA have confirmed the failure of this enterprise is a criminal offence
How they pursue the matter lies with them
As I said before, I absolutely didn’t want to get dragged into this thread as I am not a member of any of the 4 supporters organisations (if you include the Saddlers Club) and have no axe to grind with any of them (except for any claim that any one of them is speaking on my behalf). However, it looks like I need to re-emphasise my other point that my last post made - all this inter-necine public squabbling, and the absolutely disgraceful mud slinging, innuendo, and half truths that one side seems intent on resorting to, does concern me as anyone from inside the club or other supporters reading this thread may well tar all of us with the same brush.
If you read the rules document posted by the Trust mistruster, it specifically says that the offence applies to non-submission by 2 distinct organisational registration types. If you bother to read the documentation on the same site that the Trust have submitted, they are registered as a totally different organisation type and thys not subject to the same rules.
As Exile has already pointed out, the Trust officially endorsed the “missing” set of accounts at their 2019 AGM (the minutes for which are publicly available on their website), so it’s not like they are trying to deliberately hide them. Perhaps they have been sent to the FCA but they haven’t processed them yet - did you think of that?
So given all that, for an official of a different organsiation to publicly call for the Trust to be criminally charged is well OTT. Please be careful what you are alleging as the law of libel does cover social media and sites like this (and the people running them - admins please note!)
BTW If you read the rest of the Trust’s registration document it lists 6 objectives not 1, and the one that mentions buying shares and getting a place on the board is only the 5th of these and says they want to encourage and promote the principle of supporter representation on the board and for them to be the vehicle to do it at Walsall. Hardly seems like a good reason to insist that they disband because they haven’t achieved that yet (especially when LP’s reasons why he doesn’t believe it will happen seem to satisfy the same person doing the insisting) - at least they have attended (and asked questions) at club AGMs.
I can confirm that yesterday. A meeting was attended by. People who represent the trust. Issa and the dsa !
All grievances where aired and fully discussed,
I can only speak on behalf of Issa when I say, That the trust officials have given there word that matters spoke of will be fully investigated , and. We will be given. A full explanation of there findings. In due course
The trust raised no issues. Of any sort in relation to the independent saddlers supporters association as to our conduct etc
As a group Issa thank the trust for calling said meeting , and hopefully we can all move forward once trust have. Concluded there own. Enquiries into matters raised
We are hopefull that this can be done in time prior to next working party meeting, in order for all three groups to move forward. , but if matter is not fully concluded by then, Issa will remain an absentee from the March working party meeting , whilst such enquiries by trust are carried out fully
Again I state as chairman of the independent saddlers supporters association, we are more than happy and welcome the trusts approach in sorting said issues , and await there findings
A senior board member of the Trust called for a meeting with the Chairs of ISSA & the DSA for the purpose of identifying the grievances that exist. As chair of the DSA I thank the Trust for this endeavour
The Trust fully engaged with ISSA and the DSA and took on the concerns of the two groups
It is hoped that all parties involved will be able to resolve any problems and that all the groups
will then attend future WPM thus ensuring fans remain properly represented
I’m sorry to speak out of turn here, but if find this all a little comical.
The trust will investigate, they are a two bob outfit what’s to investigate?? Hardly a job for Columbo is it…