Hope this isn’t the next step, think we as fans need to step up, we don’t deserve this - 40 years of crap ownership.
Sorry but that's nonsense.One of the tenures in Company law, is that the directors ensure that the club is run in a way that it benefits the community, which they are falling to do, there is a possibility that legal action could be brought against the club directors barring them from running the club, question is what happens next?
Sorry but that's nonsense.
Legal action against the clubs directors?
On the basis that this hasn't happened at Charlton, Blackpool, and all of the appallingly run clubs why should it happen at Oxford?
How do the fans need to “step up”?
From what I can see this is entirely down to the way the club has been run and is nothing to do with the supporters.
One of the tenures in Company law, is that the directors ensure that the club is run in a way that it benefits the community, which they are falling to do, there is a possibility that legal action could be brought against the club directors barring them from running the club, question is what happens next?
Yeah, I'm interested in this too. I'm a director of my own company, albeit not as large as OUFC, but all I know about director responsibilities is from this guide: https://www.gov.uk/running-a-limited-companyReally? Can provide a link or source of this legislation.
Here it is: Not sure how it's relevant to OUFC directors?:
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/172 - Companies Act 2006, section 172
A director of a company must act in the way he considers, in good faith, would be most likely to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole, and in doing so have regard (amongst other matters) to—
1(d): the impact of the company's operations on the community and the environment
I don't think that means it has to benefit the community at all, just be mindful of the impact on the community?
Well it doesn't say it has to benefit the community, just that it has to 'have regard' for the community and environment. In other words, it means nothing that isn't covered in law (excessive noise, pollution, nuisance etc) - just 'don't be a pillock'. Which the directors of some companies I have worked for would actually find more than a bit taxing...
The idea of somehow using this to force the owner/directors of OUFC to do anything is 'optimistic' to say the least.![]()
Because just maybe it has never been about the football club[emoji848]Why would someone buy a club get a load of wealthy backers on board then go into administration 12 months later?
Doesn't sound logical at all
The fact that there seems to be a total lack of concern from the owners that a chasm is opening between the club and its fans seems to back up this line of thought.Because just maybe it has never been about the football club[emoji848]
I can see merit in this argument, but it brings us back to that eternal question: Why on earth did DE choose to sell to him over Sartori? That’s if, as people insist on here, Sartori was indeed a serious player.I think you’re looking too deeply into his motivations. The fact of the matter is our owner is a chancer who has never had a plan from day 1. He can’t share what that plan is with us because he doesn’t know it. He makes it up as he goes along but is able to say to his big buddy mates that he is an owner of a football club. This is an ego trip plain and simple. The lack of organisation in the club is partly because of his absenteeism and that there is no-one capable or empowered to get things running on an even keel. Rudderless, drifting and without even the sense of a purpose - no wonder KR finds it difficult to attract players.
I can see merit in this argument, but it brings us back to that eternal question: Why on earth did DE choose to sell to him over Sartori? That’s if, as people insist on here, Sartori was indeed a serious player.
The Satori situation remains a strange one. If he really wanted to be involved in a football club and had the sort of money that was being spoken of, you would think that he would have a far greater role at Sunderland? I know he's put a few quid up, but nowhere near the money that was being claimed he would throw our way. I wonder if he was ever anymore than a link to SD and Charlie and maybe that's why DE pulled out.I can see merit in this argument, but it brings us back to that eternal question: Why on earth did DE choose to sell to him over Sartori? That’s if, as people insist on here, Sartori was indeed a serious player.
But we know that DE was no fool, so why do a deal with someone who we are continually told is a potless chancer?3 reasons.
1) Money
2) Money
3) Money
Tiger offered the best package. DE selling in the ‘best interests of the club’ was either a flat out lie or he too was drawn in by the snake oil Tiger was selling. I think the Sartori bid was real but it was a pragmatic offer and it is hard to put much value on a club that doesn’t own its own stadium and has few assets.
Because Slippery had already secured his dosh from the sale as part of outstanding transfer balances that would've come to the club if tigger had the money up front.But we know that DE was no fool, so why do a deal with someone who we are continually told is a potless chancer?
Because Slippery had already secured his dosh from the sale as part of outstanding transfer balances that would've come to the club if trigger had the money up front.
Oh and at the time there were valuable players in the squad. Sartori via his advisers thought they could get the club at a cut down price in a fire sale.
What budget do you think Satori et al would have had for each operating year, and what do you think Tiger's budget is? I think you'll be surprised that there would have been very little difference. The idea that we would have been swimming in cash under Satori is entirely unfounded.Or they just put a more realistic valuation on the club..looking at the club’s current status, you could argue Tiger overpaid. Let’s just say he hasn’t been willing or able to follow on his initial outlay to any great extent..