Thohir

Dave T said:
See this is where it becomes pointless and people start getting pissed off. I think I’ve been more than reasonable in my responses and have asked questions that add to the debate. Yet u just stick to the script. Throw in a hand grenade of a post > wait while people start melting down about it > don’t answer questions > have a pop at oxvox > disappear again. Every time.
Click to expand...
If the single question I asked on here is a "hand grenade", I really do despair. And who's melting down? As for not answering questions, again, I've probably put more info on this forum over the years than anyone and actually raised those very questions.

And, yep, I am going to disappear again. Just don't expect me back.
 
myles said:
If the single question I asked on here is a "hand grenade", I really do despair. And who's melting down? As for not answering questions, again, I've probably put more info on this forum over the years than anyone and actually raised those very questions.

And, yep, I am going to disappear again. Just don't expect me back.
Click to expand...
Ok whatever. Been nice not discussing it with you
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MarkG said:
Those articles are a couple of years old now. The first one suggests that the Elm Park revenues would subsidise the club, but are the club owners and ground / car park owners completely different groups of people now?
Click to expand...

Yes totally agree it is old news but my point is and my understanding is that the land is still owned by the Thai group (RFC Prop group) which included Tiger and I was picking up on a tweet that an Oxford United director has just joined the board of the RFC Prop group. I.E Horst Geicke (The builder)
 
Dave T said:
Shouting asset strippers doesn’t prove anything, when it’s countered with actually evidence of the opposite in spending on training grounds, academies and players additions
Click to expand...

But Dave, spending on training grounds, academies and players doesn't have any bearing about whether they're using the club as a tool to run some big property deal or what the club's relationship with the ground will be at the end of it.

In my view @myles is adding value in his role as Cassandra.
 
Paul Cannell said:
But Dave, spending on training grounds, academies and players doesn't have any bearing about whether they're using the club as a tool to run some big property deal or what the club's relationship with the ground will be at the end of it.

In my view @myles is adding value in his role as Cassandra.
Click to expand...
Yes it does, as asset stripper wanting a big property deal are in it for one thing and one thing only - money. So they have no need to, and are unlikely to spend millions of pounds on things that they don’t have to. Why cut ur profits by investing millions in things u will unlikely ever see a return on.
 
My point exactly - it could be that they are spending money because they 'like the footy thing' but will strip the club off from the ground anyway. They can have fun building a team and still rip the club off. We as fans have to sit and hope that if / when the deal is done the club is protected.

Perhaps you are working on this, I don't see anything from OxVox on it although I have more than an inkling that one or more supporters is.
 
Dave T said:
Yes it does, as asset stripper wanting a big property deal are in it for one thing and one thing only - money. So they have no need to, and are unlikely to spend millions of pounds on things that they don’t have to. Why cut ur profits by investing millions in things u will unlikely ever see a return on.
Click to expand...
To claim tax losses maybe.
 
PottersRightBoot said:
To claim tax losses maybe.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but even as tax losses they are more of a benefit to the long term stability of this football club than anything any recent owners have put it. Unlike soft loans or losses being added to the debt they are something that can’t be stripped away or recouped. They only benefit the club. And as for what the deal for any new stadium might look like, are we not a little early for worrying what they may or may not do, when as far as we know we haven’t yet even found a site, let alone got planning permission. There is still only two ways tiger can make money on the vast sums he’s already spent out, id guess including purchase he’s approaching £10m. They are to dramatically improve our position on the pitch, or to dramatically improve our stadium situation. Surely worst case is still exactly where we’re starting from, paying high rent to a landlord for an unfinished stadium we gain no revenue from ? If tiger is gonna pump say £80m into building a new stadium, while continuing to cover £2m losses a year and invest in infrastructure and players over the 5/6 years it would take to build the stadium, that’s a s**t load of money that he apparently doesn’t have.
 
The owners making money from property and Oxford United benefiting are not mutually exclusive. However, it should not be left to trust to ensure that our club ends up in a healthy position once the property deal, if such a thing is the end game, has been completed. While planning permissions have not been obtained, it is our elected representatives whom can best ensure that Oxford United has the necessary protections.

I have no issue with our owners making oodles of cash from a property deal, as long as the club is treated equitably and has a secure future.
 
OxfordYankee said:
The owners making money from property and Oxford United benefiting are not mutually exclusive. However, it should not be left to trust to ensure that our club ends up in a healthy position once the property deal, if such a thing is the end game, has been completed. While planning permissions have not been obtained, it is our elected representatives whom can best ensure that Oxford United has the necessary protections.

I have no issue with our owners making oodles of cash from a property deal, as long as the club is treated equitably and has a secure future.
Click to expand...

Exactly, but it’s at that point that the supporters trust, councils and fans through their councilers and mp’s even, make sure that something along the lines of a community trust covenant are placed on the deal, guaranteeing that the stadium and the club can never be split, and exactly what the lease and costs are to the club, so we don’t end up in the same situation as now or worse like Coventry . (As it happens this is exactly the situation dc United find them self in) paying a £1 a year rent, in a nice new stadium that benefits the whole community. And yes the owner and ex owner made some money doing it. Second guessing the worst possible outcome at the current point in time, does nothing but get every body worked up for no reason. There’s the old saying pick ur battles, maybe we should wait and see if there’s anyone wanting a bloody fight first, or we could end up inadvertently pushing away the richest owners this club has ever had, before they have a chance to show what they could do
 
Sith Lord said:
Yes totally agree it is old news but my point is and my understanding is that the land is still owned by the Thai group (RFC Prop group) which included Tiger and I was picking up on a tweet that an Oxford United director has just joined the board of the RFC Prop group. I.E Horst Geicke (The builder)
Click to expand...
Yes, that is an interesting development that Horst has joined their board. I wonder if there are any OUFC implications? As stated elsewhere it raises a possibility of Thames Valley Royals again? Or is it just the common associates of Tigers pointed out in Myles's original "beware of Tigers" thread?
Also on this forum is a post about a search for a new training ground, and someone says why would they look for a new training ground to then knock it down for property. Yet that seems to be partly what RFC Prop are doing with that big indoor training facility next to the ground from article 1 posted.
 
MarkG said:
Yes, that is an interesting development that Horst has joined their board. I wonder if there are any OUFC implications? As stated elsewhere it raises a possibility of Thames Valley Royals again? Or is it just the common associates of Tigers pointed out in Myles's original "beware of Tigers" thread?
Also on this forum is a post about a search for a new training ground, and someone says why would they look for a new training ground to then knock it down for property. Yet that seems to be partly what RFC Prop are doing with that big indoor training facility next to the ground from article 1 posted.
Click to expand...
How does it raise the possibility of Thames valley royals ? That company doesn’t own reading does it ? Just the land around it
 
Shosho said:
Thats not up to me what other people post - this is a forum where people exchange views. If other post negativity, thats up to them.

I posted a tweet that said our director has become a director elsewhere also - I think thats in the interest of Oxford United?

If you look through my posts I regularly link to the OM site, tweets: https://yellowsforum.co.uk/threads/summer-academy-update.2490/
Click to expand...
Yes but its old news, you post it. up pops Myles, you praise Myles.
 
Dave T said:
How does it raise the possibility of Thames valley royals ? That company doesn’t own reading does it ? Just the land around it
Click to expand...
How about, OUFC board announces it can't find a new ground, can't do a deal on the current ground, can't afford to run the club with the losses it makes, and can't find a buyer stupid enough to do the same. So approaches Reading FC for a merger? Kassam gets to knock down the Kassam stadium, and somewhere along the line the OUFC board members get a "finders fee"?

Not saying it might or will happen, but Thames Valley Royals was suggested by Maxwell so it's not an original idea.
 
LondonRoader said:
Yes but its old news, you post it. up pops Myles, you praise Myles.
Click to expand...

What is your point here? Do you think I have some other MO aside from posting Oxford United related information on an Oxford United forum?
 
myles said:
I'm sorry. I didn't realise that you were so precious about the pseudonym you hide behind. And you're right, I'm not offering you mutual respect.

Try asking our Supporters Club. I'm sure they've done some in-depth investigation into those who own our club.
Click to expand...

Myles, I am precious about very little, but when you raise concerns about playing the man rather than the ball then I feel you should not allow your standards to drop to the same level. But lets move on as there is no point is petty name calling if we all share the best interests of our club.

As for whether or not our Supporters Trust have done their investigating, would you not agree that more information in the public domain would help members put pressure on the trust to act? And therefore, any information that you have uncovered would be of value, either directly to the Trust, or via other media sources?

I appreciate that you may not wish to engage with me, and that is your choice. But many others have supported your views and share your concerns. Do you not think they deserve to know what is going on?
 
MarkG said:
How about, OUFC board announces it can't find a new ground, can't do a deal on the current ground, can't afford to run the club with the losses it makes, and can't find a buyer stupid enough to do the same. So approaches Reading FC for a merger? Kassam gets to knock down the Kassam stadium, and somewhere along the line the OUFC board members get a "finders fee"?

Not saying it might or will happen, but Thames Valley Royals was suggested by Maxwell so it's not an original idea.
Click to expand...

A legitimate concern, even if I'm not sure it is the scenario that will play out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom