Serious answer to Harty's hypothetical

[perseus]

Serious answer to Harty's hypothetical

What did out radio pundit say. Something like should Archer (in the unlikely event that he wanted to) be allowed to pay for his name to go on the new stadium.

My view is that there should be an open share issue, and should any one businessmen or consortium want to invest say £75 million, and who cares what their name is. So Jo Bloggs can own shares as much as any multi billionnaire with a foreign unpronouncable name. Legal safeguards could be put in place to avoid any asset stripping or any other unsavoury practices.

It simply doesn't matter.

 

[Harty]

Perseus my friend you missed the point, I did not ask the question directly I merely stated that Bruce Talbot of the Argus had asked me the question. It is a difficult one but when you look at the current plight of the club, ie for all DK's great work our arse is still hanging out of our trousers, would we really care were the money came from?
Personally as a man who has had domestic rows with Mrs H and the Hart kids over their ban from Toys R Us, it would be a lot to stomach, but until he comes up with the dosh, fat f***ing chance, I cannot say hand on heart whether I'd be happy with the club taking it.

 

[Tooting Gull]

When are you going national, Harty? Strikes me that 'Harty's Hypothetical' is the sort of thing to bring the missing millions back to Radio One.

 

[GUNTER]

I do not want Archer or his dirty money any where near our proud club. I'd rather have a true fan like Knight in charge anyday, even if he is potless!

 

[Mr C]

It's definitely a principle point here. After the history with A&B, I don't think we should ever have anything to do with them.

 

[Bwian]

It's definitely a principle point here. After the history with A&B, I don't think we should ever have anything to do with them.

Let's not forget that wanker Stanley too. He is perhaps more of an enemy than the other two cnuts. He always get left out of things in favour of "Archer and Bellotti".

 

[Biscuit]

Perseus my friend you missed the point, I did not ask the question directly I merely stated that Bruce Talbot of the Argus had asked me the question. It is a difficult one but when you look at the current plight of the club, ie for all DK's great work our arse is still hanging out of our trousers, would we really care were the money came from?
Personally as a man who has had domestic rows with Mrs H and the Hart kids over their ban from Toys R Us, it would be a lot to stomach, but until he comes up with the dosh, fat f***ing chance, I cannot say hand on heart whether I'd be happy with the club taking it.

If he came up to us, said look mate im really sorry for being such a ****, here's 75million but please name the stadium after me. It would simply be stupid to decline the offer. We need the money, thats the only way we can look at it. Morals are a great thing, but its happened and we need the money for a frsh start....hypothetically speaking of course...that rich bastard wouldnt give us the time of day.

BTW seen the new toys R us advert....It shows a "Toys R Us" ship flying around the earth and landing in a field. It should have a caption "COMING TO AN HISTORICAL STADIUM NEAR YOU".

 

[coach03]

Take the dosh, call it the Archers' Stand (please note the apostrophe AFTER the 'S') and everyone will think we got the moola from the drinks company. That keeps everyone except Archer happy - which is fine with me.

 

[Citrus]

How about we kill him, nick his money and build Falmer?

Anyone?

 

[Elderly William]

Ian and my friends...it ain't going to happen. When we can't afford the wages of the the toilet cleaner, how are we going to find £45M for Falmer?

I still know, however, that DK saved this club. If it were not for him, we would all now be watching the wrestling on a Saturday afternoon on ITV.

(Oh..don't they have that on anymore?).

Elderly..........

 

[perseus]

Let anybody invest, I say.

Have a public company where people can buy and sell shares. The Articles of Association (I am not sure of the legal term) or whatever it is called can specify the limits of power. Once the money is in, the shares can be sold, but the club still goes on even if the Managing Director drops down dead.

If no one owner is allowed to have more than 50% of the votes, at least it will take a conspiracy to get the stadium named after one person. And then we can get a vote to change it later.

What I don't like is Board of Directors paying off large sums of money to get rid of incompetent Directors.

What I don't mind either is having a separate stadium company from the football club. This has its dangers. e.g. at Shoreham Airport, when the expansion plans could threaten to squeeze out the small user of planes in favour of the commercial activities.

The same could apply to multiple use community stadium. Concerts could provide more dosh than the football club and the money men could concentrate their efforts on the profitable bits.
Therefore, this aspect should be watched, but I daresay the Albion are well tuned into this possibility.

Whether another Archer would be is a different matter.