Lying scum Archer - NEVER forget why you will always be despised here...

[Easy 10]

Just stumbled across this on YouTube - apols if fixtures but I'd never seen it. Archer, Stanley, Bellotti and a greasy lawyer outside Lancaster Gate dodging some extremely uncomfortable questions from a reporter as to why the clubs Articles of Association had been altered to remove the 'no profit' clause.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=OiSjvqnHnHc&feature=related


Slime. Absolute slime.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Not a single showing of guilt or potential regret for what they had up their sleeves and were trying to do.

Who was their solicitor and/or solicitors firm?

 

[TSB]

Not a single showing of guilt or potential regret for what they had up their sleeves and were trying to do.

Who was their solicitor and/or solicitors firm?

He looks as slimy as them....

 

[Nemesis]

Not a single showing of guilt or potential regret for what they had up their sleeves and were trying to do.

Who was their solicitor and/or solicitors firm?

Wasn't it Eversheds? or were they on our side?

 

[The Large One]

Eversheds were the club's lawyers.

Roy Chuter famously received a libel writ from them in 1996 demading an apology on behalf of David Bellotti. It was so full of basic grammatical and typographic errors, that he wrote back to them, telling them he wasn't fooled by such a piece of comedic writing, with all of the errors (27 I think it was) marked up and corrected, free of charge.

It was re-printed in Gull's Eye and Build a Bonfire.

 

[Seagull Stew]

This is one thing I never understood about the "no profit" clause being removed from the articles of association.
Whether or not this was done deliberately (and I'm sure we all know the truth about that) did it not then become binding or was it the case that at that point, the ground had already been sold and the clause only applied to any profit made AFTER it was re-instated, making it's re-instatement irrelevent as the damage had already been done?

 

[The Large One]

Ultimately, it didn't make any difference, because the club never folded.

Although it was bloody close.

 

[Al Bion]

I hope all the younger supporters who weren't around at the time watch that video, it shows exactly what lying, cheating scumbags Archer, Bellotti and Stanley were.

We will NEVER forget what they did to our club.

 

[Seagull Stew]

Ultimately, it didn't make any difference, because the club never folded.

Although it was bloody close.

So the "no profit" clause only came into place if the club actually folded, not just if the ground was sold.

Gotcha!

 

[Easy 10]

Was it Paul Samrah who actually discovered this "oversight" as they called it, and alerted the press ? I seem to remember it was. And thank christ he did.

 

[The Large One]

Was it Paul Samrah who actually discovered this "oversight" as they called it, and alerted the press ? I seem to remember it was. And thank christ he did.

It was him, Paul Bracchi and Paul Whelch.

If you remember your 'Build A Bonfire', they went to Companies House to ascertain who would stand to benefit from the sale of the Goldstone Ground. The club weren't even giving away the fact that they'd sold the ground, much less who they'd sold the ground to.

It was while looking that they found the minutes of an EGM from November 1993, at which only Bellotti, Stanely and Archer were present. Other directors were kept in the dark about the meeting. In those minutes, it was discovered that the 'No Profits' clause had been removed.

And this is where the notion of 'oversight' evidently becomes such bollocks. So how do you actively do something (in this instance remove an entire clause), and then claim it was an oversight, when an oversight is something not done, but the act of not doing it was unintentional. For example, something was forgotten or missed out.

The other thing is, if the solicitors were to blame, why the f*** did the club retain their services?

 

[steward 433]

read the last edit on wiki about bill archer! it nearly made me cry

a disgrunteled albion fan maybe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Archer_(businessman)

 

[Knotty]

Just stumbled across this on YouTube - apols if fixtures but I'd never seen it. Archer, Stanley, Bellotti and a greasy lawyer outside Lancaster Gate dodging some extremely uncomfortable questions from a reporter as to why the clubs Articles of Association had been altered to remove the 'no profit' clause.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=OiSjvqnHnHc&feature=related


Slime. Absolute slime.

Great post Easy. You should repeat every few months or so for those who find it so easy to criticise DK for the slightest thing.

He is, of course, not above criticism, but some are so ridiculous as to be laughable.

The Archer saga should be a permanent reminder to those who have such a rose-tinted view of the running of a football club.

 

[nail-Z]

read the last edit on wiki about bill archer! it nearly made me cry

a disgrunteled albion fan maybe

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Archer_(businessman)

"Archer was also a leading figure in the controversial 1997 sale of the Goldstone Ground, the former home of Brighton & Hove Albion F.C. for conversion into a retail park, without having secured an alternative site for a stadium..he was also included in the popular old Sussex refrain, Build a Bonfire, which is regularly and heartily sung at football matches in the county and further afield. He is also a f***ing wankshaft."

 

[The Clown of Pevensey Bay]

Superb. You can see Archer pooing his pants in the face of some VERY polite, yet incisive, questioning.

 

[Don Tmatter]

Talk about passing the buck, Stanley passes the questions over to Archole in a flash and Archole lets the lawyer answer the questions and Bellendi just stands there grinning like the **** he is.
Absolute scum the 3 of them.
NEVER FORGIVE NEVER FORGET

 

[Seagull Stew]

It was him, Paul Bracchi and Paul Whelch.

If you remember your 'Build A Bonfire', they went to Companies House to ascertain who would stand to benefit from the sale of the Goldstone Ground. The club weren't even giving away the fact that they'd sold the ground, much less who they'd sold the ground to.

It was while looking that they found the minutes of an EGM from November 1993, at which only Bellotti, Stanely and Archer were present. Other directors were kept in the dark about the meeting. In those minutes, it was discovered that the 'No Profits' clause had been removed.

And this is where the notion of 'oversight' evidently becomes such bollocks. So how do you actively do something (in this instance remove an entire clause), and then claim it was an oversight, when an oversight is something not done, but the act of not doing it was unintentional. For example, something was forgotten or missed out.

The other thing is, if the solicitors were to blame, why the f*** did the club retain their services?

Did Paul Samrah & co ever ascertain who would profit from the sale of the ground though?

The "no profit" clause only covered the eventuality of the club actually going bust, it did not appear to cover profits made from the sale of the ground without the club going bust, which is of course what happened.

 

[The Auditor]

It was him, Paul Bracchi and Paul Whelch.


And this is where the notion of 'oversight' evidently becomes such bollocks. So how do you actively do something (in this instance remove an entire clause), and then claim it was an oversight, when an oversight is something not done, but the act of not doing it was unintentional. For example, something was forgotten or missed out.

The other thing is, if the solicitors were to blame, why the f*** did the club retain their services?

Oh come on TLO ...it was a printing error when the Memorandum & Articles were reprinted...

 

[The Large One]

Did Paul Samrah & co ever ascertain who would profit from the sale of the ground though?

The "no profit" clause only covered the eventuality of the club actually going bust, it did not appear to cover profits made from the sale of the ground without the club going bust, which is of course what happened.

The money was supposed to go to the club. The club owned the land, therefore the club pocketed the money. The money, however, was needed to pay off debts, although not all of the debts needed settling immediately. It was extremely facile business practice, because, as Paul Samrah pointed out at the time, although the club was around £6m (or £4.5m, or £10m, the figure seemed highly flexible from day-to-day) in debt, only £915,000 needed to be paid up at the end of that season.

Instead the board decided to sell the ground and close the club down. Or rather, if they didn't decide to close the club down, they made a bloody good fist of it.

There is, as far as I am aware, no evidence that any individuals connected with the club ever profited from the sale of the Goldstone Ground. Whether anyone of those same people profited from the subsequent sale a year later is, of course, another issue...

 

[The Auditor]

There is, as far as I am aware, no evidence that any individuals connected with the club ever profited from the sale of the Goldstone Ground. Whether anyone of those same people profited from the subsequent sale a year later is, of course, another issue...

amazing how land values increase.....