Re: The Shay. : Wed Jan 15, 2025 1:53 pm  

faxcar wrote:

Or thinking of the reputation of the rugby club maybe dig the pitch up as required.

Davy could be first with a little sign saying “please keep off the Ken.”

He'd be turning in his grave , literally .

Re: The Shay. : Wed Jan 15, 2025 2:42 pm  

faxcar wrote:

You mentioned Ken Davy and history that upset some Huddersfield Town fans.

Do you know the full circumstances and details of what the issue was, do you know his side of the argument?

It’s just that looking at our own history as a rugby club just taking FC Town Shaymen fans assessment would hardly be the place to get a fair and accurate view.

On the other hand what we actually do know the last time I looked Huddersfield Town were still in their stadium as majority share holders with the opportunity to become full owners and when Davy sold his shares they didn’t pay over the odds or get ripped of in anyway.

He moved the shares in the stadium company owned by Huddersfield Town to one of his companies (Huddersfield Sporting Pride Ltd) for a nominal fee of £1. His reasoning was to "safeguard" them for the future and would sell them back once the football club was stabilised.

He kept them within his ownership, and after selling HTAFC to Dean Hoyle, then tried to sell the shares back for a lot more than the £1 he paid for them, presumably to recoup some of the money he'd spent on HTAFC. There was a lot of uproar in the town and he eventually transferred them back for the same rate I believe, But his reputation had gone from saviour to villain and while the current ownership at Huddersfield Town have no beef with him, many of the fans do.

Re: The Shay. : Wed Jan 15, 2025 3:16 pm  

Brew wrote:

He moved the shares in the stadium company owned by Huddersfield Town to one of his companies (Huddersfield Sporting Pride Ltd) for a nominal fee of £1. His reasoning was to "safeguard" them for the future and would sell them back once the football club was stabilised.

He kept them within his ownership, and after selling HTAFC to Dean Hoyle, then tried to sell the shares back for a lot more than the £1 he paid for them, presumably to recoup some of the money he'd spent on HTAFC. There was a lot of uproar in the town and he eventually transferred them back for the same rate I believe, But his reputation had gone from saviour to villain and while the current ownership at Huddersfield Town have no beef with him, many of the fans do.

Being from Brighouse when I was younger, I and the group I associated with at the time were all Huddersfield Town fans and is pretty close to what I heard, overhaul though what he put into HTAFC was far more than he took out and there was never a time they were at any risk whilst he was involved.

He might not even go through with it but if he doesn’t no one else with the resources to make a difference has or is coming forward so what happens then because the council are desperate to get shut one way or another.

Re: The Shay : Thu Jan 16, 2025 9:27 am  

Bubba wrote:

Apologies, I thought you were meaning with regards our thoughts on the requirements for any KD purchase.

As for our proposal; we would not be looking to purchase the stadium so the only security risk to the two clubs would be from either their own failures or the failure of the SST (if you want to call it that), which is obviously intrinsically linked to the stability of the two clubs.

So if the SST are not looking to purchase the Shay what is your proposal and what will the SST actually be doing and responsible for?

Presuming CMBC are still the owners who need to remove the financial liabilities associated with the ground from themselves and the wider tax paying community how will the SST fund the running of the stadium and where will they get the hundreds of thousands of pounds required to do it from?

Talking of the past, has this type of thing been tried before, if so how did it work out and would any of the previous group be involved again?