Nowhereman
-
Posts
2,061 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Nowhereman
-
-
1 hour ago, Marten said:
Thanks, that answers my question on Airdrie as the "entry" is not related to the ground but to the first team. So I guess it's more paperwork issues or staff qualifications or something like that.
Yeah I see that Dumbarton's ground is entry but the first team is silver surprisngly enough. Must be because we had a club poet and a club minister.
1 -
5 hours ago, Leith Green said:
Nothing whatsoever on the front page of BBC Sport Scotland about the bottom 6 matches..................
And their headline now is the womens cup final. They rarely give the womens game precedence over the mens game and given it is the last day of the premiership season that is somewhat surprising. I wonder why they took that editorial decision
6 -
30 minutes ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:
A first-class statement here from Pollok FC on the proposed Conference League.
https://www.pollokfc.com/2023/05/27/club-statement-on-proposed-conference-league/
The Sonstrust has already submitted a letter to DFC, and whilst there was a swift acknowledgement, we don't yet know if the club is in receipt of the SFA proposal communication and what course of action the Board intends to take.
We will seek however to find out prior to any vote taking place.
Given that it’s some time since the trust submitted their letter and given the board comprise only two people it’s somewhat concerning that they haven’t stated their intentions by now
0 -
38 minutes ago, GordyBrow said:
Choo-choo. All-aboard the Lowland League Express.
Conference express surely?
0 -
5 hours ago, Frank Quitely said:
I don't disagree but it would be a huge problem trying to get the Dumbarton board involved, we're told they don't want anything to do with the ownership issue. And when you've only two directors and one of them is a relative of the 'owner' that doesn't help.
Given that the board have a responsibility to the clubs shareholders not wanting anything to do with the ownership issue is a strange stance to take
0 -
19 hours ago, Autistisches Nilpferd said:
Spartans get to go to Dumbarton, Hamilton, Bonnyrigg, Peterhead and Methil next year. Twice. Are Rovers really the losers here?
You know the cup draws already?
0 -
21 minutes ago, PossilYM said:
Were you meaning Meadowbank there?
I doubt he was given that Meadowbank didn’t come in to the sfl until 1974
0 -
On 17/05/2023 at 19:49, BallochSonsFan said:
By virtue of some woolly agreement to receive future considerations.
I see that Morehomes were due to pay us £300,000 in April. Maybe the club should call up the security that was granted in their favour
1 -
58 minutes ago, BallochSonsFan said:
No.
The majority shareholding in Dumbarton Football Club is held by a company called Cognitive Capital.
Company number 09567426
Cognitive Capital is an off the shelf company. It's purpose is essentially to act as the shareholder of shares in Dumbarton Football Club. So the simple answer to who owns the club is that Cognitive Capital owns the majority of shares in Dumbarton. The rest of the issued share capital is held by smaller share holders. Some private individuals. The Sons Supporters Trust.
Cognitive don't so much own Dumbarton as own the majority of the club's shares. They don't own the club directly and their ownership is limited to the value of their shares. They don't directly own anything Dumbarton related. Or at least they shouldn't. Dumbarton Football Club is basically a legal entity that exists as if it was a person that can own property and can engage in business. The football club board of directors act on behalf of the club and run it as if they were the club.
In practice, Cognitive Capital as major shareholders are in de facto control of the club. They still don't own the club's assets directly (we'll come on to that), but by controlling the majority of the club's issued shares, they have the most influence if the club were to hold either an AGM or EGM. At either an AGM or EGM, Cognitive would control the most votes and nobody could out vote them. Essentially the club board runs the club on a day to day basis and Cognitive don't directly own any club assets, but if there was ever a binding vote at an AGM or EGM then Cognitive would vote on the outcomes they wanted because nobody has enough of a shareholding to out vote them.
Much like the situation with the club board, Cognitive is a limited liability company. Essentially Cognitive is also a legal entity that can own property and can engage in business. The board of directors of Cognitive Capital run the company. The shareholders in Cognitive Capital own shares in the company and can vote on matters at AGMs or EGMs.
Andy Hosie is the majority shareholder in Cognitive Capital.
So Dumbarton FC legally owns its assets. They don't belong to the shareholders directly and the only way that shareholders could receive money from the club is by way of share dividends. Cognitive Capital as major shareholder owns shares in Dumbarton. The assets of Cognitive Capital are the shares it owns. Shareholders in Cognitive Capital are entitled only to any dividends that Cognitive may wish to pay to it's shareholders. Andy Hosie is the majority shareholder in Cognitive Capital. Dumbarton has lots of shareholders, of which Cognitive own the most. Cognitive has shareholders, of which Andy Hosie is the largest.
Again this means that whilst Hosie doesnt directly own Dumbarton, he might as well do. He isnt exposed to any debts that the club may have. He doesnt directly control club assets. But there are legal ways and means by which he can benefit financially and can exert influence.
It is a requirement under UK companies law that a company has at least 2 office bearers. It should have a director. It should have a registered company secretary. The company secretary can be a director of the company, but the company cannot have a single director who also acts as the secretary. It's either 1 director and 1 secretary or as many directors as is appropriate and a company secretary, who may also be a director.The Dumbarton Football Club board of directors according to Companies House is currently Neil McKay, Colin Hosie and Henning Kristofferson. Stephanie Park has recently resigned from her role as the Supporters Trust appointed director on the club board. The extent of Henning Kristofferson's involvement in the club is unclear.
Cognitive Capital currently has no directors. It has had 5 directors in it's lifetime - Matthew Atkinson, Henning Kristofferson, George Mattam, Bjarne Stratveit and Reza Tohidi. Tohidi's role is listed on Companies House as "Pizza Takeaway". They resigned from the board of Cognitive in 2016 and appear to have been nothing more than a body necessary to set up the off the shelf company. Stratveit resigned in August 2020, which is nearly a year prior to the takeover being announced. Mattam resigned in January 2021. The important people here are Atkinson (resigned December 2021) and Kristofferson (resigned February 2023). Essentially it appears as if Henning Kristofferson may still be a director of the football club, but has resigned from his directorship of the ownership company. That doesnt mean that Cognitive no longer owns its shares in Dumbarton. It means that Cognitive is currently in breach of UK companies law.
A company that is in breach of companies law can be given time to put their breach right. If it doesnt do that then it can be struck off from the register of companies. A struck off company essentially stops existing. It's assets become the property of the government. Cognitive Capital currently has a strike off notice against it - this means that Companies House will remove Cognitive Capital in the next 2 months unless it puts right it's current breach of company law. It previously had a strike off notice against it that was discontinued in April 2023 when it satisfied the register that it has put right a previous breach (in this case a failure to submit statutory documents). So Cognitive is at risk, but as of today it still owns the Dumbarton shares and Hosie still owns his Cognitive shares.
Andy Hosie doesnt appear on the club board or on Cognitive's board of directors as he remains banned from serving as a director of any company in the UK. He can own shares. He can even vote as a shareholder. But he can't act as a director and therefore have any direct control of a company. He can only act indirectly. Cognitive needs somebody who isnt Andy Hosie to become a director or there's a good chance that it'll cease to exist. That would mean that the government would receive Cognitive's shares in Dumbarton and somebody would be appointed to dispose of them. Any individual small shareholder, and the Sons Trust, would continue to own our shares in the club.
Matthew Atkinson is an interesting character. Whilst he's no longer a director of Cognitive, he remains the sole director of More Homes DFC Ltd. More Homes DFC Ltd is a company that is majority, or wholly, owned by Cognitive Capital. Matthew Atkinson is an architect and property developer.
Why is this important?
The club owns, or at least owned, all of the land that the ground sits on. The whole site, as far as it's boundaries. Planning permission was granted on a parcel of the land - the 2 corners nearest the housing development and the strip of land behind the dugouts that connect the 2. That planning permission has exhausted and is now subject to a planning committee decision on whether or not to renew permission. Permission has been sought for a combination of flats and houses. That development land is also subject to securities granted to a company called Pendragon Group Limited. In effect, that land has been mortgaged and used as security for a loan taken from Pendragon. So who took the loan?
A combination of Cognitive Capital and More Homes DFC.
The club's majority shareholder, and a wholly owned subsidiary that is currently headed by an architect, borrowed money and used the development land as security. Meaning that much like your house and your mortgage provider, if the borrower defaults on the loan then the lender exercises its security to try and get its money back. Whether or not ownership of the development land was ever transferred to Cognitive or More Homes DFC is very unclear. What is clear is that the status of the development land is under serious question because of monies borrowed against it by companies other than Dumbarton Football Club. The dates of all of this are very interesting.
Its unclear when Cognitive Capital bought it's majority shareholding in Dumbarton from Brabco. What is clear is that it was some time in April 2021. What else happened in April 2021?
Matthew Atkinson became the director of More Homes DFC Ltd on 15/04/21.
Henning Kristofferson and Neil Dermott were appointed to the board of Dumbarton Football Club with effect from 21/04/21.
Security over the development land was granted to Pendragon Group Limited as authorised by Henning Kristofferson and Neil Dermott on 21/04/21. The security documents are available on Companies House. Those 2 signed them. They're dated 21/04/21.
Andrew Hosie became the majority shareholder in Cognitive Capital. This was registered with Companies House with effect from 22/04/21.
Awfully convenient that. Atkinson (the architect) becomes the director of More Homes. Kristofferson and Dermott become directors of the club. Kristofferson and Dermott almost immediately grant security over the development land to Pendragon in exchange for money borrowed.. None of the money borrowed makes its way to the football club and is instead paid to More Homes DFC and Cognitive Capital. Andy Hosie becomes the majority (possibly even sole) shareholder in Cognitive Capital. All in the space of 6 days. I've seen previous mention somewhere that when the security was granted, there was a future financial consideration that would be payable to the club on the successful development of the land. I've seen that reported as being £1.5million. Unfortunately I can't recall exactly where I saw it.
But given that another Andy Hosie sham company stiffed us for £35,000 sponsorship money, what prospects are there for him willingly parting with £1,500,000?
Hopefully that answers your question about ownership. I've gone into more detail about the highly questionable events of April 2021 because it should give you a good idea of why the Sons Trust are so concerned about our owners and so frustrated by the actions of our local club directors. The fortunes of the club are massively reliant on Cognitive and More Homes DFC being able to satisfy the terms of the loan from Pendragon. Were they to be unable to do so then the lender could legitimately try to enforce it's security over that land. Whilst that wouldn't necessarily leave the club homeless, a future where Dumbarton were penned in by further housing development and where absolutely no money was paid to the club for said housing development would be exceptionally bleak.
We're de facto owned by a recognised con man who is banned from being a director. We're being run by a local club board trying their best in difficult circumstances, but who don't exactly fill many of us as fans with a lot of confidence. We're approaching a critical point where we'll need as many fans as possible to be switched on to the seriousness of our situation.
I pretty much knew all of that but the bit I don’t understand is how the club can grant a security over its own land and the money borrowed doesn't make its way in to the club accounts
1 -
2 hours ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:
I’m going to defend Farrell a wee bit here. I don’t actually think he is a bad guy, off the park he’s been a breath of fresh air compared to the likes of Jim Duffy - he didn’t bother his arse to turn up to a single social event organised by the Trust or club volunteers, including the POTY awards do. Farrell always seems to go out of his way to attend these sort of things and I think he deserves a bit of credit for that. Anyone I know who has had any dealings with him all have him down as a helpful, decent guy.
His interviews aren’t great, he’s clearly talking nonsense but I think that’s probably because he’s trying to save face a bit. His pride is clearly dented because he cares. Again compare that to Jim Duffy who came across like he didn’t give a flying f**k about anything.
As a manager he’s absolutely hopeless and he should be out of a job. He should’ve been out on his arse at the end of last season but I think some of the personal abuse being directed at him on Twitter is in really bad taste. His managerial ability is not up for debate but I really don’t think some of the abuse he’s gettin on social media is reflecting well on us as a support. People are obviously frustrated and people are getting defensive because he has got to the point he is waffling absolute shite in post match interviews, I referred to him as a clown a few pages back, but I think in the cold light of day too many of us are confusing a terrible manager with a bad person, which I’m not sure Stevie Farrell is.
I’d agree with this and as much as I think Farrell should go I can’t help but think that the players are getting off lightly. Farrell was booed on and off yesterday yet the players were applauded off. They are just as culpable with a few exceptions
0 -
Genuinely can’t understand why this would appeal to league two sides. Relegation to a league of six where two end up in relegation positions. So a one in three chance. And likely next to no crowds against the colts. Also would the colts have to follow the fixture list or could they just postpone if it didn’t suit like they do in the lowland league. Even if this doesn’t get passed it certainly proves that the SFA don’t have Scottish footballs best interests at heart if you still needed any proof
4 -
17 hours ago, kennie makevin said:
Commentary on the second half by Jimmy Jewell !!??? Expert analysis in the studio with Hylda Baker and Arthur Mullard.
Different person. Jimmy Jewel was the comedian
0 -
17 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:
That may not be as straightforward as you suggest.
17 hours ago, BallochSonsFan said:There are a few issues that would influence that. For starters there are the C shares. And the fact that the ground is built on a filled in dock. It was filled with all sort of rubbish and would almost certainly have a significant clean up bill before any development was allowed. That kind of work fairly eats in to any potential profit. Would also possibly need some work to stablise the land at the river end of the ground. Look at the dip.
I get that but it doesn't detract from the point that the fewer fans that turn up makes it easier from Andy Hosies point of view
0 -
2 hours ago, The Moonster said:
If you check our club thread there is some chat there about our Trust rep. Having a fan on the board is only as the good as the person sitting in the seat and ultimately they can only have so much influence over any board. A lot of good people have walked away from the club due to the strains the ownership situation has put on the club so I don't think there is any shame in a supporter doing the same right now.
I get what you are saying but is refusing to attend not just playing in to Andy Hosie’s hands. He will be delighted if crowds fall to a couple of hundred and the club fall to the bottom of the division. Because the fewer people who are interested suits his purposes and will make it all the easier for him to wind us up at the first hint of a half decent offer from a builder
1 -
3 hours ago, kennie makevin said:
Each to their own...but to me that's as illogical as saying you'd watch/listen to Gerry Cinnamon rather than Bob Dylan simply because the former is 'Scottish'. It's probably because I don't fervently support a Scottish club. I get that. I would watch the Scottish national team over any other match and Andy Murray over Nadal or Djokovic, so I accept what you're saying but Scottish domestic football just can't hold that attachment for me.....not as long as Rangers and Celtic are playing in it.
So you are just as illogical
0 -
Cannot believe that Brett Long didn’t win any POTY award
1 -
15 hours ago, FifeSons said:
By “would still prefer Bonnyrigg” I meant, would prefer Bonnyrigg to go down.
I want Albion Rovers to stay up ahead of either, though, because they’re OGs and Cliftonhill is superb.
If you’re referring to shedding of tears, that’ll happen regardless when we lose the playoffs!
Must admit I don't get the love for Coatbridge. Nothing against Albion Rovers but their ground is one of the worst to watch a game from, easily poorer than either Elgin or Bonnyrigg (as long as it is dry)
1 -
52 minutes ago, HorseyGhirl said:
Are you a politician per chance?
Completely ignoring Cove, Edinburgh and Kelty.
Also how many club 42's have returned.
Closed shop anyone!
His comment was about clubs who are outwith the spfl, not about clubs who are already in it.
0 -
1 hour ago, grinderbrokeyourhearts said:
I wouldn’t say that. It’s a really competitive league. Only 13 points between 3rd and 10th!
Bonnyrigg have an aging team after a huge bumped cup run a few years ago paid for it. So they are settling down, a really good performance in their first season up.
The real reflection is where East Stirling and Cowdenbeath finished. 15th and 16th in the Lowland league, even Berwick could only manage 7th.
That’s without mentioning the 6 or 7 clubs in the EOS and WOS that would raise the standard of the LL as well (and ok current form replace East Stirling and Cowdenbeath).This shows there’s plenty room for opening it up IMO!
Absolutley agree that it should be opened up, there should be proper promotion and relegation. I was only commenting on your assertion that there were up to eight clubs who were stronger than the current clubs in league two. There will be plenty who would be competitive.
0 -
3 hours ago, Pompey Blue said:
Post of the thread for me. If dropping into non league wasn’t such a terrifying prospect we might get some real progress. The English model has to be followed. The conference there is a thriving league and I include conferences north and south too. That’s because there is a proper promotion and relegation model. Getting into the football league is attainable unlike Scotland where a club has to virtually complete the 12 tasks of Hercules before gaining promotion. Fluidity of movement between divisions is the lifeblood of any domestic league. Take that away and it becomes uncompetitive and stale. How can it be right that probably between 5-8 clubs who are stronger than most of league 2’s clubs are marooned in the LL and HL simply because it’s impossible to get promoted. Needs sorting.
While I agree with the point you are making about promotion and relegation given the way that Bonnyrigg have struggled this season I'm not so sure about that claim
0 -
1 hour ago, SJFCtheTeamForMe said:
Gatecrashing in here. I'm 100% against the Colt nonsense in the league completely.
Our Leagues aren't perfect but one of the great things is the competitive nature of the lower part time level. That includes the junior clubs who've now got the opportunity to push on.
Probably getting into conspiracy theory territory here but the continuation of making it harder for the ambitious, ex junior clubs or the current Lowland or Highland League clubs who've been spending money to progress their squad and facilities in a bid to make it into League 2 etc -has me convinced it's done to protect the current lower league sides scared of relegation out of League 2.
Even without the Colts, another league simply isn't required? One already exists below League 2
.
I'm no doubt missing some key details in all this as I'm not close to it but I just don't see the point!
So you think that the SFA's main interest is league two sides and that they are setting up a new league to protect them? Really?
1 -
19 hours ago, Footballfirst said:
This BBC article demonstrates the failure of Premiership clubs to give youth a chance. Only 18 players, aged 21 or under, have started a match this season.
Yip and given almost every article on the BBC website concentrates on Celtic and Rangers isn't it interesting that there is no reference to those two teams' 'efforts' to play youth
1 -
On 24/04/2023 at 15:13, Cowden Cowboy said:
Every club gets that apart from the B teams not the winners - I would think for many L2 clubs playing the same clubs in the LL with no prize money at all might be even less appealing?
If club directors would prefer to play in the B team conference rather than the lowland league without B teams then that only shows the huge difference between a director and a fan. I don’t know anyone who would like to see our club drop in to a league where most of the games would seem meaningless. Indeed I know very few who would actually go to games. On the contrary a successful season in the lowland league could revive a club. You only need to look at Brechin this season for proof of that. Dropping in to a B team conference would be far more likely to lead to a clubs demise than dropping in to a decent lowland league where there was proper promotion and relegation at both ends
14 -
30 minutes ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:
I’ll be honesy, Gregg Wylde would’ve been one of the first players I punted this year. He’s had a handful of decent games for us but that’s about it. Whenever I watch him I’m questioning what he actually offers us, he’s a dreadful defender, he’s a complete shitebag who shirks out of challenges and he can’t beat a man/looks terrified to run at full backs. He has a decent enough left peg but that’s about it.
If Farrell is going to offer shite like him a contract when it’s clear as day it’s a position we could massively improve in should have alarm bells ringing.
If we are offering Wylde a deal I'm struggling to think who we won't be offering a deal. And if we end up with virtually the same squad next season that is concerning, no matter which division we are in.
2
Conference League Good Guys List
in Lowland League
Posted
Care to show your working on that thought?