Sons' sorrow

[Jan Vojáček]

6 minutes ago, Silverton End said:

Wonder who the 'foreign striker' is?

It's Seb Osei-Obengo, isn't it. The big man still has a picture of his top on Twitter - he's just waiting on us calling him.

[The Moonster]

It's Nade, giving him 3 weeks to prove his fitness.

In all seriousness, where are we plucking the cash from to sign a striker?  Considering 80 of us sat in the Rock last week listening to how the club is struggling with cash flow and directors have been putting in money to make ends meet, I can't imagine we've got much lying around to be flung at a striker. 

[Jan Vojáček]

A foreign striker with connections to Stevie who is currently a free agent and would probably play for buttons.

It's finally happening

[O'Kelly Isley III]

Apparently Stuart Millar recently met Imre Varadi on holiday in Puerto de la Cruz - done deal if you ask me.

[Boghead ranter]

Hreinn Hringsson

[Howlin' Wilf]

On the proposed stadium move, there are many questions which answer themselves and others which simply follow on to other questions. Leaving aside for a moment that there is a substantial trust deficit for Brabco and justifiably so, it's maybe worth considering a few points. If Brabco were to honour their offer of the club having the stadium in perpetuity for a peppercorn or no rent bound by a legally binding lease, then Brabco would be the owners of the stadium for apparently no reason. That's what been suggested here. However and again presuming their offer is genuine, might they insist on retaining ownership of the land so that no future owner might realise the asset? I.e. sell the ground. Let's for a moment the club do own the proposed new stadium. This would mean that instead of Brabco owning the stadium and land it would be owned by........drum roll........Brabco. In that case with no lease to bind the agreement, the club's security then once again becomes dependant on the whim of the owner, whoever he or they may be.

Now in the time that I have supported Dumbarton, there have been four owners. The first was Robert Robertson, chairman of Hutchison Engineering. At one stage he tried to buy Clyde's majority shareholding and merge the two clubs. He also threatened to sell Boghead and move the club to Cumbernauld. Sir Hugh Fraser was next. SIr Hugh made the club a £40k loan which became repayable to his estate when he died. His daughter's solicitors were not patient and we're ready to take the club to court for the money. Not actually having the money the club actually faced a winding up order. Fortunately they avoided this by selling Steve McCahill to Celtic rather than having to sell the ground.

I'm Next owner was Neil Rankine who appeared after paying only £40k for the majority shareholding. He proxied his shares to Jim Innes when he (Rankine) went bankrupt, only to reappear and take control again but only after Innes was on the point of accepting an offer from Boghead from a house builder. Only intervention by Gilbert Lawrie prevented that. Rankine bought the land at the Rock for £200k and built the stadium at the Rock with the proceeds of the sale of Boghead and £300k of money raised via sportscotland, Allied Distillers and Diageo. GIlbert, back at that time as a director, was convinced that Rankine was going to sell the club to the highest bidder - and there was considerable interest because of the potential land value. It was Gilbert who brokered the Brabco deal. Rankine supposedly got £800,000. A tidy profit less than twenty years after paying £40,000 for the shareholding.

We can speculate that this might have been the thing to secure the club's future or indeed to deliver it to yet another owner who has designs on the potential value of the land occupied by the stadium - or something else....

And so in summary, on the various occasions where the future of DFC looked to have been in jeopardy during the last 45 years or so, on each occasion it was precisely because they owned a heritable asset.

Comparisons with Airdrie, Stirling, Clyde etc are with clubs who I understand are paying market value rental which isn't what has been proposed. Ok, I'm playing devil's advocate and everyone is rightly suspicious of a deal which leaves the club apparently with no assets
but you can't take the breeks aff a heilanman.

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

On the proposed stadium move, there are many questions which answer themselves and others which simply follow on to other questions. Leaving aside for a moment that there is a substantial trust deficit for Brabco and justifiably so, it's maybe worth considering a few points. If Brabco were to honour their offer of the club having the stadium in perpetuity for a peppercorn or no rent bound by a legally binding lease, then Brabco would be the owners of the stadium for apparently no reason. That's what been suggested here. However and again presuming their offer is genuine, might they insist on retaining ownership of the land so that no future owner might realise the asset? I.e. sell the ground. Let's for a moment the club do own the proposed new stadium. This would mean that instead of Brabco owning the stadium and land it would be owned by........drum roll........Brabco. In that case with no lease to bind the agreement, the club's security then once again becomes dependant on the whim of the owner, whoever he or they may be.

Now in the time that I have supported Dumbarton, there have been four owners. The first was Robert Robertson, chairman of Hutchison Engineering. At one stage he tried to buy Clyde's majority shareholding and merge the two clubs. He also threatened to sell Boghead and move the club to Cumbernauld. Sir Hugh Fraser was next. SIr Hugh made the club a £40k loan which became repayable to his estate when he died. His daughter's solicitors were not patient and we're ready to take the club to court for the money. Not actually having the money the club actually faced a winding up order. Fortunately they avoided this by selling Steve McCahill to Celtic rather than having to sell the ground.

I'm Next owner was Neil Rankine who appeared after paying only £40k for the majority shareholding. He proxied his shares to Jim Innes when he (Rankine) went bankrupt, only to reappear and take control again but only after Innes was on the point of accepting an offer from Boghead from a house builder. Only intervention by Gilbert Lawrie prevented that. Rankine bought the land at the Rock for £200k and built the stadium at the Rock with the proceeds of the sale of Boghead and £300k of money raised via sportscotland, Allied Distillers and Diageo. GIlbert, back at that time as a director, was convinced that Rankine was going to sell the club to the highest bidder - and there was considerable interest because of the potential land value. It was Gilbert who brokered the Brabco deal. Rankine supposedly got £800,000. A tidy profit less than twenty years after paying £40,000 for the shareholding.

We can speculate that this might have been the thing to secure the club's future or indeed to deliver it to yet another owner who has designs on the potential value of the land occupied by the stadium - or something else....

And so in summary, on the various occasions where the future of DFC looked to have been in jeopardy during the last 45 years or so, on each occasion it was precisely because they owned a heritable asset.

Comparisons with Airdrie, Stirling, Clyde etc are with clubs who I understand are paying market value rental which isn't what has been proposed. Ok, I'm playing devil's advocate and everyone is rightly suspicious of a deal which leaves the club apparently with no assets
but you can't take the breeks aff a heilanman.

That's why we have to look towards fan ownership.

Whether that be with an investor or not, it's the safest option for clubs in the modern world. Easier said than done I know, but we have to look at other clubs around us and look and draw from their efforts and experiences. And by that I don't mean their league positions, by that I mean how secure they are in the hands of people who have a genuine love for the club.

It's about time fat cats in suits with pound signs in their eyes were done away with for good. Guys like Ian Wilson are poison to clubs like ourselves. Absolutely nothing this pretender promises should be taken seriously nor entertained, and that includes his hollow promises of peppercorn rents and century long leases.

[Jan Vojáček]

I just clocked we put up a picture on Twitter with Stevie shaking hands with a new signing, then took it down. Luckily I managed to screenshot it.

 

Spoiler

 

[lionel wickson]

Delighted to see that our friends in the north have allowed Lawrence Shankland to open the scoring for St Mirren tonight in their Scottish Cup tie. Just like they did with us and Daniel Harvie on Satur..., actually, forget that last bit.

[pleslie99]

Delighted to see that our friends in the north have allowed Lawrence Shankland to open the scoring for St Mirren tonight in their Scottish Cup tie. Just like they did with us and Daniel Harvie on Satur..., actually, forget that last bit.

That is a bit shit...... I know they can do what they like with their players but I think the rule should be either they can all play or they all can't! Stuff this picking and choosing nonsense!

[Nowhereman]

On the proposed stadium move, there are many questions which answer themselves and others which simply follow on to other questions. Leaving aside for a moment that there is a substantial trust deficit for Brabco and justifiably so, it's maybe worth considering a few points. If Brabco were to honour their offer of the club having the stadium in perpetuity for a peppercorn or no rent bound by a legally binding lease, then Brabco would be the owners of the stadium for apparently no reason. That's what been suggested here. However and again presuming their offer is genuine, might they insist on retaining ownership of the land so that no future owner might realise the asset? I.e. sell the ground. Let's for a moment the club do own the proposed new stadium. This would mean that instead of Brabco owning the stadium and land it would be owned by........drum roll........Brabco. In that case with no lease to bind the agreement, the club's security then once again becomes dependant on the whim of the owner, whoever he or they may be.

Now in the time that I have supported Dumbarton, there have been four owners. The first was Robert Robertson, chairman of Hutchison Engineering. At one stage he tried to buy Clyde's majority shareholding and merge the two clubs. He also threatened to sell Boghead and move the club to Cumbernauld. Sir Hugh Fraser was next. SIr Hugh made the club a £40k loan which became repayable to his estate when he died. His daughter's solicitors were not patient and we're ready to take the club to court for the money. Not actually having the money the club actually faced a winding up order. Fortunately they avoided this by selling Steve McCahill to Celtic rather than having to sell the ground.

I'm Next owner was Neil Rankine who appeared after paying only £40k for the majority shareholding. He proxied his shares to Jim Innes when he (Rankine) went bankrupt, only to reappear and take control again but only after Innes was on the point of accepting an offer from Boghead from a house builder. Only intervention by Gilbert Lawrie prevented that. Rankine bought the land at the Rock for £200k and built the stadium at the Rock with the proceeds of the sale of Boghead and £300k of money raised via sportscotland, Allied Distillers and Diageo. GIlbert, back at that time as a director, was convinced that Rankine was going to sell the club to the highest bidder - and there was considerable interest because of the potential land value. It was Gilbert who brokered the Brabco deal. Rankine supposedly got £800,000. A tidy profit less than twenty years after paying £40,000 for the shareholding.

We can speculate that this might have been the thing to secure the club's future or indeed to deliver it to yet another owner who has designs on the potential value of the land occupied by the stadium - or something else....

And so in summary, on the various occasions where the future of DFC looked to have been in jeopardy during the last 45 years or so, on each occasion it was precisely because they owned a heritable asset.

Comparisons with Airdrie, Stirling, Clyde etc are with clubs who I understand are paying market value rental which isn't what has been proposed. Ok, I'm playing devil's advocate and everyone is rightly suspicious of a deal which leaves the club apparently with no assets
but you can't take the breeks aff a heilanman.

So Wilf. Are you seriously saying that Brabco are trying to do the football club a favour by selling the club's main asset, pocketing the proceeds for themselves and leaving the club without any tangible assets. Seriously?

[O'Kelly Isley III]

12 hours ago, Howlin' Wilf said:

On the proposed stadium move, there are many questions which answer themselves and others which simply follow on to other questions. Leaving aside for a moment that there is a substantial trust deficit for Brabco and justifiably so, it's maybe worth considering a few points. If Brabco were to honour their offer of the club having the stadium in perpetuity for a peppercorn or no rent bound by a legally binding lease, then Brabco would be the owners of the stadium for apparently no reason. That's what been suggested here. However and again presuming their offer is genuine, might they insist on retaining ownership of the land so that no future owner might realise the asset? I.e. sell the ground. Let's for a moment the club do own the proposed new stadium. This would mean that instead of Brabco owning the stadium and land it would be owned by........drum roll........Brabco. In that case with no lease to bind the agreement, the club's security then once again becomes dependant on the whim of the owner, whoever he or they may be.

Now in the time that I have supported Dumbarton, there have been four owners. The first was Robert Robertson, chairman of Hutchison Engineering. At one stage he tried to buy Clyde's majority shareholding and merge the two clubs. He also threatened to sell Boghead and move the club to Cumbernauld. Sir Hugh Fraser was next. SIr Hugh made the club a £40k loan which became repayable to his estate when he died. His daughter's solicitors were not patient and we're ready to take the club to court for the money. Not actually having the money the club actually faced a winding up order. Fortunately they avoided this by selling Steve McCahill to Celtic rather than having to sell the ground.

I'm Next owner was Neil Rankine who appeared after paying only £40k for the majority shareholding. He proxied his shares to Jim Innes when he (Rankine) went bankrupt, only to reappear and take control again but only after Innes was on the point of accepting an offer from Boghead from a house builder. Only intervention by Gilbert Lawrie prevented that. Rankine bought the land at the Rock for £200k and built the stadium at the Rock with the proceeds of the sale of Boghead and £300k of money raised via sportscotland, Allied Distillers and Diageo. GIlbert, back at that time as a director, was convinced that Rankine was going to sell the club to the highest bidder - and there was considerable interest because of the potential land value. It was Gilbert who brokered the Brabco deal. Rankine supposedly got £800,000. A tidy profit less than twenty years after paying £40,000 for the shareholding.

We can speculate that this might have been the thing to secure the club's future or indeed to deliver it to yet another owner who has designs on the potential value of the land occupied by the stadium - or something else....

And so in summary, on the various occasions where the future of DFC looked to have been in jeopardy during the last 45 years or so, on each occasion it was precisely because they owned a heritable asset.

Comparisons with Airdrie, Stirling, Clyde etc are with clubs who I understand are paying market value rental which isn't what has been proposed. Ok, I'm playing devil's advocate and everyone is rightly suspicious of a deal which leaves the club apparently with no assets
but you can't take the breeks aff a heilanman.

Good post Wilf, and a timely reminder of why myself and some others saw the need for a Supporters Trust at Dumbarton; we may not have changed the world in the interim but the days of wide boys and tinpot dictators strutting their stuff at DFC without scrutiny are hopefully no more.  My personal ideal for Dumbarton FC would be a mix of supporter commitment, enthusiasm, graft  and PR outreach to the community and the business acumen, experience and commercial ballast of private shareholder capital.  And whilst I believe that model could be achieved, we are still a long way off several of those elements.

On the point of Neil Rankine, BTW, whilst he was a one-off to put it mildly, I have it on good authority that there was in fact a rival offer in excess of Brabco's which he resisted as he felt it wasn't in DFC's interests, so fair play to him for that.

[Howlin' Wilf]

So Wilf. Are you seriously saying that Brabco are trying to do the football club a favour by selling the club's main asset, pocketing the proceeds for themselves and leaving the club without any tangible assets. Seriously?

Eh....no. I was simply exploring a line and backing it up with some facts. Maybe you're not familiar with the expression 'Devil's advocate'?

[Howlin' Wilf]

So Wilf. Are you seriously saying that Brabco are trying to do the football club a favour by selling the club's main asset, pocketing the proceeds for themselves and leaving the club without any tangible assets. Seriously?

The peppercorn rent option was incidentally, the option favoured by Gilbert Lawrie as he saw it as safeguarding the club. Gilbert handled many large property sales and leases in his time and knew more about DFC than most. I understand however that the option was not pursued and was dropped in favour of club ownership. I have a feeling that Ian Wilson's resurrection of the option was as big a surprise to his fellow Brabco directors as it was to everyone.

[Benito Robles]

Reading the stuff here and in the Reporter. it seems to me that your club owners are operating in an alternate universe and time zone. Sons fans simply have stop the separation of the club from the ground.

[sonsism]

I'd love the fans to own the club but not sure we'd have enough support. Would the best option for us not to find an investor who would go in with the Sonstrust?

[The Moonster]

2 hours ago, sonsism said:

I'd love the fans to own the club but not sure we'd have enough support. Would the best option for us not to find an investor who would go in with the Sonstrust?
 

I'd say something like St Mirren's takeover would be the ideal situation for us.  If we could find a local investor to put in the initial capital and have say 500 Sons fans paying that back via a monthly payment over 10 years then the future of the club would be secure. 500 Sons fans paying £20 a month over 10 years would raise £1.2 million, which would surely be enough to buy the club. Some might think 500 is ambitious, and it definitely would be a challenge, but when you think we've got over 300 Trust members I think with the right PR we could reach 500. The problem we find ourselves in now is that we have an owner who has no interest in the football side of the club, yet doesn't want to relinquish their ownership of the football club. Even if we had an investor and the Trust put forward an offer, it doesn't sound like Brabco would even entertain it.

If the stadium move goes tits up that might change though.

ETA - I should also note that Simon spoke about other options being explored by the Trust at the meeting the other week - Gianluca Vialli was mentioned and I think he's involved in a company which specifically looks to help fans in buy-out situations like the above by providing capital through crowd funding. There will be a few options open to the fans if we want to press ahead with a buy-out, but as I said above we need a willingness from the current owners to have any joy.

Edited November 30, 2016 by The Moonster

[Howlin' Wilf]

2 hours ago, The Moonster said:

I'd say something like St Mirren's takeover would be the ideal situation for us.  If we could find a local investor to put in the initial capital and have say 500 Sons fans paying that back via a monthly payment over 10 years then the future of the club would be secure. 500 Sons fans paying £20 a month over 10 years would raise £1.2 million, which would surely be enough to buy the club. Some might think 500 is ambitious, and it definitely would be a challenge, but when you think we've got over 300 Trust members I think with the right PR we could reach 500. The problem we find ourselves in now is that we have an owner who has no interest in the football side of the club, yet doesn't want to relinquish their ownership of the football club. Even if we had an investor and the Trust put forward an offer, it doesn't sound like Brabco would even entertain it.

If the stadium move goes tits up that might change though.

ETA - I should also note that Simon spoke about other options being explored by the Trust at the meeting the other week - Gianluca Vialli was mentioned and I think he's involved in a company which specifically looks to help fans in buy-out situations like the above by providing capital through crowd funding. There will be a few options open to the fans if we want to press ahead with a buy-out, but as I said above we need a willingness from the current owners to have any joy.

I wish the St Mirren effort every success. Having been on the organising end of collecting subscriptions for various things, I know they will need to be diligent indeed.

[TheFarPost]

18 hours ago, O'Kelly Isley III said:

My personal ideal for Dumbarton FC would be a mix of supporter commitment, enthusiasm, graft  and PR outreach to the community and the business acumen, experience and commercial ballast of private shareholder capital.  And whilst I believe that model could be achieved, we are still a long way off several of those elements.

I think that's the kind of direction we should be heading in. A partnership model with a significant fan stake, an asset lock, and a clear strategy for being a community club with a much more enthusiastic outreach and a sustainable business approach. We may be moving there a little faster than you think - but, yes, there's a way to go. 

Simon

[TheFarPost]

11 hours ago, The Moonster said:

I should also note that Simon spoke about other options being explored by the Trust at the meeting the other week - Gianluca Vialli was mentioned and I think he's involved in a company which specifically looks to help fans in buy-out situations like the above by providing capital through crowd funding. There will be a few options open to the fans if we want to press ahead with a buy-out, but as I said above we need a willingness from the current owners to have any joy.

Yes, as I said at the AGM, we're exploring serious options for building the trust, transitioning it into an organisation that can generate more resources and aim at a bigger stakeholding in the club, develop a partnership strategy for the future, etc. (The Vialli link is with a company that helps fans crowd-fund for projects, shared ownership etc.) We should be able to say more in the near future -- and of course when those options take shape we'd call an EGM so that all members have a say and decide. But our aim is to help shape a future for the club, in collaboration with all who want to put DFC first. We don't just want to be commenting or moaning from the sidelines.