Hastings United Takeover Proposals

The Consortium
A supporters based consortium, with a combined total of almost ninety years support and service to Hastings United, have had a formal offer for the club rejected by majority shareholder Dave Walters. The consortium, including former Treasurer Dave Ormerod, Bryan Warren and Roger Sinden had preliminary talks in 2006, having submitted a letter of interest.

Roger Sinden on behalf of the consortium said, "Dave Walters has worked tirelessly to develop links between the club and the business community, and also strengthened links with the youth teams through Chris Russo, and this can only be positive for the future of the club. We are grateful for this. However we feel that the time may now be right for change in the culture of the club and to broaden the decision making .It is our view that the club potentially belongs to all residents of Hastings, and that shareholders hold the club as stewards on behalf of the community. We would like to see a more open, transparent approach to decision making and involvement .It is our belief that this view is shared by others, who we would also welcome on board.

We made Dave what we felt was a fair and reasonable offer and we are obviously disappointed with his initial response. We would however encourage him to talk to Hastings supporters and think again. We continue to be ready to talk and bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion."

The proposals, if accepted, would have seen an increased number of directors with no single person having an overall control. This would have led to a more participative and open approach to decision making within the football club. The consortium remains open to the possibility of Dave Walters retaining a role as director in the new set up.

The consortium has promised some additional financial investment if it is successful in its bid. Indeed it has been confirmed that if ultimately successful with their bid, modest investment will be forthcoming from the consortium on an annual basis to strengthen the club.

Issued on behalf of the consortium

Dave Ormerod
Roger Sinden
Bryan Warren

Frequently Asked Questions - Hastings United Takeover Proposals

Update briefing 27/02/06
Although these proposals have only been public for some three days we have been deluged by messages of support, offers of assistance, advice on the best way forward and the offer of financial donations. We have been overwhelmed by feedback from supporters, players past and present, and those neutrals outside of the club who share the values we are seeking to promote. We have also received formal offers from those who feel they can contribute to the day to day life of the club. A big thank you to you all.

We are keen to clarify points that have emerged from a number of questions and we thought that the best way forward would be via a series of questions and answers posted on the unofficial fans forum.

Question: How did all this come about?

The proposal initially emanated from Dave Walters who suggested that when he stood down he would like to hand over the reins to a Supporters based Consortium. The possibility has developed momentum in view of the disappointments of the current season but mostly as a result of the closed culture within the club.  Supporters have pressed us to accelerate these plans.

Question: How have the negotiations come about?

We submitted an offer of intent to Dave and met with him and Chris Russo recently when we had the chance to set out the detail of the offer. We repeat our commitment not to breach the confidentiality of the meeting. We will not therefore divulge the amount offered to Dave, or indeed how much greater this is than the price paid by him. Neither do we intend to divulge the earnings that Dave or his daughter take from the club. However as soon as the offer was rejected both verbally and in writing we felt it was quite proper to place the generality of approach in the public domain as we believe that it is a matter of public interest.

Question: So what are your proposals for the future?

We reassured both Dave and Christine that we would like them to stay on board for the sake of continuity and to utilise their skills. We were happy for Dave to retain the largest number of shares but for no one director to have an overall majority as this has the potential to blunt participation, debate and impairs decision making. Supporters have raised the option of greater share issues and not needing to pay Dave any money at all but to increase the working capital within the club. It would be possible to do this and for no overall majority to exist and it is a helpful suggestion to move things forward.

We have stressed the priority we place on an augmented board of directors for collective decision making and for formal recognition of elected supporters representatives to be part of that decision making. We have stressed the importance of access to information in terms of minutes, observers at meetings and for accounts to be in the public domain in a fuller version as a matter of course. Our values have been vindicated by those who would want to come on board when the culture changes.

Question:  Would it be helpful to meet with the Consortium to take these details forward?

We are always happy to talk to private individuals about their support but our desire, as you would expect, is for a decent, courteous public debate at a face to face fans forum. This would enable Dave Walters to gauge the feelings of supporters that are being conveyed to us privately. The ball is very much in the court of supporters if they want to request this.

It would be possible to involve an independent body to facilitate such a meeting if this was helpful.

Question:  Why did you discuss the proposals with the remaining shareholders before you went public?

We had met with Dave and Chris who are shareholders and the only two directors. We wanted to talk to the remaining shareholders to test their response and we felt that it was only courteous, having regard to the nature of the proposals, to share them with these individuals. They were unanimous in their support in what is behind the proposals.

Question:  Is it proposed that any members of the consortium draw a salary from the club?

In no way. We all love the club, and have done so for a number of years. We have no need to do so; neither do we think it proper. Our proposals are to increase investment in the club year on year not to take from it.

Question:  How would appointments to paid tasks take place in the future in your proposals?

We believe that all appointments should be made transparently, through equal opportunity interviewing after a public advertisement. This is the only way to secure value for money from the best possible candidate.

Question:  It has been suggested that you have an ulterior motive and want to destabilise the club.

Not at all. We want supporters to be able to exercise clear choice and for informed decisions to be made. We will continue to support and serve the club that we love. Preliminary discussions have taken place with a major sponsor for next year. A precondition of the success of these negotiations is that these democratic reforms have been concluded beforehand.

Question:  Reference has been made in recent posting to the tea bar. What are your views on this?

We believe that supporters’ facilities should be for their comfort and convenience and should not be evaluated by their profit margins. We have a dream for the club that sees the need for more than two refreshment outlets not just one. The Consortium have written to Chris Russo confirming willingness to fund the necessary works from its own resources and we hope that the necessary works can be concluded as quickly as possible.

Question:  Isn’t the plea for Supporter participation in football clubs a passing fad?

Not at all. The game is benefiting from Supporters Direct, a body established to assist football clubs become more democratic and ensure the clubs become community assets. The Consortium is of course already in contact with this body .The approach has influenced non league clubs but also European giants Barcelona who are a supporters owned club who pick their directors.

Consortium appeals for change of heart on behalf of United Ladies

Representatives of the Supporters based Consortium were dismayed to learn of an apparent decision to ask the ladies team to vacate the Pilot Field at the end of the 2006 season and appealed for a change of heart on their behalf. If such is not deemed to be possible by the two current Directors, there is a strong view that the decision, which was apparently made in January 2006, should be explained to all associated with the club. This would be in keeping for the ongoing requests for a more open, transparent culture where information is proactively available, rather than seeping out from time to time.

"Hastings Ladies fly the flag for the club in a league which includes representative teams from Tottenham Hotspur, Hendon and Clapton Orient and are symbolic of the club’s aspirations to be an inclusive, community orientated club. This decision is another nail in the coffin of this aspiration, and follows the fact that local cup finals will not be played at the Pilot Field this year. The Pilot Field is a Council resource which is leased to the Parent Club, and should be accessible to Sports enthusiasts throughout the Town".

Meanwhile details are awaited from Chris Russo of the work that is necessary for the Main Stand Tea Bar to be reopened. The Consortium have agreed to fund this work , as part of their commitment to improved facilities for supporters, and are frustrated by the slow progress.

The proposed meeting between members of the Supporters Club and representatives of the Consortium took place on 15th April 2006 at 5pm, directly after the Fleet game.

A collection of
football
recollections
by Roger Sinden