Away From The Numbers
All good things come to an end. Or so they say. AFTN has been around since 1989, first as a fanzine and then making the jump to a website and forum in 2003. We've been through the many ups and down at East Fife in those 12 years but policing the forum has become a giant pain in the ass in recent years. As such, we made the decision not to renew it when it expired.
The forum is no more and will remain as a locked archive until it is eventually deleted by the host. We're looking in to try to save some of the content as an archive.
This is not the end of AFTN though. The site will continue and will be revamped and return in its full glory for the start of the 2016/17 season. Maybe even sooner. There will be a comment sections and possibly even a new, registered forum. Check our Twitter (@aftnwebsite) for all the latest info and we'll also post in on the EFFC memories Facebook page.
Until then, have a last browse here, thanks for all your support over the years, and 'Mon the Fife.
GoF
From today's Courier......
Claim East Fife directors acting with “heart over head” in takeover bid
By Craig Smith, 20 January 2015 10.30am.
East Fife’s Supporters Trust (EFSS) have suggested directors behind the ongoing takeover of the club are acting with “heart over head” - and have once again urged them to back a joint bid.
The Methil club’s four current directors previously tabled an offer for the majority shareholding which was accepted in principle by the club’s owners, adding that the EFSS and other groups could buy into a minority share of the 52% stake they are seeking to acquire.
However, the EFSS have stressed that the club’s current owners may have overvalued the majority shareholding, with the price tag believed to be in the region of £380,000, and have called upon the directors to work with them on a united bid which they believe will “genuinely move the club towards community ownership”.
A spokesperson for the EFSS has revealed that they have been approached by a financial institution which would be interested in providing the capital which might allow supporters to buy the majority shareholding, with further meetings scheduled for later this month.
In the meantime though, the EFSS continue to stop short of formally backing the directors’ bid currently in the pipeline.
“Although the current EFFC board undoubtedly have the interests of the club in mind, it does seem in their case to be heart over head,” the EFSS said.
“The last meeting between EFFC and EFSS had ended with the unsatisfactory offer by EFFC to allow EFSS and other groups to buy into a minority share of the 52%.
“At that point we indicated that until more detail of the current board’s purchase was made available, and a clear understanding of the club’s financial position was revealed, then the EFSS working group would be unable to make any firm recommendation as to the financial involvment our members should have.
“Unfortunately we are now a couple of months further down the road and although the EFFC accounts have been published we are not really any closer to being in a position to recommend any form of support for the EFFC directors’ bid.
“At the same time we are still keen to be heavily involved in creating a community club run by all groups, not excluding the current EFFC directors.
“It is quite clear from both the EFSS accountants and the EFFC auditors that as things stand any investment in EFFC is a very risky proposition so our advice to our members is not to get involved with the bid yet.”
The EFSS have urged directors to review the value of the offer to buy the 52% majority shareholding, be more open with details of the current financial situation faced by the club, and work together with them on a new offer which could take the club forward.
However, the group concluded: “Until progress is made in meeting these three targets any recommendation made by the EFSS working group would come from the heart rather than the head.”
A combined bid is a certainly preferred.
Hearts, Hibs, Motherwell have all announced plans where supporters groups will hold the 51% controlling stake in the club. This will be the future of Scottish football. And it is a good thing that I hope our club will embrace.
The SFA ruling on Rankine has certainly changed the landscape and the directors bid must now be off the table. Their "rental" agreement can no longer stand given that the owner must dispose of their assets.
For the owner this must be a horrible situation to be in. A forced sale means that there is no chance of him getting the ridiculously inflated asking price. Quite the opposite .... he'll have to take what he can get now. Let's hope the directors decide to combine their resources with the EFSS - to try and outbid them would be absolute madness. Every penny spent outbidding is a penny diverted from paying the debt and investing in the team.
No doubt the owner will be thinking of schemes to minimize his losses and perhaps even retain control over the bits of his asset that is of interest to him. Any director past or present who seeks to aid him in doing this will not be acting in the best interests of the club. This comment I aim directly at Bruce Black, and Messers Stevenson, Marshall, Barclay and Donaldson
The position of the buyer has never been stronger. It can only be weakened by lack of togetherness. And if the parties can't come together at this stage....will they ever be together. Togetherness is essential if the debt and the decline are to be tackled.
The olive branch has been offered. The ball is with the directors. Let's hope for unity.
Very eloquently put, but what exactly is on the table from the EFSS? What is the olive branch? What is the EFSS valuation? I may be wrong, but I don't think the EFSS have actually stated a figure yet? What figure are you saying needs to be outbid? Do you know the figure, because I don't think anybody else outside (or maybe even inside) the EFSS know?
I agree togetherness is better, but togetherness means both sides need to understand each others position a bit more clearly. Your statement appears to be saying to the directors that they must accept whatever the EFSS dictate to them. That doesn't sound like togetherness to me, it sounds more like take it or leave it. That may not be what the EFSS are saying of course, it is you who is saying it.
The ball appears to be firmly in the EFSS's side of the court and needs to be returned with hard facts and figures before anybody can consider togetherness. Let's hope for some concrete information on the EFSS bid coming out soon. Maybe if it was announced now, some progress can be made? I think the longer they take to say what their financial plans are in monetary terms, the less the likelihood they have of being part of the new era that is beckoning.
Regarding the clubs you mentioned who have plans to give 51% ownership to fans, can you explain how they are going to achieve that and how it differs from the directors of East Fife's plans? How long will the process take for these clubs to achieve 51% ownership?
both sides need to understand each others position a bit more clearly.
I completely agree.
The EFSS movement have done their analysis and have (or are developing) a business plan. They were forming a strategy for buying the club last year but that was upended when the directors went ahead with their takeover plans in isolation. With the SFA ruling, a new strategy will no doubt be formed and the invite (olive branch) looks to be on the table for the directors to collaborate with the EFSS on any new bid.
The details of any valuation are likely to remain confidential until an agreement of sale is reached. But we can safely speculate that the debt and assets will cancel each other out. My valuation would be between £1 and £30,000 for the 52%. The upper end depends on what the finances and assets look like at the point of sale. I've seen nothing to suggest they have improved since May 2014. I have no idea what the EFSS valuation is.
Interesting you suggest that the EFSS might not play a part in any new era. Do you really think there is a future without the supporters being involved? I can't see it.
I'm not in a position to answer the questions you ask about Hibs, Hearts, etc.
But there is a major difference in what they are offering their fans.
Each member would have 1 vote regardless of how much they contributed to the share ownership. Stark contrast to the directors where (assuming the directors voted together) all other opinions would be irrelevant.
No, the supporters definitely have a part to play, but not necessarily via the EFSS, unless it comes up with a sensible plan.
I have to highlight that the clubs you mentioned that have plans to give 51% ownership to supporters are looking at this being achieved over years. However, I think you are expecting the East Fife supporters 51% ownership to be achieved immediately? Is this really possible? Also, are these other clubs being sold off cheaply by the current owners?
Your valuation of £30000 is pure comedy I'm afraid. EFSS obviously don't think in these terms, otherwise why would they have to go to a financial institution for backing? If they can't muster a paltry £30000 between all the members, then how do you expect them to finance running the club once they have bought it?
My range of £1 to £30,000 is not based on what can be raised. It is my valuation based on my analysis of the clubs financial statements (and other things that I won't go into). And note the condition on the upper end of that range - subject to assets and debts being as per May 2014.
You may find it comedy. But what you won't find is someone willing to pay more than this sum. As you rightly point out, you'd be purchasing the wrong end of a very large debt...... with little in the way of assets to back it up.
(And when I say pay this sum, that means actually part with the cash and buy the shares - not a rental or pay up agreement).
The EFSS mentioned that a financial institution had approached them. I have no knowledge as to what package has been offered but I would imagine that in the main the funding is for working capital. Without WC how can additional revenue be raised to make repayment?
I'm all for the directors if they can work with the EFSS. Let's hope they do.
Rankine has to sell his shares in Livingston or East Fife. Hopefully he decides to unload his interests in East Fife..
The value of his shares are determined by those who wish to buy them as he has to sell or the SFA will be after him. The Directors spoke about having offered in the region of 380k, a figure not too dissimilar to the figure the EFSS eventually conceded at the first meeting.. If the two groups go it alone the only beneficiary will be Neil Rankine as a bidding war will push the price up. A joint bid which is likely to be the only bid for a Club with debt like ours will push the price down as he has no option but to sell. No person / group in their right mind would proceed with an offer of anything like the 380k given the present predicament of the majority shareholder.
Time for compromise on both sides and for egos to be set aside in a bid to secure a future for East Fife Football Club which is the one common interest of all parties.
Is there anything to stop Rankine "selling" his shares to other friends? Ones he doesn't live with and there's less of a connection. What if he takes the Twigg/Johnstone shares and splits them over 5-10 friends? I hope this wont be the case but he's always seemed keen to cling onto the club for some reason.
There are good points being made here about the current situation. Debate and discussion like this is healthy and helps to raise awareness of the possibilities.
It is encouraging to see people grasping some of the key points about the Neil Rankine affair. A big opportunity has opened up now that Rankine has lost full control of the situation. He is required to get rid of his interest at either Livingston or East Fife. What if he can’t do that at Livingston? If he can’t find a way out there, and he wants to avoid Livingston facing potentially serious punishment, then he will have to find a way to end his interest at East Fife, where there are two parties who have been considering bids for the Twigg/Johnston shareholding. Trouble for Rankine is that, as has been suggested on this forum, the seller is not in as strong a bargaining position as prior to the ruling that Livingston have made four breaches of SFA rules because of Rankine’s involvement.
Rankine has got three weeks from now to come up with a convincing plan of action. After that, he has to deliver his plan. That’s another matter entirely.
Rusty raises an interesting point: “Is there anything to stop Rankine "selling" his shares to other friends? Ones he doesn't live with and there's less of a connection. What if he takes the Twigg/Johnston shares and splits them over 5-10 friends?”
I would guess that this would be difficult now. His associates have become fairly well known since the spotlight was turned on his affairs. If the majority shareholding was to be transferred to one or more of those people, he risks ending up back in the dilemma he finds himself in today.
If Rankine gets out at Livingston, the problem with the SFA is resolved. But if the two parties who have discussed bids for the majority shareholding at East Fife genuinely want to remove Rankine’s influence, there has never been a better opportunity to achieve this than right now.
It is encouraging to see people grasping some of the key points about the Neil Rankine affair. A big opportunity has opened up now that Rankine has lost full control of the situation. He is required to get rid of his interest at either Livingston or East Fife. What if he can’t do that at Livingston? If he can’t find a way out there, and he wants to avoid Livingston facing potentially serious punishment, then he will have to find a way to end his interest at East Fife, where there are two parties who have been considering bids for the Twigg/Johnston shareholding. Trouble for Rankine is that, as has been suggested on this forum, the seller is not in as strong a bargaining position as prior to the ruling that Livingston have made four breaches of SFA rules because of Rankine’s involvement.
Rankine has got three weeks from now to come up with a convincing plan of action. After that, he has to deliver his plan. That’s another matter entirely.
Rusty raises an interesting point: “Is there anything to stop Rankine "selling" his shares to other friends? Ones he doesn't live with and there's less of a connection. What if he takes the Twigg/Johnston shares and splits them over 5-10 friends?”
I would guess that this would be difficult now. His associates have become fairly well known since the spotlight was turned on his affairs. If the majority shareholding was to be transferred to one or more of those people, he risks ending up back in the dilemma he finds himself in today.
If Rankine gets out at Livingston, the problem with the SFA is resolved. But if the two parties who have discussed bids for the majority shareholding at East Fife genuinely want to remove Rankine’s influence, there has never been a better opportunity to achieve this than right now.
Very interesting situation now Donald, the timing of the SFA hearing and the need for Rankine to act fairly soon should hopefully help the situation for the EFSS bid. The current directors are in my opinion not thinking straight over their deal, and whilst it is to be admired getting rid of the Rankine influence, at what cost? £300k + would be insanity.
As soon as the books can be looked at properly by experts then who knows what the true woth of the shares are at the moment. Meanwhile time marches on and the club are getting deeper in the mire.
Here's hoping the situation can be resolved sooner rather than later when there may no longer be an East Fife in its present form.
It is encouraging to see people grasping some of the key points about the Neil Rankine affair. A big opportunity has opened up now that Rankine has lost full control of the situation. He is required to get rid of his interest at either Livingston or East Fife. What if he can’t do that at Livingston? If he can’t find a way out there, and he wants to avoid Livingston facing potentially serious punishment, then he will have to find a way to end his interest at East Fife, where there are two parties who have been considering bids for the Twigg/Johnston shareholding. Trouble for Rankine is that, as has been suggested on this forum, the seller is not in as strong a bargaining position as prior to the ruling that Livingston have made four breaches of SFA rules because of Rankine’s involvement.
Rankine has got three weeks from now to come up with a convincing plan of action. After that, he has to deliver his plan. That’s another matter entirely.
Rusty raises an interesting point: “Is there anything to stop Rankine "selling" his shares to other friends? Ones he doesn't live with and there's less of a connection. What if he takes the Twigg/Johnston shares and splits them over 5-10 friends?”
I would guess that this would be difficult now. His associates have become fairly well known since the spotlight was turned on his affairs. If the majority shareholding was to be transferred to one or more of those people, he risks ending up back in the dilemma he finds himself in today.
If Rankine gets out at Livingston, the problem with the SFA is resolved. But if the two parties who have discussed bids for the majority shareholding at East Fife genuinely want to remove Rankine’s influence, there has never been a better opportunity to achieve this than right now.
Very interesting situation now Donald, the timing of the SFA hearing and the need for Rankine to act fairly soon should hopefully help the situation for the EFSS bid. The current directors are in my opinion not thinking straight over their deal, and whilst it is to be admired getting rid of the Rankine influence, at what cost? £300k + would be insanity.
As soon as the books can be looked at properly by experts then who knows what the true woth of the shares are at the moment. Meanwhile time marches on and the club are getting deeper in the mire.
Here's hoping the situation can be resolved sooner rather than later when there may no longer be an East Fife in its present form.
I think it is both sides who need to be thinking straight here. Having another dig at the directors is not helping and this should be stopped, as it looks to be more of a personal issue than anything else and just creates division. Are the EFSS thinking straight with their valuation, which we still do not know how much it is yet? In defence of the directors who have at least made a bid, if something concrete was to be declared by the EFSS, then maybe there could be a better way forward? Who is delaying matters in all of this and why is it taking them so long?
I have to ask who the experts are and if they are neutral? Paramount to all of this, is the survival of the club and getting it out of the hands of the major shareholders. Experts may not be worried about that, they will be more interested in their fee for doing their audit most likely.
It is encouraging to see people grasping some of the key points about the Neil Rankine affair. A big opportunity has opened up now that Rankine has lost full control of the situation. He is required to get rid of his interest at either Livingston or East Fife. What if he can’t do that at Livingston? If he can’t find a way out there, and he wants to avoid Livingston facing potentially serious punishment, then he will have to find a way to end his interest at East Fife, where there are two parties who have been considering bids for the Twigg/Johnston shareholding. Trouble for Rankine is that, as has been suggested on this forum, the seller is not in as strong a bargaining position as prior to the ruling that Livingston have made four breaches of SFA rules because of Rankine’s involvement.
Rankine has got three weeks from now to come up with a convincing plan of action. After that, he has to deliver his plan. That’s another matter entirely.
Rusty raises an interesting point: “Is there anything to stop Rankine "selling" his shares to other friends? Ones he doesn't live with and there's less of a connection. What if he takes the Twigg/Johnston shares and splits them over 5-10 friends?”
I would guess that this would be difficult now. His associates have become fairly well known since the spotlight was turned on his affairs. If the majority shareholding was to be transferred to one or more of those people, he risks ending up back in the dilemma he finds himself in today.
If Rankine gets out at Livingston, the problem with the SFA is resolved. But if the two parties who have discussed bids for the majority shareholding at East Fife genuinely want to remove Rankine’s influence, there has never been a better opportunity to achieve this than right now.
Very interesting situation now Donald, the timing of the SFA hearing and the need for Rankine to act fairly soon should hopefully help the situation for the EFSS bid. The current directors are in my opinion not thinking straight over their deal, and whilst it is to be admired getting rid of the Rankine influence, at what cost? £300k + would be insanity.
As soon as the books can be looked at properly by experts then who knows what the true woth of the shares are at the moment. Meanwhile time marches on and the club are getting deeper in the mire.
Here's hoping the situation can be resolved sooner rather than later when there may no longer be an East Fife in its present form.
I think it is both sides who need to be thinking straight here. Having another dig at the directors is not helping and this should be stopped, as it looks to be more of a personal issue than anything else and just creates division. Are the EFSS thinking straight with their valuation, which we still do not know how much it is yet? In defence of the directors who have at least made a bid, if something concrete was to be declared by the EFSS, then maybe there could be a better way forward? Who is delaying matters in all of this and why is it taking them so long?
I have to ask who the experts are and if they are neutral? Paramount to all of this, is the survival of the club and getting it out of the hands of the major shareholders. Experts may not be worried about that, they will be more interested in their fee for doing their audit most likely.
So never hire a professional because they want a fee for their services?
My mechanic doesn't really care about my car, but he knows a lot more about keeping it on the road than I do.
The accounts prepared by the directors for the period ending in May show that the assets of the business are worth £90,000 LESS that the debt of the business.
That is a very dangerous situation for any company to be in.
So what's your valuation of the business Curious?
What is the valuation of the majority shareholders shares that the EFSS wish to buy?
It is encouraging to see people grasping some of the key points about the Neil Rankine affair. A big opportunity has opened up now that Rankine has lost full control of the situation. He is required to get rid of his interest at either Livingston or East Fife. What if he can’t do that at Livingston? If he can’t find a way out there, and he wants to avoid Livingston facing potentially serious punishment, then he will have to find a way to end his interest at East Fife, where there are two parties who have been considering bids for the Twigg/Johnston shareholding. Trouble for Rankine is that, as has been suggested on this forum, the seller is not in as strong a bargaining position as prior to the ruling that Livingston have made four breaches of SFA rules because of Rankine’s involvement.
Rankine has got three weeks from now to come up with a convincing plan of action. After that, he has to deliver his plan. That’s another matter entirely.
Rusty raises an interesting point: “Is there anything to stop Rankine "selling" his shares to other friends? Ones he doesn't live with and there's less of a connection. What if he takes the Twigg/Johnston shares and splits them over 5-10 friends?”
I would guess that this would be difficult now. His associates have become fairly well known since the spotlight was turned on his affairs. If the majority shareholding was to be transferred to one or more of those people, he risks ending up back in the dilemma he finds himself in today.
If Rankine gets out at Livingston, the problem with the SFA is resolved. But if the two parties who have discussed bids for the majority shareholding at East Fife genuinely want to remove Rankine’s influence, there has never been a better opportunity to achieve this than right now.
Very interesting situation now Donald, the timing of the SFA hearing and the need for Rankine to act fairly soon should hopefully help the situation for the EFSS bid. The current directors are in my opinion not thinking straight over their deal, and whilst it is to be admired getting rid of the Rankine influence, at what cost? £300k + would be insanity.
As soon as the books can be looked at properly by experts then who knows what the true woth of the shares are at the moment. Meanwhile time marches on and the club are getting deeper in the mire.
Here's hoping the situation can be resolved sooner rather than later when there may no longer be an East Fife in its present form.
I think it is both sides who need to be thinking straight here. Having another dig at the directors is not helping and this should be stopped, as it looks to be more of a personal issue than anything else and just creates division. Are the EFSS thinking straight with their valuation, which we still do not know how much it is yet? In defence of the directors who have at least made a bid, if something concrete was to be declared by the EFSS, then maybe there could be a better way forward? Who is delaying matters in all of this and why is it taking them so long?
I have to ask who the experts are and if they are neutral? Paramount to all of this, is the survival of the club and getting it out of the hands of the major shareholders. Experts may not be worried about that, they will be more interested in their fee for doing their audit most likely.
So never hire a professional because they want a fee for their services?
My mechanic doesn't really care about my car, but he knows a lot more about keeping it on the road than I do.
I think you should get another mechanic who does care about your car mate! Are you not wondering why you need him so often?
I don't. He cares about the job when he's doing it and gets paid for it. But I doubt he thinks about it when it leaves his garage, or when he goes home at night.
You pay professionals for their service.You don't need experts to "worry" about anything, you need them to do the job you pay them for, in this instance it is to establish the facts of what has or what is draining the club of frightening amounts of money.
I see you have ignored my advice of having a dig at the directors. This serves no purpose and just polarises positions and no common ground will ever be reached. You seem to be more worried about the club's money, than how your money is going to be handled by the EFSS, if you actually part with any. Maybe you are a potential expert only?
Ah smell Jocky 
How novel! The sheer variety of come backs are truly astonishing on this site.
Irrelevant.
But you mocked my valuation as comedy. Care to put you valuation forward?
