Advertise Here

Raj Singh Statement

by Scott Thornberry - 23rd March 2012

raj singh statement

Raj Singh has reacted angrily to claims he’s attempting to block DFC 1883’s takeover of Darlington Football Club.

 

Mr Singh has been working closely with the proposed community club in the hope Quakers can prevail.

He has asked for two conditions, which would not in any way jeopardise the community club’s proposed takeover, to be included in a potential CVA which, up until today, he was led to believe was progressing with solicitors.

In fact, Mr Singh spoke to the lawyer representing 1883 last week, and was shocked to hear of the so-called CVA deadline.

In a statement tonight, Mr Singh said: “I’ve simply asked for two conditions to be included in the CVA, which does not involve a new group paying a penny out of funds raised now or in the future. 

“I’m simply protecting my interests going forward. I’m not preventing the CVA, I’m not blocking any deal, what I’m asking for does not affect the financial viability of the club going forward in any way whatsoever.

“I’ve been in negotiations with DFC 1883 over the last few weeks – the key members of whom I had the impression had agreed in principle to the two conditions – and I was expecting the CVA to come to fruition very soon, in order for 1883 to motor on with its rescue package.

“As usual, as with the dramatic developments on January 18, it’s a case of people jumping the gun and me getting the blame, when in actual fact I’ve been more than accommodating in resolving the issues with two or three separate offers that have come forward.

“It’s disappointing, but I will continue to do whatever I possibly can to make sure DFC 1883’s efforts are not wasted.”

Comments

Add your own in our forum

al_quaker - 23rd March 2012 22:15:02

Interesting. Hopefully the CVA can be agreed very soon so we can move on from this.

ambiente - 23rd March 2012 22:16:29

Interesting, statements everywhere now where previously there were none. Doesn't really add much to the little we know and I guess we just wait on. Hope it doesn't feed the conspiracy theorists though

super_les_mcjannet - 23rd March 2012 22:20:33

So what are the two conditions. Guess may find out later!!

LoidLucan - 24th March 2012 16:54:16

It's becoming obvious that agreement isn't being reached with the main creditor over the debt. It looks like debt isn't going to be simply "written off" in the interests of setting up a community club and therefore there must now be an increasing danger that agreement won't be reached, with all the devastating consequences that brings.

Quakerz - 24th March 2012 16:58:52

The devastating consequences of jettisoning all of the debt, setting up again at the Arena temporarily with a couple hundred grand in the bank, and being free to benefit from any land deal?

What will be will be. If Raj digs his heels in he will kill the club, but he can never stop a new one forming. The worst case scenario is starting again in the northern league in the 2013/14 season.

LoidLucan - 24th March 2012 17:01:59

I remember misspentyouth quite some time ago saying this may be the only way forward....

At least we wouldn't need a big players budget!

The_Natural - 24th March 2012 17:07:22

If it cam to that though, who would be running it?
Would be nice to get it going next season--but would it be via 1883 or the TRUST?--not sure if you are allowed 2 Phoenix clubs?

LoidLucan - 24th March 2012 17:17:35

Given the bad publicity surrounding the Trust, what do you think the response would be if they issued a rallying cry: "Here we go, who's with us?"

The_Natural - 24th March 2012 17:20:13

well if ts not until the 2013-14 season maybe bad feeling can be put to rest after a cooling off period and both groups can do it together.

MikeinBlack - 24th March 2012 17:22:58

There is no way that Darlington will be around as a new club in 2013-14, the interest will simply fade away and die in that length of time, look at the investment figures in this scheme as an example. If 1883 doesn't happen well, simply put it's all over.

charlie - 24th March 2012 17:23:21

Er we havnt given up yet

MikeinBlack - 24th March 2012 17:25:18

No-one said we had, it's pretty well out of our hands again though isn't it. We will see though and have everything crossed = Come on 1883!

charlie - 24th March 2012 17:29:08

MikeinBlack wrote:
No-one said we had, it's pretty well out of our hands again though isn't it. We will see though and have everything crossed = Come on 1883!


I`m sure your all there with me but the uncertainty is doing my head in and my nerves.

LoidLucan - 24th March 2012 17:30:28

If agreement really can't be reached with Raj for whatever reason, the time is coming where we need to just admit defeat down that route, let it go and move on. He seemingly can't come to an agreement with 1883 and no agreement can be done with other potential investors who have come forward (they've all pulled out along the way over this one) so there's an inevitability about what's going to happen when the main creditor can't come to an acceptable deal... ie he ends up getting nowt, the current club goes down the pan and we start again deep down in football's sump.

MikeinBlack - 24th March 2012 17:31:39

The only thing that is certain is the uncertainty lol. What worries me isn't so much Raj, he's never going to allow anything other than his terms, but why the Administrator's deadline of Monday? That was rather out of leftfield to me and a tad worrying. Have we ran out of money again?

quakersam - 24th March 2012 17:42:50

I think it's more to the fact that this can't keep lingering on. He's needs something to be agreed and signed for it to have any viability of moving forwards, as without Raj agreeing we can't do anything.
Remember, Harvey's costs are also increasing for each day we use him so for the sake of the football club, it's either we get something sorted and move on or we call it a day, simple as that really

leedscol - 24th March 2012 18:54:42

Let's have it sorted out this week please one way or the other.
This uncertainty is driving me crazy and I know I'm not alone.

divas - 24th March 2012 19:46:29

DFC1883 need to start playing hardball with Raj, if the club folds he'll get zero. The land deal will be done eventually meaning S&S will get their money and DFC will reform.

3BlackHoops - 24th March 2012 21:20:51

LoidLucan wrote:
Given the bad publicity surrounding the Trust, what do you think the response would be if they issued a rallying cry: "Here we go, who's with us?"


There's only one thing the Trust can do to gain OUR trust now. Both we and they know what this is.

Question is, are they with US?

Only time will tell.

DL_Fourteen - 25th March 2012 03:41:36

divas wrote:
DFC1883 need to start playing hardball with Raj, if the club folds he'll get zero. The land deal will be done eventually meaning S&S will get their money and DFC will reform.


I think we're gonna see another round of brinksmanship, something like 'Peugeot Day'. Raj is likelt to hold out for the best deal/protect his interests, so no harm in 1883 playing the game too. Like Divas says, this is hardly one-way traffic. If DFC folds, Raj gets nothing anyway (at least thats how I understand it). I'd love to be a fly on the wall during negotiations!

In many ways, apart from the stress of the uncertainty again... at least the Monday deadline will get us some short term publicity. Another stay of execution or 'Back from the Dead' moment might stir up some interest in shares again. It might even provoke talks between the Trust etc. Or it might be the end. Time will tell.

theoriginalfatcat - 25th March 2012 13:48:56

"Peugeot Day" never again.

Raj Singh stated (didn't he ?) that a not for profit community club was okay. He didn't want anyone else to profit from what he saw as his misfortune.

if this is what 1883 have put in place, then what's Mr Singh's problem ? Why the need for brinkmanship at all ?

theoriginalfatcat - 25th March 2012 13:58:32

"in a statement tonight, Mr Singh said: “I’ve simply asked for two conditions to be included in the CVA, which does not involve a new group paying a penny out of funds raised now or in
the future. "

I take this to mean that he wants a cut of the Arena/land sale, if it ever comes off. But it doesn't belong to him. I'm baffled.

I could be completely wrong about this but we don't get many facts in these released statements so we are forced to draw our own conclusions.

divas - 25th March 2012 14:05:02

As outlined in the other thread Singh clearly wants a cut of any sale of the arena that would come into the club to help it relocate.

He's been very careful with his wording all along. He's happy to write off the debt but he doesn't want the football club to come into money as a result of selling the stadium as that's clearly what he wanted to do but wasn't allowed. He's trying to protect against that by either stopping it or getting a share of it that will give him back some/most of the money he speculated on the football club whilst trying to reach the end game. The sooner clubs are not allowed to loan money from chairmen/directors and their associated companies the better.

Like I've said he has next to no cards to play. We do not own the arena so there's little that can be done unless the football club receives money from the sale. If it went to a third party i.e the council to build a community stadium I don't see what he can do.

theoriginalfatcat - 25th March 2012 14:17:52

You can't have your cake and eat it.

It seems Mr Singh wants it both ways.

Hilly - 25th March 2012 15:33:13

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
You can't have your cake and eat it.

It seems Mr Singh wants it both ways.

Unfortunately he holds the ace when it comes to DFC though.

loan_star - 25th March 2012 15:44:26

Not much of an ace is it! Play silly beggars and get nowt, let it go and get nowt. Either way he gets nowt! Only thing is if he lets go then he can still show his face in public without the stigma of having let a football club die.

Quakerz - 25th March 2012 15:47:13

divas wrote:
Like I've said he has next to no cards to play.


He may have next to no cards to play, but he's got the "kill club" card to play. People will agree to almost anything if they think the club is going to die. That is where he thinks he can possibly get something.

Ironically, if the club dies we lose our club but he loses any chance of getting a cut of a future Arena land deal.

If 1883 say they are not prepared to agree to clauses even on pain of death - his choices become 1 let the club survive and get nothing, 2 let the club die and get nothing.

Darlofan97 - 25th March 2012 16:02:05

This is such a risky operation. Do we agree to Raj's conditions and let him have a cut of the profits made from the stadium/land potentially leaving us stuck at the Arena for years on end before it becomes to much of a burden for us to handle?

Or do we decline his conditions and take a gamble on whether he's going to let the club live and walk away with nothing?

Quakerz - 25th March 2012 16:04:59

Sadly, I see no resolution to this that involves the club surviving in it's present state.

divas - 25th March 2012 16:54:06

Darlofan97 wrote:
This is such a risky operation. Do we agree to Raj's conditions and let him have a cut of the profits made from the stadium/land potentially leaving us stuck at the Arena for years on end before it becomes to much of a burden for us to handle?

Or do we decline his conditions and take a gamble on whether he's going to let the club live and walk away with nothing?


Sadly if we agree to his demands I think we're merely prolonging the inevitable. How long before people get pissed off at treading water in the BSN and we can't afford an increase in rental on the stadium when it inevitably comes.

The longer this goes on the more I think just end it.

Must say if we were guaranteed £3/4m from the sale of the arena to build a new ground and put together a warchest to play in NL1/2 and build the club up it's looking like a decent option.

DFC has too much baggage, and will continue to have if Raj's sanctions are agreed and S&S remain landlords

LoidLucan - 25th March 2012 17:13:10

It also seems that Raj's shadow continuing to hang over things is putting off business investment in a future community club. We can't move forward and it may be time to admit that if he continues to dig his heels in we just have to let it go and start afresh. Maybe this is the only realistic resolution, given Raj's stance. It's a daunting prospect starting from scratch deep down the pyramid but it could be that there is no other way forward.

To be honest I'm approaching the end of my tether with it all. All I want to do is watch my football team play football and to go there with a bit of a chance of winning some of those games. It seems a long time ago that it was all about watching a game of football and having some hope of achieving something. I'd just like to jettison all this s*** that's swirling round and get back to basics and start enjoying being a supporter of a football club again.

If that means starting again then so be it. We're getting nowhere down this current route.

ex-exile - 25th March 2012 17:20:38

Now can some people realise why some people will not put money into a new club until Raj Singh signs off a deal.Anybody who has been in buisness will unless they were very lucky will have come across people promising one thing and delivering the opposite.

theoriginalfatcat - 25th March 2012 19:42:03

I'm in a state of disbelief here. Is this really happening? Or are we message board users (keyboard warriors as some believe - but we could all be meeting in a pub) jumping the gun.

We've had press,the local MP, in fact nearly everyone you can care to name all saying stuff like "community club, all profits to go back in etc etc and don't worry it's all been agreed". Shares are bought and then it seems there could be dubious demands placed onto our non profit making club!

OUR NON PROFIT MAKING CLUB. THE ONE WE WERE LEAD TO BELIEVE WAS AGREED TO.

Got carried away a bit there, sorry :oops:

I'm disappointed that the press hounds don't do more digging. Come on guys, tell us what's happening.

Quakerz - 25th March 2012 21:27:53

Non profit making?

It's not a charity mate. The idea (probably ambitious) is to make profit, which will be ploughed back into the club.

theoriginalfatcat - 25th March 2012 22:41:47

Well yes, obviously Quakerz.

Any generated surplus money has to be reinvested back to the club.Meaning no single person could benefit from any possible windfall. Isn't this what we want ? Isn't this what Mr Singh wants ?

Mr Singh made out previously that he wanted the club to be self sufficient,and that he didn't want to profit personally. 1883 has been set up to accommodate this as it was the only avenue left open by his demands.

I could write so much more here....................................................................................................................................................... . But won't. :thumbdown: