John Paul Conroy

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@SalfordCityFC @camptechproduct Hakeeb Adulakun

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@Wozza742 @TJPgrey @dontmswithme @triggs14 @BFC8420 @TMS1885 Maybe you should be asking the Board why they are proposing to use members money to fund the 3g pitch rather than focussing on developing the relationship with the Benefactors so the Benefactors provide the balance if the funding.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@Anthony67864821 @kategiffard @SamHeath2019 The charge on the ground specifically prohibits a lease. This is a 3 way agreement between the DLUC, Benefactors and the Society. The Benefactors would need to agree to a lease before any lease can be put in place. They have objected to a lease.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@Wozza742 @SirCCodpiece @qwertyop80 Interesting comments by Matt Barker about why the Benefactors are reluctant to invest further at this stage. The relationship (if ever there was one) has clearly broken down. Being faced with a partner who just reads from pre written scripts and doesn't engage. Would you invest?

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@Wozza742 @SirCCodpiece @qwertyop80 The lease wasn't a requirement by the council under the 51/49 model.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@kategiffard @TMS1885 IMO the advisory vote Q3 is only there to put pressure on the Benefactors to agree to a long term lease (which they already know the Benefactors object to) and then may be used by the Board to claim that they have a mandate to engage in a legal case.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @RickLally @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial *lease

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @RickLally @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial FSSB appear to have created the need for a license by moving away from the 51/49 model organisation to the 100% fan owned model that currently exists.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@RickLally @dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial It's what is currently in place so I guess already agreed as acceptable by the DLUC.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial The wording of the charge is very different and more specific than the articles.

I guess we will just have to wait and see.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial The charge on the ground is a legally binding agreement between the DLUC, Benefactors and the Society. The Benefactors would need to agree to a change in this Agreement and also change their own Articles of Association before a lease could be out in place.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial The most important thing is that the Board and Benefactors reach an amicable way forward which will enable them to work together and pull in the same direction to maximise the benefit to Bury Football Club.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial I understood that the original concept proposed by the benefactors was for the directors of the companies to be a purely administrative role with all the decisions being taken by the FSSB Board. Committees under the Board responsible for delivering the Boards decisions.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial Different structure. Different response.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@dontmswithme @GT1490 @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial My take on this is that FSSB have proposed the 100% fan owned structure to the DLUC where it could be argued a lease is the preferred option. With the 51/49 model the owners of the football company and the ground company are the same so a lease would not be required.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@GT1490 @dontmswithme @kategiffard @sixnotrumps @GStansfield @shakerite66 @buryfcofficial @TMS1885 As far as I understand it a lease would be required under the 100% fan owned model structure we currently have but not under the 51/49 structure included within the merger proposal.

[John Paul Conroy @Johnpconroy1]

@Jonjo_32 @Wozza742 @TJPgrey @ulstershaker @TMS1885 @philyoungzero What promise did they make and when Jon?