TOPIC:

WAFC might be able to put together a deed of agreement for a long term loan.

But WPFC should have nothing to do with running the club , they should be run by league appointees and the former CEO should be held to account.

Greatwhiteshark wrote:

BC wrote: Of course the WAFC could just sit back and let the process take its course and if and when WPFC is wound up, issue a new licence to the Joondalup Falcons FC with no debts, a new board, a bit of cash from the WAFC to get going, strict overseeing by an independent panel initially and finally have a presence in Joondy attuned to the local community. I'm not saying that will happen or even if it should...but it could be an attractive prospect to Taylor and his mates.

Be interesting to see how many of the local community attend Joondalup matches without the West perth supporters? They wouldn't fill two rows of the stand up.

You could be right gws but how many Joondy locals support WPFC I wonder? Probably not many as there's no connection or history there for them unlike your good self....call the club Joondy Falcons and I would guess you'd get a whole new cohort of local residents attending games to support their club.

Bazza wrote: WAFC might be able to put together a deed of agreement for a long term loan.

But WPFC should have nothing to do with running the club , they should be run by league appointees and the former CEO should be held to account.

Rubbish, you just need to get better people. The WAFC can put a temporary person in their for a year or two but after that the club needs to be the club.

Bazza wrote: WAFC might be able to put together a deed of agreement for a long term loan.

But WPFC should have nothing to do with running the club , they should be run by league appointees and the former CEO should be held to account.

Secured by what? They don't have anything left and I wouldn't think the WAFC would take the risk given WP's recent financial performance.

Whatever happens here i think those responsible should be held to account to ensure others are discouraged from doing similar in the future.

Jjim wrote: Whatever happens here i think those responsible should be held to account to ensure others are discouraged from doing similar in the future.

The fundamental issue abt responsibility rests squarely with WP then the WAFC.

The Peel bail out was to sure up the error putting the club down there not due to mismanagement or financial misbehavior and that is a bitter pill to swallow but the fact remains that the circumstances are different.

Greatwhiteshark wrote:

Bazza wrote: WAFC might be able to put together a deed of agreement for a long term loan.

But WPFC should have nothing to do with running the club , they should be run by league appointees and the former CEO should be held to account.

Rubbish, you just need to get better people. The WAFC can put a temporary person in their for a year or two but after that the club needs to be the club.

Rubbish my arse, there is NO way they should be trusted to repay a 1 million gift without STRICT oversight,,this is the shared money of the WAFL NOT your mob.

BC wrote:

Bazza wrote: WAFC might be able to put together a deed of agreement for a long term loan.

But WPFC should have nothing to do with running the club , they should be run by league appointees and the former CEO should be held to account.

Secured by what? They don't have anything left and I wouldn't think the WAFC would take the risk given WP's recent financial performance.

True BC all they have is turnover - Which is why they shouldn't have anything to do with the running of it, it would have to be run on a tight budget and that means staff, player and over heads pay CUTS.

Grump wrote:

Jjim wrote: Whatever happens here i think those responsible should be held to account to ensure others are discouraged from doing similar in the future.

The fundamental issue abt responsibility rests squarely with WP then the WAFC.

The Peel bail out was to sure up the error putting the club down there not due to mismanagement or financial misbehavior and that is a bitter pill to swallow but the fact remains that the circumstances are different.

Spot on, the error of Peel rests fairly and squarely with the WAFL Clubs that voted for their entry.

Bazza wrote:

Greatwhiteshark wrote:

Bazza wrote: WAFC might be able to put together a deed of agreement for a long term loan.

But WPFC should have nothing to do with running the club , they should be run by league appointees and the former CEO should be held to account.

Rubbish, you just need to get better people. The WAFC can put a temporary person in their for a year or two but after that the club needs to be the club.

Rubbish my arse, there is NO way they should be trusted to repay a 1 million gift without STRICT oversight,,this is the shared money of the WAFL NOT your mob.

So basically you think they should let West Perth die.