Statement by Momi

[black morse]

If nothing has happened on the sale front by the New Year then it would be possible to repay Momi's interest free loans with the money raised from the Chelsea game.

Which square would that leave us back to?

If Momi fails the test we certainly don't want him having a hold over the club with a loan, interest free or not. Let's face it, judging from recent years, we usually run at quite a large loss which in other clubs is covered by the owner. Jason is unlikely to fund it now so a debt to Momi, in those circumstances, is something we ought to try to do without. All these decisions will, of course, be made by our BoD's. So in answer to your question Marky it leaves us back at square one but the club will still be alive.

[KenH]

I could be totally wrong in this but it would appear that the Bond Group are going to have even more input than they do now by the possible appointment of 2 Directors.

I have always assumed that the Bond Group is in fact connected with Jason. So is it possible that he could still be lurking in the background having passed control of the financial aspects over to the 'new' owner(s).

Sounds to me as though it's a case of shuffling the chairs to fit the problem........but the problem has and could well be going forward still Jason......so nothing in effect could change as the Bond Group have and will be the financiers of our club.

Bond Group IS Jason. He's the sole director of it.

[redrobo]

I could be totally wrong in this but it would appear that the Bond Group are going to have even more input than they do now by the possible appointment of 2 Directors.

I have always assumed that the Bond Group is in fact connected with Jason. So is it possible that he could still be lurking in the background having passed control of the financial aspects over to the 'new' owner(s).

Sounds to me as though it's a case of shuffling the chairs to fit the problem........but the problem has and could well be going forward still Jason......so nothing in effect could change as the Bond Group have and will be the financiers of our club.

Bond Group IS Jason. He's the sole director of it.

Thought as much.

This saga looks far from being resolved and is very worrying that Jason might now have a seat on our BoDs.

My initial enthusiasm is now one of deep suspicion and I can't see this entire saga coming to a meaningful conclusion.

Shuffling the deck chairs but NOT their occupants.

[jbc.shrimp]

If nothing has happened on the sale front by the New Year then it would be possible to repay Momi's interest free loans with the money raised from the Chelsea game.

Which square would that leave us back to?

If Momi fails the test we certainly don't want him having a hold over the club with a loan, interest free or not. Let's face it, judging from recent years, we usually run at quite a large loss which in other clubs is covered by the owner. Jason is unlikely to fund it now so a debt to Momi, in those circumstances, is something we ought to try to do without. All these decisions will, of course, be made by our BoD's. So in answer to your question Marky it leaves us back at square one but the club will still be alive.

If the efl have a rule for an owner to keep the club funded, how can Bond get away with witholding funds and letting somebody else do their job. Surely the efl should be looking at this.

[black morse]

If nothing has happened on the sale front by the New Year then it would be possible to repay Momi's interest free loans with the money raised from the Chelsea game.

If Momi fails the test we certainly don't want him having a hold over the club with a loan, interest free or not. Let's face it, judging from recent years, we usually run at quite a large loss which in other clubs is covered by the owner. Jason is unlikely to fund it now so a debt to Momi, in those circumstances, is something we ought to try to do without. All these decisions will, of course, be made by our BoD's. So in answer to your question Marky it leaves us back at square one but the club will still be alive.

If the efl have a rule for an owner to keep the club funded, how can Bond get away with witholding funds and letting somebody else do their job. Surely the efl should be looking at this.[/quote]

I might be wrong but I think the funding requirements refers to proposed new owner being able to show, for the EFL owners test, that they have enough money to be able to fund the club for two years. The EFL have no powers to actually make the owners fund the club once they own it. That would be a very contentious legal position. What are they going to do if owners refuse? Take the ownership off them?

[Phoenix Shrimp 2017]

Show us the money Momi. Or should it be show us the Momi money?

[Keith]

The EFL have no powers to actually make the owners fund the club once they own it. That would be a very contentious legal position. What are they going to do if owners refuse? Take the ownership off them?

Which is why people shouldn't complain about the EFL, as their hands are tied. Hopefully, once a Football Regulator is in place, it will have real bite.

[Billy bodger]

The EFL have no powers to actually make the owners fund the club once they own it. That would be a very contentious legal position. What are they going to do if owners refuse? Take the ownership off them?

Which is why people shouldn't complain about the EFL, as their hands are tied. Hopefully, once a Football Regulator is in place, it will have real bite.

Do you really think a regulator should be able to tell an owner how they have to spend their money?

[John L]

Show us the money Momi. Or should it be show us the Momi money?

Sorry, just had a flashback there to the old Sugar Puffs adverts!

[Phoenix Shrimp 2017]

Show us the money Momi. Or should it be show us the Momi money?

Sorry, just had a flashback there to the old Sugar Puffs adverts!

Show me the honey mummy? Knew it came from somewhere but couldn’t place it till you mentioned that.

[John L]

You're welcome!

[Billy bodger]

Oh I miss Sugar Puffs, I’ve tried buying wheat puffs and coving them in honey and sugar it’s just not right, then you read the list of unhealthy products and it’s all a joke.

[jbc.shrimp]

One thing that keeps niggling me and it isn't answered in his statement......what's in it for him?

That's a question that could be asked of Peter McGuigan, the Bernard brothers, and Bond group. None of which had been local to Morecambe, and who were never going to make massive money out of a Conference - league 2 football club.

[captain sparkle]

That's a question that could be asked of Peter McGuigan, the Bernard brothers, and Bond group. None of which had been local to Morecambe, .

I always though McGuigan was born & bred on Harewood Avenue?
Or is that a different family altogether?

[Old Man Kensey]

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1A2bb9N3Yj/

Good to see the Trust working hard on our behalf.
Every fan should be a member.

[black morse]

[quote="Old Man Kensey"]https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1A2bb9N3Yj/

Good to see the Trust working hard on our behalf.
Every fan should be a member.[/quote]

I honestly can't see why they aren't at the cost of being one. Real value for money.

[Keith]

Do you really think a regulator should be able to tell an owner how they have to spend their money?

I think to a certain extent, that is what is being planned. They won't have the power to insist additional funds are ploughed into a club, but, for example, if the club is up for sale, and a 'fair and reasonable bid' is received, the Regulator can step in, and insist it is accepted. That would have solved our situation a long time ago. If an owner doesn't have the capital to run the club, and no plan as to how it will be raised, then they may be able to force them to put it up for sale. Basically, there will be much closer governance and the Regulator will have real powers. If it ever gets passed. The Premier League sides are firmly against it. Obviously, Starmer being invited into the Directors' Box at Arsenal was entirely coincidental.

[Billy bodger]

I’m not sure I see that working! football unfortunately is all about money and that sort of restriction and regulatory power will drive the people who buy clubs away.

It may in fact make things worse!! Club owners could well be in default all the time and a Club forever being under offer because of the regulators interpretation of the state of a Clubs finances.

I agree the current situation is not worth the paper the regulations are written on and I don’t know what will work, the balance that will be required to get it right is probably unattainable. I sincerely hope that doesn’t mean the changes will be in affective but we don’t want one s**t show replaced by another.

The devil will be in the detail and what we don’t want are the courts clogged up with court actions challenging the regulator. In the end it’s a business a should the business of football be different from other company law?

[Redalert1970]

Mr Momi is also a director of a company called Nexus Infosys

What I can see about this company is they are a Dell supplier around the Mumbai region of India

[Keith]

I’m not sure I see that working! football unfortunately is all about money and that sort of restriction and regulatory power will drive the people who buy clubs away.

I think that's exactly the point! It will drive away the people who we don't want buying clubs in the first place!

[black morse]

I’m not sure I see that working! football unfortunately is all about money and that sort of restriction and regulatory power will drive the people who buy clubs away.

I think that's exactly the point! It will drive away the people who we don't want buying clubs in the first place!

Sounds good to me