mudflaps Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 I have always defended RF as he and Peterborough have been serially shafted by those in charge and also lost money. I am not surprised that he has walked away. What I cannot forgive is the way it has been done and the timing, virtually ensuring no Panthers next season even if a buyer could be found. From this point of view he is far worse than previous owners. They at least found a buyer before leaving Panthers in the lurch. Yes on the face of it I'm afraid I have to agree with you, there has to be more than this than we are being made aware of. It would appear (due to the timing of the announcement) to be that RF has pulled out of Speedway because of the outcome of the AGM rule changes. Maybe he thought most of his asset base would become redundant and worthless with the introduction of the new rules - effectively removing upton 20 foreign riders from our shores... Also I'd imagine he thought that the playing field was not level with regards to the dispersing the NL reserve riders amongst the Top tier teams... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackett Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 I would guess that the promotion were hoping that Sky Sports sponsorship would of taken the edge of the financial situation .. With that unlikely to be determined before the AGM I guess they counted there losses and walked away. Personally I would of done the same , with attendances of 770 and having to pay a rent to the EoS its a no win situation. Throw in the loss of Sky Sports money and main sponsor it pretty much a no brainer business wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midland Red Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 I would guess that the promotion were hoping that Sky Sports sponsorship would have taken the edge of the financial situation .. With that unlikely to be determined before the AGM I guess they counted their losses and walked away. Personally I would have done the same , with attendances of 770 and having to pay a rent to the EoS it's a no win situation. Throw in the loss of Sky Sports money and main sponsor it pretty much a no brainer business wise. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Humphrey Appleby Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) You can't suddenly change a system that has been 'working' for many years without a lot of fallout. Of course you can - it happened after Bosman. If a speedway rider went to court over restraint-of-trade, then it would probably be ruled illegal anyway, and that would be that. The speedway asset system has just become a merry-go-round of riders being loaned by one promoter to another promoter who in turns loans to another promoter. There are virtually no full transfers anymore because the system has become such a joke and there's no guarantee you can use a rider for more than a season. How many of the current promoters actually paid anything for their assets anyway? Some of the Sky money could have been allocated to a compensation scheme to phase out the asset system, but that's presumably all been squandered now. Maybe riders could be transferred to the BSPA who can charge loan fees until their original 'owners' are deemed to have received suitable compensation, but it's high time to knock this archaic nonsense on the head. Edited November 19, 2013 by Humphrey Appleby 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
houdi Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 HERE'S another hypothetical scenario ... You work in a local shop, which is rented by the owner of the business. One day he comes in and says he is closing it down, walks away leaving you out of work.. A few days later someone else rents the shop and offers you employment, which you accept. But then the previous owner demands a fee from the new owner for your employment. Surely, that in effect is the situation facing the current Peterborough riders? Not really a proper comparison though is it. Unless of course you are saying that previous shop owner had to originally 'buy' his employee for say £20,000 to work for him, as well as then paying him a wage. If it is wrong for Frost to seek to sell his assets, then it was wrong for him to have to originally buy those same riders in the first place. Typical of the muddled and inconsistent thinking that bedevils the sport. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Of course you can - it happened after Bosman. If a speedway rider went to court over restraint-of-trade, then it would probably be ruled illegal anyway, and that would be that.The speedway asset system has just become a merry-go-round of riders being loaned by one promoter to another promoter who in turns loans to another promoter. There are virtually no full transfers anymore because the system has become such a joke and there's no guarantee you can use a rider for more than a season. How many of the current promoters actually paid anything for their assets anyway?Some of the Sky money could have been allocated to a compensation scheme to phase out the asset system, but that's presumably all been squandered now. Maybe riders could be transferred to the BSPA who can charge loan fees until their original 'owners' are deemed to have received suitable compensation, but it's high time to knock this archaic nonsense on the head. Of course assuming that loan fees are actually paid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maneacat Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 I would guess that the promotion were hoping that Sky Sports sponsorship would of taken the edge of the financial situation .. With that unlikely to be determined before the AGM I guess they counted there losses and walked away. Personally I would of done the same , with attendances of 770 and having to pay a rent to the EoS its a no win situation. Throw in the loss of Sky Sports money and main sponsor it pretty much a no brainer business wise. Well thats how it looks on the face of it - but - our main sponsor "Readypower" IS Rick Frost's business and add that to his recent comments re losses and financing the club in the local press you can't help but think there is something else behind the decision not disclosed so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveLyric2 Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Maybe HMRC are taking a closer look at the accounts after 5 years of sponsorship/tax losses?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudflaps Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Well thats how it looks on the face of it - but - our main sponsor "Readypower" IS Rick Frost's business and add that to his recent comments re losses and financing the club in the local press you can't help but think there is something else behind the decision not disclosed so far. Indeed Angela! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spiegal Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 I would genuinely doubt that Rick Frost would contenance anything so stupid. He owns a HUGE very very profitable business, his sponsorship factors would be legitimate and legal. He is an honest and shrewd man. His disenchantment is more about internal Speedway factions and the way the "circus" decisions have been made with the resultant adverse effect it has had on his promotion. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 I would genuinely doubt that Rick Frost would contenance anything so stupid. He owns a HUGE very very profitable business, his sponsorship factors would be legitimate and legal. He is an honest and shrewd man. His disenchantment is more about internal Speedway factions and the way the "circus" decisions have been made with the resultant adverse effect it has had on his promotion. So where's the harm in saying that if it's true. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warren2 Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 So where's the harm in saying that if it's true. This is a good point IMO... The only statement so far published in the ET was from Julie, hopefully we will also get 1 at some point from Rick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimonB Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 C'mon Simon Throw ya cap into the ring, wont be the first time.Cost me far too much last time Semion, cant afford to do it again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Yes on the face of it I'm afraid I have to agree with you, there has to be more than this than we are being made aware of. It would appear (due to the timing of the announcement) to be that RF has pulled out of Speedway because of the outcome of the AGM rule changes. Maybe he thought most of his asset base would become redundant and worthless with the introduction of the new rules - effectively removing upton 20 foreign riders from our shores... Also I'd imagine he thought that the playing field was not level with regards to the dispersing the NL reserve riders amongst the Top tier teams... So why hide behind financial losses when you'd said a couple of weeks previously that that was irrelevant for one so wealthy. He's topped David Hawkins as it stands as Panthers most incompetent so I'd want to blow the gaff if it was me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semion Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Cost me far too much last time Semion, cant afford to do it again Yes, but that was several Years back now, you have had plenty of time to resurrect that bank balance for another crack at it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 outstanding venue, thrilling track, friendly fans, nice bar, amazing hog roast van. hope someone comes in to at least run NL a few times per year. You only need 40 tea bags and a kettle (bring your own mug) for NL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Antebellum Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 While I agree that one day, speedway will follow football (George Eastham, Bosman, etc) into a free market, at present the sale of a club is more or less as ever, that the "ownership" of rider-assets gets decided at the point of sale. Example: Glasgow was sold by one company to new ownership last winter. Since then, several riders have been transferred from Glasgow for actual money. However, although the fees paid by Workington and Edinburgh for Mason Campton and Mitchell Davey accrued to the "new" ownership, the money (eventually) coughed up by Swindon for Nick Morris went to the former owners. At present, I don't think anyone knows if the fee already paid/to be paid by Poole for Josh Grajczonek will be going to the old or new Glasgow promotion. However, all this does indicate a sale of Peterborough as a going concern with a guaranteed place in the Premier League for a new owner would carry with it the club's rider-assets, unless these were retained by Mr Frost, and the purchase price duly discounted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semion Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) If Frost has money to toss away, (100k x 5 Years), then as one P'boro fan has suggested its just small change to the guy, would he not just walk away and pass the Club on to someone else, and do that without taking a fee. After all its only more loose change he would have to worry about. Hows about a fans consortium taking it on ? Edited November 20, 2013 by semion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wealdstone Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Whilst I do not necessarily agree with the new format, arguably it will bring the costs down to a more affordable level which is presumably why Birmingham, Eastbourne Belle Vu, etc feel they can stay in. It would seem therefore that there is more to all this than meets the eye. If in any case if RF is so loaded why could he not keep the club going whilst trying to find a buyer? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluPanther Posted November 19, 2013 Report Share Posted November 19, 2013 Whilst I do not necessarily agree with the new format, arguably it will bring the costs down to a more affordable level which is presumably why Birmingham, Eastbourne Belle Vu, etc feel they can stay in. It would seem therefore that there is more to all this than meets the eye. If in any case if RF is so loaded why could he not keep the club going whilst trying to find a buyer? That's a point I have also made, he could have reduced costs by going Premier lge and ensuring speedway at the Showground, giving him more time to find a buyer. It feels like the captain of the ship has jumped off first.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.