• Hello Guest, You'll need to login or signup to be able to post on here.

JRFC Potential Ground Share rumour, speculation, hearsay

Interesting HMRC document. I must admit I have never heard of one company being made liable for the tax bill of another simply because it has done business with them though! I imagine that would only work in the direction of A pays B incl VAT, B fails to pay VAT to HMRC, HMRC claims VAT from A. In that case WAFC would be safe, as they would be in the position of B, receiving money from A (aka JRFC).

I will sadly confess that while I carry out a degree of diligence myself with any new clients, that only extends to checking their existence/legality on paper and whether they have a poor payment history elsewhere. WAFC appear to be doing just that, and with the former JRFC pass the test. It is then up to the supplier (WA) to decide how much of a risk the other company is and what preventative measures to put in place. Again, I would imagine cash up front would be the answer, and while we may question the ethics of not bothering where the money came from, this is sadly how most commercial operations function.
We do not have a right to impose a different moral code on them, merely to point to the dangers and raise legitimate doubts/questions. They then ignore the signs at their peril.
 
Interesting HMRC document, certainly thought provoking at the very least.
Personally I can't see HMRC necessarily making the effort to carry this through, but the Notice is there within the guidelines and they obviously have the powers there if they felt so disposed to do so. Not so sure I'd take the risk though, if I was in any doubt as to the provenance of the money involved here. Each to their own I guess.
 
I suppose it's a guide to cover businesses taking money from other businesses that don't pay taxes to pay their taxes.??? o_O
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tez
This VAT rule is to prevent Carousel fraud eg cycle trading of the same goods between firms and reclaiming VAT back over and again and can be a major fraud issue, It won't apply to any transaction between Witton and a ground rent so don't worry unduly, this could certainly end up bad for Vics ultimately but I cannot see how it ends badly for Witton if they fold or stop paying rent we are where we are as of today not in trouble but looking to enhance income, we are not in financial trouble to my knowledge as a shareholder. I think Alan Marshall sums the position up nicely without the obvious hate some have for Rushe ! we might not be dealing with him we can summise but we have not been party to the meetings or discussions. I will close off on this now because we are going round in circles by saying we have good and honest people on our board who I trust and who communicate to fans, volunteers and shareholders so we will leave it in there hands to deal responsibly with whichever club they choose to.
 
We are talking like it's a foregone conclusion that Vic's will be ground sharing with Witton from next season.

Short-sightedness on Witton's part if they choose the team who offer the highest amount per game without factoring in any of the other income streams - i.e. Bar and food takings as it will be like them playing a home game every week in terms of spectator spend.

Vic's have a massive amount of uncertainty around them on their ability to meet credit terms or pay anything on time where as 1874 are on a sound financial footing as i'm sure the accounts will reinforce when released.

If 1874 ground share with Witton then it will be for at least 5 years as we have no ground of our own in place or around the corner (in time terms), they will get a team which is reliable (ask Winsford), the absolute polar opposite of Vic's in every sense.

We as fans are quite happy to stay at Winsford, although the better playing surface at WP would lend to the style of football we are trying to play, and if we move to WP then I believe Witton's time as the 'biggest' club in town based on gates and fan numbers would be numbered which is what I think you and many other Wittoners would fear the most as gates haven't really increased as you may have hoped with the demise of NVFC and the emergence of 1874.

I am sure any offer that was made by our board and Vic's would have been done with a confidentiality clause imposed so if you are aware of the rumoured figures then you or the person that told you hold a position of responsibility and that would imply a total lack of integrity.
 
Nik_s said:
We are talking like it's a foregone conclusion that Vic's will be ground sharing with Witton from next season.

Short-sightedness on Witton's part if they choose the team who offer the highest amount per game without factoring in any of the other income streams - i.e. Bar and food takings as it will be like them playing a home game every week in terms of spectator spend.

Vic's have a massive amount of uncertainty around them on their ability to meet credit terms or pay anything on time where as 1874 are on a sound financial footing as i'm sure the accounts will reinforce when released.

If 1874 ground share with Witton then it will be for at least 5 years as we have no ground of our own in place or around the corner (in time terms), they will get a team which is reliable (ask Winsford), the absolute polar opposite of Vic's in every sense.

We as fans are quite happy to stay at Winsford, although the better playing surface at WP would lend to the style of football we are trying to play, and if we move to WP then I believe Witton's time as the 'biggest' club in town based on gates and fan numbers would be numbered which is what I think you and many other Wittoners would fear the most as gates haven't really increased as you may have hoped with the demise of NVFC and the emergence of 1874.

I am sure any offer that was made by our board and Vic's would have been done with a confidentiality clause imposed so if you are aware of the rumoured figures then you or the person that told you hold a position of responsibility and that would imply a total lack of integrity.
Click to expand...
 
Nik_s said:
We are talking like it's a foregone conclusion that Vic's will be ground sharing with Witton from next season.

Short-sightedness on Witton's part if they choose the team who offer the highest amount per game without factoring in any of the other income streams - i.e. Bar and food takings as it will be like them playing a home game every week in terms of spectator spend.

Vic's have a massive amount of uncertainty around them on their ability to meet credit terms or pay anything on time where as 1874 are on a sound financial footing as i'm sure the accounts will reinforce when released.

If 1874 ground share with Witton then it will be for at least 5 years as we have no ground of our own in place or around the corner (in time terms), they will get a team which is reliable (ask Winsford), the absolute polar opposite of Vic's in every sense.

We as fans are quite happy to stay at Winsford, although the better playing surface at WP would lend to the style of football we are trying to play, and if we move to WP then I believe Witton's time as the 'biggest' club in town based on gates and fan numbers would be numbered which is what I think you and many other Wittoners would fear the most as gates haven't really increased as you may have hoped with the demise of NVFC and the emergence of 1874.

I am sure any offer that was made by our board and Vic's would have been done with a confidentiality clause imposed so if you are aware of the rumoured figures then you or the person that told you hold a position of responsibility and that would imply a total lack of integrity.
Click to expand...

Nail on head. The ground share with Vics may not even happen and it could all be complete hearsay (which is the point I've been trying to make since my first post, obviously not very well!)
 
Local football politics has got more interesting with the prospect of Vics coming back to town? Looking ahead there could be a very interesting few years ahead.

I'm genuinely surprised that Witton haven't benefitted more, if at all, from the goings on at Vics and being the only senior club in the town. To find them so desperate for money is also unexpected given their promotion and record of sound financial dealings over recent years.
I'm also surprised that Vics have survived so long but given their reputation and previous business record I still don't see a long term future for them. However, they (he) obviously thinks he can pay the rent at WP and we look to have them back!
I'm more pleasantly surprised at the success of '74'. I never doubted the club would survive but the level of support and success on and off the pitch has far exceeded my expectations.

So what are the possibilities and implications for the 3 of us?

Reasonably clear picture for Vics. They hope the crowds will return and Rushe's ambition to own somewhere local will survive. They are bound to get an increase in gates initially if only for curiosity value but where do they get the crowds from in the longer term? They would need far better publicity and marketing than JR has previously demonstrated to get new faces in. They are in the NPL with a chance of promotion and some higher profile games but at the moment it can last only as long as Rushe lasts. When he goes the club goes. However, it is buying them time, they still have the name and they will be local again.

A more uncertain picture for Witton. Having had several years of taking the moral high ground with sound planning and management and a short spell as the only club in town they seem to have failed to capitalise on it. Probably also suffering from the fears all local fans had about moving out to Wincham. WP or VS - it was never going to be an easy place to attract people to other than for the match so other revenue streams are limited. A tenant is a financial bonus for them but whether it is a 'good' deal or just a bit of a 'side income' probably depends on how much is gained from bar sales etc over and above rent. Their ace card is they do own their ground and so have an asset to fall back on, the threat is what happens if debts continue to build up? An immediate test is how gates hold up given their recent poor form.

Clear picture in the short term for '74'. Very much riding the crest of a wave both on and off the pitch. Enthusiasm, novelty value, promotion and very successful fund raising all wrapped up in a good reputation. I can't see many active '74' fans going back to Vics but what about the missing 2-300 from 5 years ago - where are they now? Even acquiring a basic ground of our own is going to be a slow business and we could outgrow Winsford very quickly at this rate. Do we spend our money on someone else's ground to fulfill promotion criteria if that is necessary or do we risk stagnating as the ceiling of promotion has been reached? There will be competition from 2 other Northwich clubs for both the new and the missing support and sponsorship. We need to up our publicity and our profile - I have talked to several football supporters of other clubs and they are totally unaware that both '74' and Vics exist separately let alone why!

It is likely that Witton will need a 'partner/tenant' in the long term to bring in essential cash. That can only be '74' or Vics. If it's 74 they have the advantage of a financially sound tenant who will significantly boost their bar sales etc but in the long term will aim to move out on their own. In the short term they have Vics with a bigger rent but if the finances don't improve then there is an opportunity for Rushe to 'buy' his way in. Unthinkable at the moment to their fans - but what will be their attitude when to bailiffs are at the door? It's how Connett got into Vics.

Interesting topic to discuss further on here?
 
Just to clear up a point Raised I do not know any figures - only that Vics offer is substantially better so no breaking of confidentiality that I'm are of. One of the reasons Witton have not prospered over The last 2 seasons is that we have been pretty poor on the pitch and that has hurt us. 1874 have been on the crest of a wave due to being newly formed and doing well on the pitch I too do not think many If any of your fans will watch Vics, but you would clearly do better as a club at Wincham Park so would be a threat in the longer term but would be better tenants , I guess we will have to leave it to the boards to sort out and be absolutely clear it is not hearsay something will happen.
 
Certainly never a dull moment when JR's around. Personally think he went wrong when he traded the oil fields for the football field.
 
Sorry C.J but I don't understand when 1874 made this offer,was it recently or before we went to Winsford?.
 
C.J said:
Just to clear up a point Raised I do not know any figures - only that Vics offer is substantially better so no breaking of confidentiality that I'm are of
Click to expand...
The fact that '74' has even made an offer and that it is also lower than someone else's is a breach of confidence. Be careful - your club has built a good reputation over recent years and suddenly Rushe is on the scene and info is being leaked. Unprofessional business dealings and Rushe go hand in hand - people may start to draw conclusions.
 
The official Witton statement was to clear up speculation about a ground share and confirmed in the "recent months" so I guess after your move to Winsford, it had talked to more than 1 club about a groundsharing deal but would confirm details when and if it gets an approval from the premier league, they have released nothing officially about who was in discussion or what was offered, however The topic is obviously a hot topic in the town and the "details" are coming out in many conversations but I hasten to add not from officials, so ask yourself who is likely to be interested, all discussions point to 1874 and Vics and one other party who are now out of thepicture and the common story ( and it may not be true) is that it will if it happens next season be with Vics for the reasons stated. I personally believe the stories but it could be chinese whispers, so lets leave it now to the clubs to release something more then it will be official, my reason for being on here were really to understand whether you would like to move to WP and if the finance issue had been raised to consider the option but I guess not.
 
Personally I don't see why we are bothered with circumstances out of our control. Lets focus on OUR club & let others play their game. Remember why we are here & where we want to be. The futures bright the futures 74.
 
The penny will drop when the bailiffs start knocking at the door, that's if Rushe changes the club address from 16 Berry Lane, Longridge, Preston but no matter once the news gets around they'll be regular visits.
I bet letters are still being addressed and delivered to the VS and the derelict shop in town....lol
 
Last edited:
So in other words C.J what you said in other post's is just you guessing and putting two and two together and making five.I believe since we moved to Winsford we have made no approach to Witton.So I suggest you get your facts right before you make statements.
 
As much as I can understand the need for Witton to think about their own financial future going forward, I would strongly urge them to consider any ground deal with a club of the well-documented reputation of NVFC.

In the past, Witton fans have been quick to condemn the business practices of NVFC and condemned the same club for the way they treated them during their last ground share, yet now some appear to be considering the possibility of getting into bed with them.

I personally find that to be hypocrisy of the highest order.
 
I know that we had originally agreed a 2 year deal with Winsford with the possibility of extending it to 3.
With that in mind it's not beyond the realms of possibility that we may have tabled an offer to Witton for next year as the ground situation, if you are a tenant needs to be submitted and approved well in advance of the leagues start date.
If I remember correctly, I'm sure Vic's got in hot water for this at some point under JR's reign.
We would need confirmation of a lease, be it at Winsford or at Witton to meet league regulations so it would be prudent for the board to be in discussions with potential landlords at this stage (which it seems like they are).
I trust them to make the right decision, much like they did when opting for Winsford in the first instance.
Sharing with Witton would come at an extra cost due to the facilities and maintenance of the ground to them. Just whether or not the benefits outweigh the negatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top