Potential Buyers

[Skillsy]

One other small thing, can we revert to Torquay United Football Club please? I've never seen the point of adding 'Association'.

[knightmaregull]

Disaster. Sounds like the same old characters are involved and they've just used the admin process to regulate the debts position, playing us all for fools along the way. The secrecy during the bid process and even now, indicates more of the same and we've lost an amazing opportunity to move towards fan control for the future.

[gullsgullsgulls]

One other small thing, can we revert to Torquay United Football Club please? I've never seen the point of adding 'Association'.

I agree with you, the “association” doesn’t sound right. Although legally speaking the club has been called that since 1921. Earliest companies house filing from 1952 shows the full club name.

[DerekDawkinsJnr]

I agree with you, the “association” doesn’t sound right. Although legally speaking the club has been called that since 1921. Earliest companies house filing from 1952 shows the full club name.

I have no problem with AFC, and the present companies house listing of the club has that as the official name.

I don't think it matters a great deal and not worthy of discussion. Folks will call it what they want, and some merch shows AFC and other shows FC. It doesn't mean one is right and the other isn't. They're both mutually acceptable.

[Taelee73]

So maybe not Edwards and not Warnock/TUST, but a local building company owner.
If so, if they have plenty of capital then either another Bristows or maybe a new start at being self sustainable.

[tufcjon]

Remember that in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century if you said football to anyone in Torquay they would assume you meant Rugby football - the more popular code locally. This was still just about the case when TUAFC was formed in 1921. Football notes in the Torquay Times would start with rugby notes, adding soccer or association notes at the end.

[numpte]

What on earth does George Edwards see in TUFC other than a big hole to sink more money into. Council position clear on the ground, fan position quite clear in being anti. That would have to be some spin job for him to take over and win anyone around anytime soon. Fans are fickle of course, put a winning team on the pitch.....

Will put my £500 aside for a few more years then.

[TommyGunn]

What on earth does George Edwards see in TUFC other than a big hole to sink more money into. Council position clear on the ground, fan position quite clear in being anti. That would have to be some spin job for him to take over and win anyone around anytime soon. Fans are fickle of course, put a winning team on the pitch.....

Will put my £500 aside for a few more years then.

I'm wondering if it means Osborne gets his money back as the debt is just transfered onwards to the next person????

[Dave_Pougher]

On the Torquay Talk forum there’s a suggestion that The Torbay Weekly posted that the Edwards, Hayman bid was the preferred bidders and that was then edited and removed. No great surprise and I do hope it’s wrong but saves me a journey for the last game of the season

I refuse to give my money to an individual that has overseen our demise.

[Owlgull]

On the Torquay Talk forum there’s a suggestion that The Torbay Weekly posted that the Edwards, Hayman bid was the preferred bidders and that was then edited and removed. No great surprise and I do hope it’s wrong but saves me a journey for the last game of the season

I refuse to give my money to an individual that has overseen our demise.

I heard that the Hayman bid was NOT the preferred bidder, but don’t know if this is true. Maybe it’s Pete Masters after all…..

Guess we’ll just have to wait and keep wondering

[TheYellowFromExeter]

I’ve heard that there are three firm bids. It looks increasingly likely that TUST is not the preferred bid. From what you’re saying Owlgull, it sounds like the Hayman bid is not the preferred bid either. This means that if there are three firm bids, this mystery third bid, who no one knows and no one has heard about is possibly the most likely to be the preferred bid. This also may be completely incorrect though.

[SuperNickyWroe]

I’ve heard that there are three firm bids. It looks increasingly likely that TUST is not the preferred bid. From what you’re saying Owlgull, it sounds like the Hayman bid is not the preferred bid either. This means that if there are three firm bids, this mystery third bid, who no one knows and no one has heard about is possibly the most likely to be the preferred bid. This also may be completely incorrect though.

Genius.

[RobinStubbsHero]

Wouldn't have thought it was TUST. For starters they haven't got the money to cover the bond to the League and show they can cover 12 months expenses. Secondly, the leaders of TUST can't keep their mouths shut despite signing confidentiality agreements. That will not sit well with the Administrators I'm sure.

[brucie]

The Torbay article did NOT name the Haymans as the preferred bidder, it just named hem as one of the bidders

[exilegull]

Wouldn't have thought it was TUST. For starters they haven't got the money to cover the bond to the League and show they can cover 12 months expenses. Secondly, the leaders of TUST can't keep their mouths shut despite signing confidentiality agreements. That will not sit well with the Administrators I'm sure.

Which confidentiality clauses do you think they might have broken? The sellers have no interest in restricting bidders from naming themselves as being in the process.