TOPIC: CUOSC Statement - Tues 29th March

Statement from CUOSC
March 29, 2025


Plan for local investment in CUFC
The CUOSC Board wrote to Andrew Jenkins last week to attempt to find a way forward. We firmly believe the time is right to bring in new investment and fresh faces to the club and to put in place a plan to stabilise the club's finances and aim for sustainability. It is vitally important that we remove our reliance on individuals like Andrew in the years to come. The club's business 'model' is clearly 'broken' and in need of repair and re-structure.

Whilst we, along with our business partners are willing to be patient, it is imperative to progress these plans as the club's short-term improvement in finances is only likely to last one season. We are still awaiting news on the underlying performance of the club's finances for this term. Last year's figures saw a loss of over £600,000 - another loss like that would gobble up a large portion of the club's cup run and transfer windfalls.

The letter highlighted three key areas we need to look at:


1. Current Supporters/Local Business Consortium Proposal

The club's owners have stated many times that they believe in 'local control' which involves keeping the club in local hands. The proposal put forward by Andrew Lapping last year provided for this but was rejected. The current proposals, although different in some ways to the Lapping plans, are another attempt to keep the club in local hands.

We believed there was some misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the terms of the proposal, particularly in regard to what was on offer to repay existing debts. A meeting with Andrew Jenkins would address this and re-state our intentions when it comes to clearing and re-structuring debt.

CUOSC recognises the outstanding role Andrew has filled over 50 years and the chance to re-state the details behind the proposal would allow us to demonstrate how we can maintain the 'local control' over Carlisle United whilst removing the huge financial burden the club's significant financial needs have placed on Andrew and his family business.


2. Potential Overseas Investor

CUOSC feel it is necessary, indeed imperative, to finally 'move on' from this overseas investor. Over 10 months have elapsed since news first broke of apparently significant overseas interest. In the meantime there has been no firm proposal put to the club of which we are aware, and contact with the investor himself has been minimal to non-existent. It was made clear to us that while the door was apparently still 'open' to this source of investment, provision was being made for local investors to come in, too. The amounts being mentioned were not significantly different to those proposed by the current CUOSC/Local Business plan. Indeed, there was a chance the amounts raised would fall well below the figure we feel we can achieve with the current proposals. We have suggested to Andrew that it is time to draw a line in the sand under this particular avenue and focus instead on a 100% 'local' solution.


3. CUFC Holdings Board

As part of a planned re-structure of the football club, we were promised a seat on the club's Holdings board at the start of this season. The re-structure has only partially been carried out, but we have once again requested the opportunity to take our place on this board. The plans outlined to us called on Holdings to act as a strategic board, meeting about 2 or 3 times a season and with responsibility for such areas as management recruitment, transfer budgets and long-term financial planning.

We are requesting a meeting with Andrew with a view to getting the proposals back on the agenda as we have no reason to think that the club's future prosperity is going to be assured with the current model in place. We have lost close to £2m in recent seasons and as things stand, one-off cup and transfer windfalls are only going to provide temporary respite. With the current situation being one of relative stability, we believe this is the best time to bring in investment. To wait until we are in deep water again would be folly. We are determined to make sure the club is stable and has a platform for future success.




Contact details:
Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Phone 07999 737390
Web: www.cuosc.org.uk
Facebook www.facebook.com/Cuosc2015
Twitter @cuosc

Andrew puts letter in the bin.

The end.

More like -

Nixon reads and throws letter in the round filing cabinet

"What was that?" asks Jenkins

"Oh - nothing. More sherry Andrew?" replies Nixon

Those boys i/c don't give a f@ck about our Club, they prove it in so many ways that it's embarrassing to the supporters and the good people of Carlisle and district.

The proposal is sound, whilst we can take the Club forward let those with the belief, the ideas and the cash do it.

In fact' it's so simple it'll never happen until they can no longer get away with abusing their positions of power. Billionaire my arse!

If any of the proposals has the slightest wiff of any of the old guard from the Trust being involved, I would also put the offer straight in the bin.....end of.

As I said repeatedly at the last Trust forum a few weeks ago, why on earth should I be putting money in to a supporter cash raising scheme by the Trust to pay off some of the debt owed to Jenkins, a man who is a millionaire and is responsible for some of that debt in the first place?

thetashkentterror wrote:
You got that slightly wrong Tashy.

You'd be paying into a cash raising scheme by the Trust to pay off their Chair's vanity loan. Once that's paid off, you'd then be paying for AJ's mismanagement loan.

Double the pleasure!!

thetashkentterror wrote:
There are 2 options, or a 'somewhere in between' approach. If CUOSC fail to raise a single penny then their shareholding will be diluted to 10%.

If CUOSC raise 500k, then their shareholding will remain the same as it currently is.

If CUOSC raise somewhere in between, then the shareholding will be diluted accordingly. Your contribution would go towards ensuring that CUOSC retain the existing shareholding.

Armo wrote:
Not correct Armo. Absolutely 0% of any funds raised as part of the 500k would go towards paying off Norman Steel's loan. If you contributed £10/100/1000, the FULL amount would go into the Newco.

And presumably if that's the case then Steel will retain his seat on the board which he bought with his loan.

cufcdeano wrote:
Should contact Mike Ashley. He likes investing in NEWCOs

Armo - I thought I saw a topic on here for my (or more CUOSC's) attention earlier, but can't find it now.

The questions weren't put to AJ/JN at that time. Although the answers had been drafted, it was around the time that the CUOSC/business consortium proposal was being put on the table, and it was decided that it could jeapordise attempts to get talks under way. Since then, and as you've seen from today's statement, questions have been put to Andrew Jenkins.

cufcdeano wrote:
Perhaps as part of this 500k - does the same hold for any other fundraising?

cufcdeano wrote:
I must be confused, I thought the purpose of the Trust was to represent the community?

If that was the case, they should of been submitting the questions and bugger political expediency.

Arragorn wrote:
Norman Steel is up for re-election to the board this Summer. My understanding is that Norman is looking to step down from the role as Chair.I was asked at a recent board meeting if I had any intention of standing for Chair - I couldn't answer because it's not something I'd really considered, and it's something that definitely needs serious thought. I work full time, have a wife and a young daughter. I guess what I'm saying is that if somebody with the time/dedication and commitment wanted to take the role on, then it's there. The CUOSC board elect the Chair after each AGM - Norman's loan has no effect on that - you'll just have to take my word on that.

Armo wrote:
You must have been confused for a long time Armo.

Armo wrote:
There's never been (for a long time anyway!) other forms of fundraising, other than the Floodlights last year as part of CUSG - 0% of those funds raised went to paying off the loan either. I understand that small amounts of Norman's loan are paid off from time to time. There's no contract / repayment schedule that I'm aware of, and he's certainly making no demands.

Dancingbear wrote:
Let me qualify that......

"The *stated* purpose of the Trust.........."

Yeah i knew what you meant Armo. Im still awaiting the statement from them saying were sorry for playing a part in causing the most successful owner the club has had for over 30 years to sell the club for a quid apiece to the current owners. Dont suspect thatll ever happen though.

CCU wrote:
Hope jenkins does the right thing for a change and tells cuosc to f**k off the trust in all but name running the club .

No thanks .

My thoughts exactly Alan as posted above. Its their fault weve got the current owners in the first place.

Some of the money raised will go into paying debt off, that was said at the forum/meeting.

Every time I asked about this it went round in circles with no clear or proper answer given.

I don't completely agree there Tashy, Robin Brown stated that investment monies would not pay off legacy debt and seemed to suggest that repayments would only take place during seasons where a surplus had become available. To me this is the reason that the tossers knocked the idea back. Jenkins wants his money back. In full, no ifs and no buts. Neither of the recent plans have gone close to offering that in any way shape or form.

I was certain he did say it would pay off some existing debt, hence why I asked about it.

But, that says a lot, when they can't explain it properly to people who are interested, then good luck explaining to it to people who aren't

The whole thing is a very sorry state of affairs all round.

Fred Story was the bad guy apparently yet he waived a huge loan, which says something about others.

The trust really are a toothless organisation. Is this the best they can muster after years of appalling failure by the current board? A polite letter which, as has already been mentioned, will most probably end up in the bin.

The fans rep has already been in and asked the questions for which the answers have already appeared in the local press. Meanwhile the trust have only just submitted their weak effort, on paper not in person, and we're meant to be impressed! Too little too late.

The board treat the trust with utter contempt and the trust simply let them get away with it. You've tried the softly softly approach for a couple of years now which blatantly hasn't worked, how about finally growing a set of balls and try fighting back for once. You never know you might get somewhere!

I do share your frustration! Whatever folk think of the trust, the input and influence of younger, successful modern businessmen is what we need, the trust would just be making up numbers in reality.. A rich benefactor as the tossers have suggested is not what I see as the way forward. They suggest Fred was in this category ? It's actually a fact that he said he would NOT be bankrolling the club, he wanted to make it pay for itself. Yes he refinanced the loan FGB took out but he wiped that out to ease the Lapping plan through. He never threw his cash a the job yet we were moving forward until ........... well...... we all know what happenned next!! And who the main protagonists were!!

Absolutely pasty. I've said many times that a rich benefactor isn't the way to go, it's happened time and again in the lower and non leagues and more times than not its ended in bankruptcy, administration or liquidation. Carlisle as a football club are more than capable, especially at this level, of being self sufficient but this requires it to be in the right hands. Financial results over the last 3 years show that it blatantly isn't at present.

What happens when Jenkins kicks the bucket? Will his family want the money owing? Will Pioneer write it off? I feel he gets a lot less stick than he should,because of his age. How many other companies let an 80 odd year old man be in charge of finances?

Still no idea why the businessmen would want to be tied up with such a discredited and dislked "fans organisation". Just look at the comments on here.
Go direct lads, and offer the Trust the same conditions they are being given now.
Proper businessmen will be able to make the deal work for the long term, however unpalatble some of the conditions may be. The thought of the Trust negotiating a deal with the future of the club at stake is somewhat scary to say the least. They admit they can't even get AJ to understand what the offer is!

How many of the cuosc board have you actually met, or spoken to CarlisleWhite?

Haven't heard much criticism of the board from the trust since it was formed. I joined then full of hope and enthusiasm. Often wondered why the trust has been so muted over the years. Are the people at the very top of the trust Freemasons?

franksidebottom wrote:
Football isn't like any other business.

On paper at least it is possible to run a club like ours self-sufficiently but it isn't going to satisfy most fans' expectations. I don't want to be watching league two football for long.

Even if you got promoted, sooner or later things would take a turn for the worse on the pitch. The fans desert. That's when you need an owner with deep pockets who can buy a player or two that income from gates of 4K won't allow you to.

Clubs like Brentford and Bournemouth have had serious cash behind them to move up the leagues. We need someone who can buy a striker when we're 5th in March so we end up 3rd.

We need new owners with a good business plan and a willingness to put cash in that can make a difference.

As someone who detests committees, I have a feeling that the trust has been strangling itself since it started, the very thing I hate about committees. It's record on communication is frankly, abysmal! It's visibility, well, practically invisible. The whole debacle with Fred Story tarred it badly for ever more with many fans. Just like the club board, it too needs radical change, this has been promised but in reality has yet to materialise.

The Archer wrote:
I get your points archer but for every Bournemouth there's probably a Portsmouth. IMO this is very ying and yang. many clubs have had their sugar daddy but it's still all ended badly. Bolton wanderers for instance, a rise to the prem, money ploughed in, then a decline, massive debts and look where they're heading. Personally I'd rather see local ownership with some business acumen and innovative ideas who can create a good business plan, to grow a modest but financially secure base.

Before the re-birth of the Trust as CUOSC and the Fans Rep position being created, it has been said by many, time and time again, the Trust must go !

Lapping's deal was almost palatable, as the Trust were degraded to 10%, he knew no serious investor would come on-board with a Trust owning any more than that. Fred wrights off a mill to allow for re-investment and the Trust Old Guard are still lurking, the same Trust (or CUOSC) that cannot agree with other ' lurkers ' on the ownership of a web-address !!

There will never be an accepted take-over or cash investment into CUFC if the Trust are involved, and I would fully support the three stooges against.

The Trust killed CUFC for a generation, they should suffer the same fate...soon !!!

Deano, stop putting your credibility on the line and using the words 'you'll just have to take my word on that' it means nothing. Instead, put your effort and energy into the reforms that are required - and start listening.

I have no idea who is on the board (apart from JM who Bruntonpasty said was on the board on here and you obvioulsy), although I did know most of the original members.
I make judgements on the actions of the Trust, and the actions are clear to see.
Their actions have not changed from the days of Mileson, and the latest statement about Jenkins not understanding the offer says it all.

The Archer wrote:
I agree here. He must be a f***ing clever bloke if he can buy a striker in march. Id definitely like someone to take over who could do that.

CarlisleWhite wrote:
Not sure where I said owt about who was on the board? No matter tho eh.

The best thing the trust could do is hand their shares back and totally disband. Complete waste of time.

Apologies if was not you.
It was where there was the picture of the Trust and the new investors, and JM was shown in the picture.

Most likely not me. I'm only a member by default, a ST holder.

CarlisleWhite wrote:
Not surprised at that. Jenkins struggled to understand who Fred had appointed as manager.

Due to the poor management of the current owners, who have failed to move with the times. Any future owner would need to put in a large initial investment in order to fund either a redevelopment of Brunton park which would have to be financed from his own pocket as we would not be able to loan any money to redevelop brunton park as it would be too much of a risky investment , or a new stadium which would also require a long process of sourcing finance etc.. All together this club needs a far larger initial investment of £2 million but its still better than nothing.

If there was ever a Blue Yonder, or a new ground it would not be funded by CUFC, who in their right mind would do that ?

New ground you say? hmmmmmmmmmmm