TOPIC: 259 Days

Posted: Thu 30 Apr 2025
CUFC Holdings directorship statement
Carlisle United Football Club can confirm that Steven Pattison resigned as a director of CUFC Holdings on 22 April 2015.

Mr Pattison retains his shareholding of CUFC Holdings.

Posted: Wed 06 May 2025
A statement on behalf of club chairman Andrew Jenkins
I would like to say thank you to Steven Pattison who has recently been asked to resign from the Holdings Company Board by people who don’t really know him.
Steven is a football person and first and foremost a Carlisle supporter and season ticket holder of CUFC.
Steven has carried out thousands of pounds in repairs around the ground over the years and is someone we depend on, after our annual inspection, to keep us safe at Brunton Park.
He played football and he and his company have sponsored the Carlisle Youth League for many years.
A few years ago Steven wrote off over £50,000 from the club accounts, for which we were very grateful.
Thank you for everything Steven, I know you will still carry out work around the ground, free of charge, and that it will not be the last we will see of you.

Andrew Jenkins (Chairman)

Posted: Tue 19 May 2025
Official club statement dated 19 May 2025
Carlisle United Football Club are pleased to announce they have received a prospective new investment offer from a second party which has expressed a genuine and firm interest in taking the club forward on a fresh financial basis.
This proposed investment is structured over a three to five year period as opposed to a one-off injection of funding.
The Club held lengthy discussions with their legal and financial advisers yesterday evening and it has subsequently been decided that current discussions about the Club's shareholding should be temporarily put on hold until this new offer is fully assessed.
Chairman Andrew Jenkins said: "It is our duty as directors to get the best possible deal for the long-term future of the Club. Therefore, it is essential that we take time to consider this latest development."
In the meantime, the recruitment of new players and retention of existing players is continuing and Keith Curle and his backroom team have been kept informed.
The Club remains committed to appointing a new Managing Director and a new Sales and Marketing Director but because of this new investment offer, the Club will temporarily put on hold planned appointments of all senior non-playing staff.

Posted: Thu 21 May 2025
Official club statement dated 21 May 2025
The next stage of talks between Carlisle United FC directors and the leader of a new party which has put forward a substantial investment proposal for the Club over a three to five year period will take place at a meeting within the next five to 10 days. This follows initial negotiations.
We will endeavour to keep our supporters and other interested parties informed about any major developments during these on-going negotiations, whilst respecting the wishes of the latest potential investors for their identity not to be revealed at this stage.
The Club also respects the position of the Trust and its right to negotiate its share percentage of the Club with future investors.
Meanwhile the Club hopes to proceed with the appointment of a new Sales & Marketing Director at the earliest opportunity, regardless of the outcome of the issue over the Club's investor group. The appointment of a Managing Director has been put on hold until potential new investors are in place and have the ability to input.
Club chairman Andrew Jenkins said: "We are looking forward to making further progress with the prospective new investors before the end of this month when we sit down with them face-to-face.
"We recognise that the issue of the Club's shareholding needs to be settled at the earliest opportunity. However, it is imperative that we choose the best option which will move the Club forward at this critical point in our history."

Posted: Tue 02 Jun 2025
Club statement dated 2 June 2025
Chairman Andrew Jenkins says the Club is continuing to make progress in its negotiations over a proposed new investment.
Further talks and communications have taken place on several occasions throughout the last fortnight between the potential investor's agent and directors of CUFC Holdings, which owns 93% of the Club.
Within that period, the Club has provided more detailed and specific information about its structure and about the operations in place at Brunton Park, as had been requested.
Both Mr Jenkins and the Club's Managing Director John Nixon have already spoken to the individual, who has asked for a confidentiality agreement during negotiations. They have also met his agent, who has been to Brunton Park for talks and whose associate has visited Brunton Park on a further two occasions.
A meeting with the potential investor is being scheduled to take place in the UK on the earliest possible date to fit in with his international business commitments once all the requested information has been examined.
Mr Jenkins said: "There is not a lot we can say at the present moment but we are endeavoring to keep our supporters informed as much as possible.
"We’ve had several contacts with the individual's agent this last fortnight over putting together a proposal and they have been seeking clarification on specific issues and requesting additional information.
"We are pleased with what both sides have done so far but these things take time and we remain in negotiations for what would be a substantial investment in the Club over a prolonged period of time, rather than a straight cash injection.
"Once this latest information has been worked through, the next step will be to try to arrange a meeting with the potential new investor himself. We are ready to do that. It is just a question of time and logistics for getting the two parties together."
Both Mr Jenkins and Mr Nixon are attending the Football League's AGM in Portugal tomorrow (WEDS) but he stressed that this would not restrict negotiations over the club's future investment.
Meanwhile, the appointment of a new Sales & Marketing Director is moving forward, with an appointment due to be made shortly.


Posted: Fri 17 Jul 2025
Club statement dated 17 July 2025
STATEMENT FROM ANDREW JENKINS, CHAIRMAN OF CUFC, ANNOUNCING THE TERMINATION OF THE SHAREHOLDING INVESTMENT PROPOSED BY A GROUP LED BY ANDREW LAPPING, WITH REASONS FOR DOING SO - AND ALSO DETAILING THE FIRST STAGE OF AN INTERNAL REORGANISATION OF THE CLUB.
The proposed investment of £1.26 million by a group led by Andrew Lapping has been terminated for the following reasons:

1 - Failure to agree heads of terms:
Heads of terms were drawn up in April this year after lengthy negotiations but several key areas remained incomplete despite specific requests from the club's lawyers for approval. These included there being:
* no evidence of a deposit of around 60% of the total investment into an Escrow Account (£800,000)
* failure to agree the make-up of the board should the £1.26 million not be realised
* removal of the club's request for an annual review of the major creditor status
* refusal to agree for a finance director to be appointed to the management board of the club

2 - The £1.26 million investment fell away under scrutiny:
After repeated written requests over many months, the club was eventually provided with a list of investors in May this year, with sums of money next to their individual names regarding the amount they were prepared to put up as part of the £1.26 million total investment. We were told not to contact them.
However, in a legitimate attempt to check the authenticity of the offer as part of our due diligence procedure, we made personal checks with three of the named investors and discovered that two of them who were listed to provide £250,000 each and another who was listed for £100,000 had actually only agreed to invest £100,00 in total between them.
With that information, the trio's total investment actually fell from £600,000 as laid out on the list to £100,000 in reality. Having checked only three of the 12 investors on the list, the £1.26 million total was already down by £500,000 to £760,000, casting serious doubts over whether the full investment could be made. This followed warnings we had received from our solicitor in April this year about increasing concerns over the financial commitment.

3 - Serious reservations over the business practices employed by Mr Lapping and/or associates with his group:
During negotiations stretching back to April 2014, the club has become aware of certain business practices used by Mr Lapping or associates of which it does not wish to be a part. Confidential matters involving the club and sometimes also the supporters' trust, including private emails and texts, have been allowed to enter the public domain.

INTERNAL RE-ORGANISATION OF THE CLUB:
A restructuring process is to be carried out within the football club, starting immediately and aimed to be completed as soon as possible. This will involve changes to both the upper level (holding company) and lower/operational level (day-to-day running), with the possibility of a new director being appointed to the former and a new, younger line-up for the latter.
The heart of the new board will consist of Suzanne Kidd (currently the club's finance controller who will become finance director), Phil King (the club's sales & marketing director) and a fans' representative to be chosen by the fans, after advertising and shortlisting, via a website vote for a one-year term.
It is anticipated that a new chairman will be appointed to succeed Andrew Jenkins and that John Nixon will only stay to help handle Football League and FA duties and to liaise with the first-team manager after stepping down from his position as MD and vacating his office by July 31 this year.
Hopefully these changes will come into force while investment talks continue with any other parties, including the current overseas interest.

When they said five to ten days they didn't specify earth days....it has been just a little over one Venusian day.

Armo wrote:
Loooooooooooooool! These c*nts are utter f*cking cancer as far as CUFC is concerned. They need driven out post-haste.


Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Makes you sick, doesn't it

If there had have been a billionaire investor , publicity wise , with the floods and all that has gone with it. It couldn't have been a better time to invest. This proves if any one had any doubts that it was all load of bullsh--t .

Perhaps they meant 5210 days .....

Don't worry, once we hit 300 days everyone will have forgotten all about it and then the club will be fine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The title of the thread will be out of date tomorrow.

I'll bet the Happy Two were glad the floods caused the AGM to be postponed as that would have been the first time they would have had to face the public, OK just shareholders, and been faced with having to respond to questions

And that was just the start of it all.

Do they still think there are people who believe them? Do they think most people have forgotten about it all? I really can't understand why they've never released some sort of statement saying the billionaire is no longer interested in making any investment and is looking at other opportunities. There are fans stupid enough to have swallowed that. Now they've really taken this too far to back down.

The problem for those of us on here who want real answers is that there are a lot more people who have been taken in, or just don't care. By that I mean the happy clappers who won't hear any doubt cast on the three of them. But I believe the questions which have been asked for months are valid, I'm sure nobody expects to be told everything that goes on at all levels of the club, but when there are some things this important there should be regular updates.

Still they've found their way out, they're hiding behind Claire.

I think the problem with any statement that the Billionaire has fallen through would mean that they would be forced to re-examine the Lapping deal (wasn't it just put on hiatus?).

I know AL has no stomach for this now but they would at least have to show willing which would make them squirm to fuckery and would be worth the admission price if you could.

I'm sure there was a statement from AJ slagging off AL but I can't seem to find it on the website. Did I imagine that?

Don't expect to see anything about the investment falling through until the end of May (the heat will be off for a few months) or at the end of ST sales for next year.

I guess you could call me a happy clapper, I went through the Knighton years and i'll buy a ST next year but that doesn't mean I don't want answers. What can I do, twine a bit on here, twine a bit to people on match days? Means [censored] all if i'll still be there.

Armo wrote: No the Lapping deal wasn't just put on hold, it was thrown out altogether. Exactly what they wanted to do from the start.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

I know it was essentially thrown out but the statements above never explicitly state that.

As I say, i'm sure there was a statement on the official website slating AL but I can't find it.

What I mean is, they'd have to go through the pretense of reexamining the AL deal.

Let me restate the position

After the treatment by the current Board,it would be inconceivable for me to work with any of them.I considered taking legal action for the defamatory remarks but opted against it because I would have ended up suing something I hold dear to my heart-the Club has been and will always be a huge part of my life.

I have moved on and got on with doing what I do best-buying into businesses that require money and/or restructuring advice.The 12 month adventure for me was costly in terms of legal costs and a massive deflection on my day job but I would like to think that the jolt I gave things has brought some good in terms of fan engagement and basic organisation.

I have no intention of getting involved with the current owners for the avoidance of doubt and am not involved in any other ongoing proposals.I remain a huge fan though I do find it difficult at times after what happened.

Those statements don't say that but there was a statement which explicitly stated that they were throwing the deal out.

Someone back me up here...

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Loser,

That's what I said, I thought there was a statement where they slated AL and threw the deal out but going through the old statements when I pulled the top post together, I couldn't find it.

Laffy,

That's totally understandable and nobody could blame you for one second. All I was getting at was the club, in perpetuating the Billionaire myth and from the statements above, would be forced to. It was more the thought of them having to squirm their way back that I found amusing. As I said, i'd pay to watch that.

For what it's worth, I actually joined the Trust again (which I never thought i'd do), purely to vote for your proposal. Whilst one vote makes bugger all difference, I couldn't, in clear conscience, twine if the result went the other way and not having done my part.

Think this was it...?

mobile.carlisleunited.co.uk//news/articl...#yFzyTCoC9LVRq9LO.99

I can't remember where the statement slating Andrew Lapping personally was, but I don't think it was the official club site, it was either in the paper or on the radio I think. It was very personal as well, and I remember being quite taken aback by it at the time. I could have understood if they'd just said that they thought the deal wasn't suitable for the club, but it mentioned dodgy business practices which was right out of order.

For me what started the whole thing was the statement on the club site about Steve Pattison. Once that had appeared there meaning it was an official club statement, not just one director's view of his mate, there was never any hope for Laffy's bid. However, that would have played badly in the media, just throwing it out completely, so what they had was the lie about an alternative investor interested, so they decided to elaborate on that, and the rest is history.

I like to think that if Laffy could have got at them personally, and without damaging the club, he'd have been able to shred them in the courts. Fortunately for all of us, he really did have the best interests of the club at heart (whether his deal was right or wrong for the club) and he didn't drag the club through the court, costing it a fortune (unlike the trust).

Norwich_Blue wrote:
I stand corrected, thanks Norwich.

Could you not sue the person(s) rather than the company? irrelevant i suppose.

Yes the club released a statement saying they didn't like Lappings business practices and confidential info got out into the public domain and for that reason they were throwing the deal out.

That came after the billionaire and pattison statements.

Perfect, cheers Norwich.

I've added it to the top.

Think the reason was that statement was in July whilst all the others where in May. I didn't go on that far.

As I say,I'm not interested in running a football club-my intention was to sort out the business as running a £500k pa cash loss is not sustainable.The fact that most other clubs in the lower leagues have the same issue is no defence either.

I'm just getting on with my life-never wanted the spotlight,celebrity,FL crap-this was about helping out as I was in a position to do so.Im happy sitting in the stand and shouting at the players without wondering if anyone was recording it!

No worries chaps, one more to add to the list:

mobile.carlisleunited.co.uk//news/articl...e-2015-2476897.aspx#

"A meeting with the potential investor is being scheduled to take place in the UK on the earliest possible date to fit in with his international business commitments once all the requested information has been examined."

I would of been shocked had anything actually happened in the past 259 days. Did anyone believe that it would be anything other than a Blue Yonder style delay tactic? Then after a couple of years people will be so tired of it all they'll stop caring and settle for the status quo.

Everyone knows they don't want to sell the club unless they line their own pockets in the process. That's never going to happen as nobody will pay them what they seem to want. So the club wont get sold or sorted until Jenkins dies/becomes so old his family take over his responsibilities. At which point - if they call in his various loans, the club may be in serious trouble. But the board don't care about this as long as they get their perks and titles.

Mr Jenkins said: "we are endeavoring to keep our supporters informed as much as possible."

Anybody else find that mildly amusing?

Norwich_Blue wrote:
ta, added

Moorlad wrote:
It does give rise to some feelings of which amusement is not even close

The saddest thing for me is that there looked at one point as though a protest might be starting. The banners at one home game (i forget who it was against), critisicsm on here and in the media etc.

In response the board does a bit of window dressing, appoints a few new faces and a fan rep to allow them to move into the background. Its the most obvious deflection job you can imagine. That has been enough for most of the discontent and any signs of protest to peter out. And yet nothing has actually changed since that game with the banners.

The fans rep was planned from the start of all this bollocks.

The only reason the protests petered was down to one reason and one reason alone - the team started winning, we got to 3rd/4th round in the cups and there was optimism about promotion.

If our play-off push fizzles then expect the protests to increase again.

Sad but true.

Blues86 wrote:
Yes mate, some people did, that is a massive part of the problem. Some people still think there's some white knight out there waiting to ride in when the going gets a bit tough. There are actually lots of them as well who believe it. Then there are also lots of people who actually don't give a shit about who runs the club, or how it's run as long as they get to watch a match at the weekend. There are also those that know they can do nothing about it so they keep quiet.

I think those of us on here who regularly have a go about this are in a small minority, that is why they can ride roughshod over everyone.

Armo wrote:
Agreed.

A cynical and opportunist ploy to pull the wool over the supporters eyes, and deflect criticism.

But it has worked perfectly for them.

It doesn't matter how pissed off people are, they can't do [censored] all about it.

The only effective thing that people can do is vote with their feet. I can't do that.

Anyway, they've won the lottery this season - a £1m sized bonus so i'm not even sure that would make any difference.

It certainly wouldn't Armo, people have been voting with their feet for years and they haven't been bothered. They've effectively halved the attendances and they're still telling people to "fuck off and don't come back" if they disagree with something.

Just what is the best way to get these c_nts out of our club!?

Mashie Niblick wrote:
There isn't a way. Say what you like about these "bumbling old fools" but they've played a blinder. Machiavelli would of been proud.

This will only come to a head when Mr Jenkins sadly passes on.

Laffy wrote:
Do you do hostile takeovers?

Then sell the shares to your original investors?

High Street wrote:
Theres nowt you can do if they won't sell

As I've said before Mr Jenkins is the person holding the aces in this business, a "hostile" takeover, as Laffy will tell you, is impossible. He can't be made to sell his shares unless he actually wants to. The shareholding is not the pertinent issue either it is the debt, the football club owes Mr Jenkins and his company close to £2m, and that is what gives him the ultimate control over the 2 companies. Anybody could buy up the shares owned by the trust, Nixon and Pattison in the holding company and still not have any control of the club because Jenkins holds the debt, and can call it in when he wants.

The problem he has is getting any sort of value now for the cash he's ploughed into the club over the past 4 years, that money is worth more than what his shareholding would normally be worth. His only option, I would suggest, for getting out (if he wanted to get out) would be some kind of debt write off, probably amounting to around half a million pounds. He's in luck this year, the player sales and the cup runs have given the club a large profit, not only that, but a lot of it is actual cash through the tills. So part of his loans can be paid off, allowing him to get closer to the value of the shares he holds.

There could well end up being enough profit this financial year (to 30 June 2025) to allow the three of them to hang on without any problems for another couple of years after this one, if they want to.

The other option was the one explored by Laffy's bid which was going to turn the loans into equity (shares) and then allow the holders of those shares to sell them to other investors over a period of time to get their cash out of the club.

Running out of money is the likely scenario unless the billionaire is real ah hem.This unfortunately leaves one in the rather difficult position of wishing for the worst to happen whilst still supporting the Club-not pleasant.

That guy Clem said something on the radio a few weeks ago which struck home with me-he was referring to the poor Blackpool fans who are staying away to force Oyston out in the knowledge that they really are true fans who only want the best for the Club-a truly difficult conflict in one's head.

Laffy wrote:
Tacit call for a boycott?

Moorlad wrote:
Not sure I fully agree with this. At 25.4% The Trust hold a few cards, the problem is not enough, however events change things. This year is potentially the best chance to get out of jail regarding debt repayment. In addition, there are two other share holders who's individual holding combined with the Trust is formidable. Never say never !!

No call for a boycott from me-I respect the owners of the shares are the stakeholders so entirely their decision to sell/stick.My gripe is about the aftermath and being called dubious,questioning my integrity,my so called non existent wealth and my ability to raise the cash.Thus far,I don't see many offering to back the current owners and status quo with hard cash

All history but not my finest hour I can tell you.

A boycott is futile and harms everyone so I would urge all to not go there.

Sorry silentone, but you are wrong. This business is all about cash. The shareholding is all very well, but the person who controls the debt controls the club, it is as simple as that.

Once again Moorlad,you and I agree-try spending that 'profit' on the FS loan in Tescos!!

It looks like we are stuck in limbo at the moment waiting for something to happen to Jenkins.
However they (Nixon and Jenkins) are beginning to become prisoners inside their own castle.

Seems they venture out if theres a 5live reporter knocking about though.

Edited for the tick tock

Did anyone see the survey in The Cumberland News?

Blues86 wrote:
Yeah and it costs them nowt either. Move two forward that already held positions and Claire gets paid [censored] all.

High Street wrote:
I don't live in Cumbria High St, what was in the Cumberland News?