TOPIC: Proof that our directors lied to us.

Some of you may know that a certain regular poster on this site, a chap who has been vilified by the owners of Carlisle United Football Club in the past, is a pretty astute and successful businessman. It might be common knowledge as well that Laffy is Managing director and co-founder of a company called Hamilton Capital Partners. Below is a report of a particular transaction from Propertyweek.com. The particular transaction was Laffy's initiative, and Hamilton Capital made the property purchase around 18 months ago for £10m, they have spent considerable time refurbishing the property at a, not inconsiderable, cost of £1.6m. At the start of this month they sold the property for £14.1m, that is a profit of £2.5m in a year and a half. I wonder how many piss pots he could buy for that.

I would suggest that this is further proof, if any were needed, that the pronouncements of our club's owners were not only nasty and false, but were made for the sole reason of clinging on to power at the club. I have been following a number of Laffy's business dealings over the last 9 months or so, and can assure you all, that this is not an isolated success achieved by dodgy practices, but this is actually typical of what he does.

PropertyWeek.com
Hamilton sells Glasgow office for £14.1m
3 February 2026 j By Andrew Don
Hamilton Capital Partners has sold the Ca’d’oro Building, in Glasgow, to a private overseas investor The sale price of the mixed—use building on the intersection of Gordon Street and Union Street in the city centre reflects a net initial yield of 6.5% to the purchaser.

The 1 872—built asset, provides 47,397 sq ft of offices and shops over basement, ground and four upper floors.
Tenants include law firm Harper Macleod, the Co—operative Group and Atos IT Services. The building has undergone a £1 .6m refurbishment since Hamilton acquired it from AXA in 201 3.

It was obvious Moorlad in that SP didn't like him and this turned the other directors against him very quickly. Like JN contacting the investors to see if they would invest without Laffy and into they plan is laughable but appalling.

Its why i wanted Laffy in as he is far successful than any of the present three. Moneywise and business wise and no doubt we could of progressed and been far more professional but it wasn't to be.

This isn't the only thing the 3 have lied about, they have consistently lied and JN got caught out numerous times the last time he was on radio. Thats probably why he doesn't go on so he doesn't slip up same for AJ where he communicates via the program. ridiculous.

£2.5m in 18 months. Ideas ripped off and the man rejected. Meanwhile our custodians hide behind programme notes to avoid answering questions. Shameful.

Laffy fan club thread 275, it's over, move on chaps.

We need reminding from time to time. Also worth pointing out how little respect the board have for the supporters.

Stinkyturner wrote:
It isn't over, and it won't be over until those three are removed. Their blatant lies need to be highlighted to everyone, as often as possible.

What I don't understand is why they don't just say "we aren't looking to sell the club, we are working towards it being self sufficient and believe we can bring success if everyone gets behind the team".

To keep up this line of looking for investment but knocking back every offer they get has turned the who thing into a charade.

Roll on the re-arranged AGM, whenever that is going to be. Then they will be compelled to talk about these issues. That's not say they won't lie of course, but it will be the first time they have had to face real people about these stories.

On what planet would our present owners bring success to the club and make it self sufficient. All they will bring is a continued slide into obscurity.

Come on Moorlad, time to crack-on. Laffy's deal is history, this board is getting tedious at times, but please no more ' I love Laffy threads please ' The most recent deal on offer needs wrestling along. it is unlikely to happen, but with the right PR and a favourable wind, who knows. You know as well as everyone the Three Musketeers are clueless when it comes to PR.

Get behind the latest local bid, the reason for rejection is self preservation, always easy to attack, let's see where it go's........

pacirv wrote: I'm not saying they would bring success, but they clearly aren't interested in selling, so why pretend they are?

I'm very interested to know why they would feel it was at all reasonable for them to publicly call into question the business practices of somebody who is quite a bit more successful than they are themselves, purely because he wanted to invest in the club. I'd particularly like to know why they thought that it might not backfire on them. They tell us that Laffy was dodgy and then they go on to invent a billionaire who was going to invest in the club, proving that they themselves were the dodgy ones. They claim that Laffy hadn't a pot to piss in, from my opening post that was quite clearly wrong, and then go on to almost bankrupt the club by not being able to invest further in the club themselves (they hit lucky with player sales and cup runs).

What are they going to do now? Well, it seems one of them is just going to string us along with even more crap in the programme notes for this weekend's game. This seriously has to stop, they have to come clean. We know they don't want to leave, for whatever reason, but they need to tell us that. They are just hiding behind any number of things now, and carrying on regardless. Their appointments of Claire and Phil and Suzanne are now clearly seen to be just for them to hide behind, purely to take the heat from themselves. These things were always going to come out, I hope some of it comes out in more public places than this, and soon. They really need to be shown up for what they are.

I have to agree, it is rather pointless inviting offers to buy, when you have no intention whatsoever of selling. Problem is, the word travels round the right circles, CUFC will become a poisoned chalice if they are not careful.

thesilentone wrote:
I am fully aware that deal is dead, but that is in absolutely no way the point I am making here. I don't even know if I was fully behind that bid anyway, although it would in all probability have been better than those three and a reliance on Jenkins alone. From what I've heard about the current bid it is almost a lighter version of what was previously on offer under Laffy. Like the cash without the ideas.

What I want is for them to just admit they were stringing us along. I know it won't happen though.

I've told you on another thread what to do with Jenkins notes turn to the directors box, Drop your britches, And shove the programme in the crack of your arse......

Boycott the programme.

Why don't we write our own programme, full of questions for them. And present it to them to read at the match on Saturday?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Moorlad wrote:
Thing is though, when the 3 finally do move on I can imagine some folk here will complain that it's not laffy in charge, and will likely hold some kind of candlelit vigil at the cathedral until laffy attempts to take over

thesilentone wrote:

Surely that's what they want, so they will have it become a poisoned chalice if they ARE careful

Laffy is successful in business but so you could argue are Jenkins and was Knighton, it doesn't mean Laffy's takeover would have taken us into a golden era!

It is a pity he used this Forum to trade insults with SP, and maybe the deal on the table wasn't enough for Jenkins after all the cash and time he has invested over the years. Like it or not it is AJ's perogative whether to sell the club or not and to whom.

Some on here should spend less time dreaming of a Laffy takeover and accept the three amigos are with us till death do us part

The Archer wrote:
I think you're choosing to miss the point Moorlad is making. They knocked Laffy back as they are entitled to do, it is their business and they can choose who they sell to as you point out but the point being made is, They didn't just say"we don't want to sell" or " we don't like this deal", they actually infered that Laffy was of dubious character and did not have the financial clout to do the deal which he quite obviously does. Had they gone about things in a more professional and dignified way rather than making up fantasy billionaires and insulting a bloke who was genuinely trying to help, they may still have some credibility.

Lets also remember, these are reluctant custodians who got control of the business for a pittance, effectively nothing. They have subsequently taken the business backwards and Andrew jenkins has had to bail the club out due to his and his co owners inability to run the show effectively.

Don't think it shows that they lied.
It does go some way to showing they were wrong though.

Unrepentant blue wrote:
If you don't think it shows that they lied, you're saying that AL really is skint. Also, by inference, that there really is a billionaire. It that what you're saying?

OK everyone, let's all stop blowing smoke up laffys soil pipe!

He wasn't the answer.

Whatever, Steve.

thesilentone wrote:
Aye, it's a good job your regular anti-Union threads are here to keep us entertained!

Bruntonpasty wrote:
Do our reluctant custodians really strike you as the sorts of people to make statements without confidence that they could defend themselves in court. They are hardly risk takers!

Laffy should've sued them for defamation and donated the damages back to the club to cover the legal costs.

Poking fun at someone you're trying buying something off (SP) before the deal was concluded wasn't a great tactic. Who knows maybe his plan for the club would have made better business sense.

The Archer wrote:
Ahh well, As I disagree with you totally, I'll not waste any of my time , or indeed yours, arguing about the matter, we're poles apart!

It is indeed time to move on-my proposal failed and that's a fact.The £1.2m was the first part of a journey to making the Club a sustainable proposition with no debt and a backable management team.I am sure the current stakeholders share the same goal but clearly my route was not acceptable to them-their decision as they own the shares and debt.

I doubt very much whether any new investor will put money in when AJ has £1.8m of debt-same issue as the FS loan.Until the loans are dealt are paid off or converted,status quo in my view

That last sentence is the crux of the matter, Big Fred wipes debt but we no further forward than we were. You are totally correct Laffy, the status quo is sadly inevitable.

.

griff wrote:
No it's not.

So when they said that AL doesn't have a pot to piss in, are you suggesting that was the truth? So far as I can see from this and other pieces of information, his pot has been solid gold and jewel-encrusted for some time.

People say 'bored of the board'

I agree, I'm bored of this board when it's about Andrew lapping just as much as I'm bored of the current board

griff wrote:
Just to clear up what I have posted.
I am not suggesting at all that AL doesn't have a pot to piss. What I'm saying that it shows that they were wrong to say this, but that in itself does not prove that they deliberately lied.

So, if we look at AL's other ventures - property. Relatively easy to add value to a property and sell on, that's why so many people go into property development. I have no doubt AL and his team are good at this.

My doubt with the AL deal was and still would be, do the club really want someone to come in, try to steady the ship and then sell on a couple of years down line - as per all other investments? I know AL has said its about self sustainability, but realistically how does that come when there's been a ny on £2m deficit needing bridged in a short space of time? Ok, so we may have seen the debt transferred or repaid, but without significant increases in the ticket sales revenue, without significant increase in match day (inclusive of television) revenue or without significant increases in commercial deals, the club has no other option but to cut costs and run on a shoe string. Are you telling me a club can really fight for promotion from L2 without a bit of a decent budget? If not the playing budget, where else can we find the savings? Hospitality, staffing? Two areas that are already heavily criticised that need an overhaul - more money to be spent.

Changes such as that take hard work and more importantly, time. On the model shown in the OP from AL's deal, he's bought a property, flipped it and the business has pocketed £2.5m, minus the costs associated. I'm not confessing to be an AL super fan and I haven't studied him in detail, but this is generally is background and how his business works. Even with best intentions it needs an MD who will pay for himself and start running the show - two reasons - Lappy himself said he wasn't interested, and stability once Lappy decides he wants his lure back to invest in other things.

How is that the right deal for the club? Apart from getting us new ownership, I can't see many significant benefits. With no disrespect to AL, all efforts for trying.

The BOD were wrong to publicly ridicule him or question his wealth, however, we don't know the facts. Perhaps the money wasn't all there? Perhaps Lappy opts for a toilet rather than a pot?

I don't think we needed any further convincing that the board are everything but truthful in communications. That said, perhaps this just shows they are ill-advised on the PR front and took things a bit personally then defended their position unprofessionally.

chopper wrote:
To be honest, your crack doesn't do much to stop this board being boring.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unrepentant blue wrote:
It's quite clear what you're saying, Unrepentant. I don't know whether Griff is intentionally twisting your post or not, but there's a big difference here between being proved to be wrong and being proved to be lying.

Mouldy....decent budgets are not required out of this league...see accrington stanley..

Sent from my GT-I8200N using Tapatalk

markredfox73 wrote:
It's not only about pouring cash in, the current owners run the place in a backward and negative way. They obviously saw AL's plan for the future as a good way to go as they have nicked some or most of his ideas already. The place needs people with a vision and some drive to grow the business, christ almighty, compare these lot with Knighton, He may have ultimately turned out to be a shyster but he created a buzz that got folk coming and and folk wanting to be associated with the club, Have these lot done that? Big fred came in and similar things happened, he made things happen, these lot have undone all that and taken us backwards.
As for the money being in place in the Lapping deal, He couldn't actually go about doing that until a prospectus had been published for the re allocation and introduction of new shares. The current lot got scared because they knew full well he could raise the interest needed to find the money and that would spell the end for their tenure.

Come on Mouldy, you sound as bad as our 'Custodians'...

Could we please stop picking over the entrails of my deal.Its dead and buried.

Also regarding my career-I am not of dubious business practices, nor am I one trick pony with a property slant. I am a director of 3 public companies, none of which are property companies.I have also listed at least 10 non property companies on the stock market in the last 15 years-hardly someone who has dubious business practices. I have my own business, Hamlton Capital Partners, and we invest in all manner of things.

To repeat, my interest in the Club was to 'professionalise' the operation and add new ideas and direction-not to rape and pillage.A very obvious thing to do given the last few years lack lustre performance.I dont blame the current board entirely:they were hamstrung by an inherited indebted balance sheet and a Shareholder Agreement which for practical purposes prevented new equity being issued.To do that, the balance sheet and Shareholder Agreements needed radical surgery-otherwise, the Club would be floundering in debt whilst trying to raise new capital with one arm up its back.An impossible position for any board of directors in my opinion.

I had hoped the transition would be smooth-from old to new if you like, but new capital would look for a new exec team with fresh ideas,whilst retaining the old guard for handover and continuity.All money raised was going into the Club. After execution of the proposals, I would step back and simply be on the top board as a 'custodian' -that board would look after the long term interests of the Club and be independent of the trading company, bringing a bit of accountability to the whole structure and those in charge of the business.

It didnt happen-thats the top and bottom of it so move on all.

my final word on it. the debt that had "hamstrung" the board was removed yet the club is still "hamstrung" by a debt to a current custodian. No way forward still unless there are big changes made at the top table.

The end.

sirjimmyglass wrote:
I agree with that last bit and, no, I wasn't trying to twist anyone's words. I just think that when a group of people have looked carefully at the business acumen of another person and found him to be sucessful and comparatively wealthy (see OP and other threads), then when they say that he hasn't "a pot to piss in" THEY ARE LYING. In other words, they didn't just say that on a whim, they knew it to be untrue. I hope this clears things up.

Old news and time to move on, but when i tweeted SP regarding what he knew about AL he started tweeting me derogatory comments about AL and then the infamous pot to piss in tweet.

So i knew from then it was doubtful as they was obviously some nastiness between SP and AL for SP to start tweeting rubbish like that. I think it came via Voldermort who was keeping SP posted on events, and i think SP managed to twist JN and AJ' mind which got JN to contact the investors names directly to invest without AL because of his dubious (successful) business practices.

Its finished though, theres more chance of them selling to Knighton then AL but they won't sell to anybody.

A bit rich given I have never met SP in my life. All I noted was 'he doesnt feature in my plans'

The pot and piss was a tad unfortunate for all

I found it very bizarre as straight afterwards i got loads of abusive tweets (Carr ) from people i ain't got a clue were. Later found out to be SP supporters but all very weird and i immediately thought someone was up between SP and AL.

Whole thing was bizarre from beginning to end not from AL but from those within the club. 100% positive the club didn't want anything coming out take JN's silencing techniques and lying on the radio.

Knowing what i know re the AJ share offer deal that was rejected by a different party the same techniques were used by the three. I think though there'll struggle with holding back the trust offer, which is why i feel it should of been made more public, as its not the 70s or 80s where things can be kept quiet.

Laffy wrote:
It might be an idea to keep your plans on peoples employment to yourself until you have full control next time, I would of made it as hard as I could for you also if I knew I was for the chop, he's daft but he's not that daft!!! I think you got a bit ahead of yourself.

You are probably right ST but you will recall the whole episode was about change to improve things-can you imagine how things would have looked if I just put up the cash with no change whatsover?

I also reserved the right to move things around given it was my plan-you will recall that the guys said they would step aside for the right people and my plan involved a transition.

Big lesson for me was not getting any exclusivity-only ommitted on this because I thought the thing was agreed. Big error on my part and costly for which I hold my hands up



It wasnt personal

Nothing should be personal in business, holds you back.
But if you tell someone they are a dead man walking they are bound to take it personally, as you say we all live and learn.