As town fans, they are superior to Rugby, so deserve 'their' shares back. If Hoyle's so great, he should buy them back as you say, at full price.

Oh no, that's 'totally different'

JWB UTG

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who slings mud at Ken Davy is an idiot who has absolutely no idea what that man has done for Huddersfield as a town. It could very easily be argued that we would have neither an RL nor a soccer team without him.

These individuals need to get a grip and show some respect for a man who has consistently put his money where his mouth is and salvaged two virtually lost causes at no inconsiderable cost to himself.

Slagging off Sir Ken is well out of order.

any protest against ken davy by town fans and giants fans would have to come out in force and support him...like posted previously is we can make a banner for warrington why not ken?!

Whilst commenting on this thread and giving your views I presume you are all taking into account the fact that 'Sir' Ken has also removed the Giant's 20% share of the ground and transferred it to his own company HSP. You're not all that naive are you?

I mean HTFC are now currently at the point of KD (thankfully) not being in control of the club so the current chairman is trying to secure the shares that belong to the football club. He's not trying to get control of them for himself but reattach them to the club so that going forward in the future we are a football club with a 40% stake in the ground which is a much more viable entity to invest in (or rescue for that matter). What happens when he is no longer in control of your rugby club? Do you just accept that going forward when Davy & associates are in no way associated with the Giants that you will have lost your 20% stake of the ground along with that? Do you think that's right?

Your rugby club was founded in 1864, ours in 1908. We have been round long before and hopefully will prosper long after Ken Davy has been and gone. Our ground was built with a landmark partnership so that the two main clubs of Huddersfield could have a great stadium to play in and both benefit from having shares in it. We helped fund the thing. It was built FOR Huddersfield Town and Huddersfield Giants, no one person, no one business that's how it should stay.

This isn't about business or legality or denying that Ken saved our club from the brink of collapse (however reluctantly or with what motives) this is about morals and ethics. That ground was built for our clubs, and for our clubs to have a share in so that we could both prosper from it. These are sports clubs that our grandfathers watched and hopefully grandchildren will watch. Our 40% share which is rightfully ours should be returned so that we can benefit from the revenue it produces. We pay 75% of the rent for it!

And to the person saying Davy has selflessy thrown his money at us at 'no inconsiderable cost to himself' should note the fact part of the deal is Davy receiving £3m + interest back for his investments into HTFC - agreed by Hoyle. On top of the £2 he charged himself for our 40 shares which he did so secretly without informing any of the fans. Which he then denied for a long time until facts from places like Companies House meant he had to acknowledge he'd done so - then spinning some yarn about it protecting us.

im a season ticket holder for both town and giants.and most town fans have forgotten that davy rescued town from posiblely going out of buisness hope this gets resolved and quickly.

Ha ha,ju

Is

Frankly I don't care who owns shares on behalf of what clubs, as long as both Play at the stadium that is good enough for me. Unless you as a individual own any shares put up or shut up and let's just enjoy some top class sport, getting pathetic now! Up the Huddersfield

Why has Hoyle backed out over just £25k??? Something is fishy and it isn't Davy here however you look at him!!!! Principles?? He's losing money he's admitted that himself so why back out of something he'll gain from??? Hmmm maybe even with the 40% back he'll still be losing money just a thought!! Morals and ethics don't come into it but even the council say Davy is a good guy!!! Please where would these 40% shares be if Davy hadn't come in and rescued Town? Would they still be rightfully Towns?? And yet the so called baddie isn't refusing to relinquish them so why give him a hard time?? If he was such a devious person he'd point blank refuse to even speak to Hoyle about them or if he did he'd want to gain far more than what he's asking he's wanting something that's FAIR don't you understand???

No go into detail, please. How am I wrong? How are we in the wrong?

What is it that you know that we don't that makes our campaign so futile?

If you can't back up what your saying there's no point in opening your mouth to begin with, it makes you look stupid.


Hoyle himself stated that the £25k is immaterial.* On the grand scheme of things it's a speck of dust but it's the principle. Davy moved the goalposts at the last minute. After agreeing the transfer of the shares back for £2 and the repayment of Davy's investment in Town (plus interest) Davy at the last minute says the rental formula must revert back to it's original standing.* Now if you're talking about fishy let's talk about things we know as fact.

Davy changed the formula agreement from what he now wants it back again to what it is now. He, himself. This is after he secretly transferred the shares away from HTFC and into his own holding company* (oh yours to, don't forget you too also have no shares in our ground). When pressed on the new rental formula he introduced by FFA & HTSA he said it was set in stone and could not be changed* Now he's saying that somehow this was lost in translation and it is in no way permanent* [iHe also states that he has not moved the goalposts in any way and has not changed his demands in regards to the transfer of the shares*, and that his insistence that the rental formula agreement revert back to its original state is not connected to the transfer of the shares*, but that without Hoyle's agreement to revert it back he will not transfer the shares*.[/i

The non-stop contradiction highlighted in italic actually all came out in ONE email to a Town fan asking questions. It's unbelievable.

The asterisk's are to show that there is direct quotes and proof from the last week alone of this stuff. So if you're going to reply wiping his shyster ar$ehole don't waste time with here say and propaganda.

Does it sit fine with all of you that the Giants have no share in the ground?

The giants fans are fully aware where their share is but the don't make a song and dance about it digging into matters that don't concern them personally just for a bit of mud slinging!

So it's a principle eh? A bloody expensive principle if you ask me! And petulant!! I think it's Hoyle who's playing dirty here but I doubt Town fans will ever agree! He has the chance of obtaining something that is apparently rightfully Towns and backsdown to such an immaterial sum?? Town fans should be getting on Hoyle's back in getting those shares back at any cost and deal with things like trust afterwards!!! They are afterall losing money! So the 40% is rightfully theres due to the morals of the Ground being built so is the rent formula Davy is asking so are we still calling for ethics and morals here?? Even if the rent formula the HTSA were told is permanent if you were paying a higher mortgage and had the chance to renegotiate for a better cheaper deal in the long run wouldn't you do so???

Do you really believe everything that forum writes?? Seriously??? they publish private emails which can be yes copied and pasted but also doctored!! I read the bile laugh at the bile but would never take the bile as anything but bile!!! I'm a football fan and would like to go onto a football forum and read views on the match I have just been to or transfer opinions but you can't on that forum! They stir up hate against anyone who they take a dislike to and it's disgusting!

we know exactly where the giants shares are and why. They are protected against a club spending more money than it has and going bankrupt - a shrewd move - and one that Davy did to protect both clubs. Davy isnt in this for the money - he has spent more than he has gained. What he is concerned about is that Town will yet again spend too much in a venture that will fail and will cost BOTH clubs.