I would guess this is due to the price of land, which has lowered significantly for commercial land since the downturn!

Lots of "property gurus" have failed due to the downturn - most people thought the price of property will never go down and always up which has been proved to be rubbish

like the banks confidence in the market and then it crashed

Usual rumour then, now i know you are just asking but why do people who have clearly no idea start rumours and pass them around like this.

Don't suppose you want to expose this person do ya.

manages his personal business as he does the management of this club.

Is it the same Duncan Developments?

I thought I could remember Ted explaining at an AGM what would happen to the shares as a result of their demise. It was over 15 years ago so I could have got it wrong

I know J Duncan was our deputy chairman and D Scougall was his representative on the board.

Also seem to remember that some, if not all, the shares were in leu of upgrading the stand

The value of the land is probably much less than £1M but higher than £80k, to Sainsbury's it was worth the £1M when they planned to develop it into a new supermarket.

Once they changed their plans from this land to a new unit inside Trinity Walk the value of the land, in Sainsbury's estimation, would not be anywhere near the £1M mark.

They have, in their opinion, therefore settled the contract for a nominal sum of £80K and the land will remain the property of the existing owner.

As with any contract, the devil is in the detail and I assume that the solicitors acting on behalf of Sainsbury have advised them on the settlement value and will have done so in the beleif that the contract allows them to do so.

Ted and his solicitors and perhaps the solicitors representing the bank, will disagree as they feel they have a "watertight" contract for the sale of the land at an agreed fee of £1M.

In the end I think a further settlement may be forthcoming from Sainsbury but it will be no where near the original agreed price of purchase.

Where that will leave Teds finances is anyones guess.

Oh yeah wild rhumour al, clearly wide of the mark!!

I'll give you a wave tonight if your watching it on the telly

The first part of the wild rumour was correct, the second part regarding him having to step down may yet have some mileage in it.
I am lead to believe that ted stands as guarantor to the rfl as to the financial stability of the club, if this is the case then who knows!
Hardly a wild rumour, and as it surfaced before even TRB knew about it, it must be from very close to ted indeed.

I would be very surprised if any Bank (yes - even those now with significant taxpayer stakes) had lent £ for £ on the contract purchase price so hopefully any settlement will be sufficient to see Ted end up with his creditors paid off, even though he may not be left with spare cash at the end of it.

I think that there have been a lot of views on this thread that are very short sighted and suggest that Ted has overseen poor financial management at the club. What those posters have forgotten is that it was Ted who saw the club through the darkest of our financial days when the club was subject to a Company's Voluntary Agreement following the Pearman fiasco (the equivalent to his own situation now) and thanks to Ted's hard work with the bank over many years the club is no on a much sounder financial footing. It's also worth remembering that Ted takes very little (if any) wage from the club, relying on his other interests for his income.

I wish Ted well in sorting things out.

Quite cleary states friday just gone HTH.


Does that really matter and for what its worth its not true.

Keep dreamin al, everythings rosie!!!