David Markham's Book & Geoff Richmond

[ChuckleBantam]

Though not controversial or really telling us much we didn't know, I think the book totally proves once and for all that BFG did nothing illegal or dodgy in his tenure at VP. In fact it totally confirms everything myself and others have always maintained, that we are far far worse off without him. The whole issue surrounding his departure in the book actually confirms something else I've always suspected, that his removal and the way it was done, with the deal behind BFG's back with Gibb was stage managed by the Rhodes to eventually have total control which, IMHO has always been their goal. This was confirmed by the hatchet job they did on Gibb, when they risked the whole club's future by engineering a second (and IMHO dishonest) spell of Administration to rip him off of the majority of his investment.

Sure BFG was a power mad autocratic boss, sure he took a few quid from what was an investment in the first place, but every decision, wrong or right he made, was made with a desire to put the club on the map, rather than wipe it off, which is what the current regime seem hell bent on doing.

Sometimes you never know what you had till it's gone and I'm sure the Richmond Critics now realise this and it's thanks to them were stuck with the mediocre rubbish in the boardroom we have now.

[Tarty]

So you won't be sending JR a card then tomorrow?

[Rick]

Sometimes you never know what you had till it's gone and I'm sure the Richmond Critics now realise this and it's thanks to them were stuck with the mediocre rubbish in the boardroom we have now.

Why what exactly did they do? Why are the Richmond critics to blame for this? Please explain.

Lets also face facts that if the book printed anything negative about Mr Richmond they would no doubt be in a court case. We will never know what went on as it is one word against another.

[Dr Wisey]

the decision not to stock the book in the club shop must be based on tantrums from those at VP that they could not have full control of the book content - I'm glad the authors went their own way - shows how cut off the VP set up is from the average supporter.

[ChuckleBantam]

Why what exactly did they do? Why are the Richmond critics to blame for this? Please explain.

They created a misleading swell of popular opinion which IMHO developed into the witchunt that ultimately led to his departure. The critics played into the Rhodes (and at that time) Gibb's hands and that's why we are stuck with the shit we have to endure now in the name of our boardroom. That's why were stuck with genunie crooks and folk with NO IDEA how to stop the rot.That's why the staff aint getting paid on time and a bird barely over School leaving age allegedly pulling the strings at VP.

Tell me Rick, do you HONESTLY think we'd be plumbing the depths we are now and enduring the crap we are now had The Richmonds still been in control. We would, at worse be a yo yo club between the top two divisions, not watching paint dry on the pitch and in the Bantams Bar with the highest expectation being survival in the Old third division.

In short, folk thought the grass was greener at that time and that just because The Rhodes' are fans that the club was in safe and capable hands (neither of which is the case)

This club will die without a change in the Boardroom. We stick with what we've got, we will die within a year. Things have to change and things have to be done now, or it's pick Farsley, Thackley, Guisely or Eccy United for your Saturday footy fix.

SACK THE BOARD!!!

[Loyalish2]

Hail the new king of the conspiracy theorists. The crown and robes are in the post.

After reading your post I'm still not sure who it was that finally got rid of him. Was it the Rhodes family for the reasons you spoke at length about, or the few 'Richmond critics' who voiced their disapproval AFTER the club went tits up???

[ChuckleBantam]

Hail the new king of the conspiracy theorists. The crown and robes are in the post.

After reading your post I'm still not sure who it was that finally got rid of him. Was it the Rhodes family for the reasons you spoke at length about, or the few 'Richmond critics' who voiced their disapproval AFTER the club went tits up???


A combination of burkes like yoursen who believe anybody on local radio or in localised print and the Rhodes and Gibb coalition of course.

You were wrong...admit it. You can even borrow me copy and read it for yersen if you like.

Why what exactly did they do? Why are the Richmond critics to blame for this? Please explain.

Lets also face facts that if the book printed anything negative about Mr Richmond they would no doubt be in a court case. We will never know what went on as it is one word against another.


The only way there would be a court case if they published anything untrue about him.

I dunno why the book is banned, if owt it paints a very rosy picture of the Rhodes' it just appears that they were shit scared that the truth finally was being told and that clearly frightens em more than the plaudits please them

[Rick]

Tell me Rick, do you HONESTLY think we'd be plumbing the depths we are now and enduring the crap we are now had The Richmonds still been in control. We would, at worse be a yo yo club between the top two divisions, not watching paint dry on the pitch and in the Bantams Bar with the highest expectation being survival in the Old third division.


It's a what if situation, still having GR in charge wouldn't guarantee anything, if fact you could be spouting the same with GR's name in place of JR's.

Since GR left he has been declared bankcrupt with a £2m tax bill unpaid from years ago. If he was still a share holder at Bradford City he would of had to step down due to rules regarding people who go bankcrupt or had his shares taken away and the club sold to raise money to pay of his creditors. So which ever way you look at it, it's impossible for him to be in charge at Valley Parade in anyway whatsoever. So there is no point in dwelling on the past if anything new blood is the only answer not calling for GR.

[ChuckleBantam]

It's a what if situation, still having GR in charge wouldn't guarantee anything, if fact you could be spouting the same with GR's name in place of JR's.

Since GR left he has been declared bankcrupt with a £2m tax bill unpaid from years ago. If he was still a share holder at Bradford City he would of had to step down due to rules regarding people who go bankcrupt or had his shares taken away and the club sold to raise money to pay of his creditors. So which ever way you look at it, it's impossible for him to be in charge at Valley Parade in anyway whatsoever. So there is no point in dwelling on the past if anything new blood is the only answer not calling for GR.

Who's saying he should come back.Even if he was in a position to do so, he'd have every right to stick two fingers up and have a good laugh at everyone who wanted him out.

What I am saying the rubbish we're stuck with should go or at least employ someone capable of making the decisions or even seek advice from someone who knows what to do, instead of treating the club like a train set.

[Loyalish2]

Oh I see. About this though...

'Tell me Rick, do you HONESTLY think we'd be plumbing the depths we are now and enduring the crap we are now had The Richmonds still been in control.'

It could be nothing more than a conspiracy theory, but, didn't the FA only agree to help us out if Richmond had severed all ties with the club? If they did it means had 'The Richmonds still been in control', we wouldn't have had a club at all!

[Rick]

It is all theories, and the main theory that Chuckle is using is that things would be better with Richmond in charge, the thought that we could not even exist doesn't come into play, would Richmond of put his hand in his pocket if Julian Rhodes was the one who walked away? There is no proof or evidence that we would be any better or worse off with Richmond in charge so all this talk is just someones opinion and not based on facts.

I could say Man may of landed on the moon faster if Richmond was running the show but as there is no way to prove it you'll have to take my opinion on it anyone who thinks otherwise will have to prove to me otherwise.

[Tarty]

Tell you something I wuldn't mind reading this book

[ChuckleBantam]

It could be nothing more than a conspiracy theory, but, didn't the FA only agree to help us out if Richmond had severed all ties with the club? If they did it means had 'The Richmonds still been in control', we wouldn't have had a club at all!

Nope. All happened because BFG wouldn't match the 400k The Prof stumped up cos they were short of what was required. Richmond later said that his forthcoming case with the taxman prevented him being able to do so, which isn't a good excuse, but it suggests why he didn't have the cash to hand at that time. Richmond's dismissal, and that's what it was was when Gibb (a bloke who Richmond bought to the club) and The Rhodes did a deal behind Richmonds back to take over. Gibb bought Richmonds shares for a quid and was given the push by the new regime. Unfortunatley when this happened, our chances of ever competing at the top level again were given the push too.

All this would have been hunky dory, even to me, if we had been left in the hands of somebody capable enough, but as recent events, amongst others have proved, nothing is further from the truth.

All I can say is, those of you who are happy for our main aims as a club to not rise above mediocrity ever again, put your faith in what we've got now.......while you still can.

[baldbantam]

It could be nothing more than a conspiracy theory, but, didn't the FA only agree to help us out if Richmond had severed all ties with the club? If they did it means had 'The Richmonds still been in control', we wouldn't have had a club at all!

As I recall the FA didn't 'help us out' at all - it was the PFA who did so by lending us the money to pay the wages.

That deal was brokered by Richmond and announced at a meeting with him and Gordon Taylor (the PFA chief executive) sitting next to each other. It was organised before there was any hint of Richmond leaving.

The 'Richmond severing all ties to get agreement' was never actually a concrete term of any deal - it was speculation that some deals may have been harder to do if he had remained.

[Rick]

Gibb bought Richmonds shares for a quid and was given the push by the new regime. Unfortunatley when this happened, our chances of ever competing at the top level again were given the push too.


Again it's all speculation and it depends to who you listen to, rumours were going around at the same time that Richmond was trying to get as much as possible for his shares from Gibb and Gibb nearly walked away. I can't prove this and it's just speculation, the only people who know are GR and Gibb. Plus by saying that our chances of competing at the top level are gone is speculation too, no one knows what is round the corner, JR might leave tomorrow if this top secret info that people seem to have access to is owt to go by, or someone with a new vision my decide to gamble on us. The sun does not shine from GR arse and for all the good he did us he is one of the factors we are where we are today.

[ChuckleBantam]

Rick...just admit, you, like a lot of folk ,were wrong and the Club is still paying for it.

Read the Book...

[Zonnebloem]

Rick...just admit, you, like a lot of folk ,were wrong and the Club is still paying for it.

Read the Book...


What is the club paying for?

DEBTS. Due to outgoings and liabilities HUGELY exceeding income and assets. Direct course to bankruptcy and ruin.

And the club will continue to pay for years to come. Fantastic legacy. Cheers Geoff.

[Rick]

A few of things,

The book won't write anything slanderous about Richmond for the risk of being sued.

Anyone can look read into something and take out the points that back up their theory and ignore those that go against them.

The fact we would be better with Richmond is purely based on your opinion and there is no way of proving it right or wrong.

Richmond was good for the club up to a stage in the same way as the Enron Directors were good for Enron upto a stage.

Richmond has had his past catch up with him, which shows he is not whiter than white, so like I said above if he stayed with city he would of been forced out by the law instead.

I can't be wrong and neither can you as all what we have stated are just opinions as there are no hard facts to back them up. You can't prove we'd be in a better position with Richmond and I can't prove we'd be in a worse.

[eurobantam]

I haven't read the book yet, just had a look here and there and it doesn't look as if features any revelations.
However, I did see that on p203 it shows how Richmond and his family made over £7 million out of City. The Rhodes family got £3m in dividends, but also paid £3m to Richmond for their stake and waived £900,000 of dividends.
It is also clear that Richmond didn't actually invest any money in the club, ever. He guaranteed £2.3m of debts, but going on his form, would he have acutally paid them if the need arose.
No surprise that the Rhodes were shocked that he wouldn't match their £400,000, seeing as he was £7m in front by then.

The book could have done with an index.

[ChuckleBantam]

What is the club paying for?

DEBTS. Due to outgoings and liabilities HUGELY exceeding income and assets. Direct course to bankruptcy and ruin.

And the club will continue to pay for years to come. Fantastic legacy. Cheers Geoff.

All gone, wiped. Julian Rhodes started his total ownership and tenure of chairman with a clean slate Nige, he admitted it and you know it. You are clutching at straws and going over ground that isn't there to be gone over anymore to help mask the fact you are and you were all along, Wrong!!

Since Rhodes and the Stealing committee took charge last year, any losses, bumbling incompetence, fall in crowds, lack of success on the pitch, management decisions etc etc ec is DOWN TOTALLY to them and their management and mistakes, this is why this time next year we probably won't have a club.


I haven't read the book yet, just had a look here and there and it doesn't look as if features any revelations.
However, I did see that on p203 it shows how Richmond and his family made over £7 million out of City. The Rhodes family got £3m in dividends, but also paid £3m to Richmond for their stake and waived £900,000 of dividends.
It is also clear that Richmond didn't actually invest any money in the club, ever. He guaranteed £2.3m of debts, but going on his form, would he have acutally paid them if the need arose.
No surprise that the Rhodes were shocked that he wouldn't match their £400,000, seeing as he was £7m in front by then.

The book could have done with an index.

Yeah..So?? If Junior and his bunch of hangers on ever deliver the same standard of achievemnt amd success, I'll happily see them do the same. Again Old ground that is not the debate. Like I said above, this regime started with a clean slate, this regime have bumbled on and made error after error , they have treat the fans like shit and locked themselves away in an ivory tower refusing to answer and explain their lack of respect to their customers and it's going to backfire on us all :(

Rhodes Out!!!

[eurobantam]

What they haven't done, Dave, is gamble with the future of the club for their own personal gain.

[ChuckleBantam]

What they haven't done, Dave, is gamble with the future of the club for their own personal gain.

I must have dreamt the time they took us into that second admin then.

[eurobantam]

The second administration was the result of dispute between Rhods and Gibb. Unlike Richmond, the Rhode's haven't profited from their involvment in City. GR took £7m out of the club and didn't put a penny back.

[ChuckleBantam]

The second administration was the result of dispute between Rhods and Gibb.

So isn't that taking a risk with the clubs future for personal gain. That second admin was for no other reason than to get shot of Gibb. I was stood outside VP when we were minutes from going bust because of this all mighty gamble mate. So don't tell me to consider someone like that our "saviour" or consider him capable or worthy of running my football club.


the Rhode's haven't profited from their involvment in City. GR took £7m out of the club and didn't put a penny back


That's odd, I seem to remember em being more than willing to take their cut of the spoils on the back of Richmond's hard work. They put it back in because it gave them cotrol of the club. I cannot believe the willingness to accept incompetence on such a scale, just because you weren't keen on the bloke before.

[eurobantam]

I dont think that they are competant at all. It is possible to critical of Richmond and not by definition be happy with the way Rhodes runs the club today. It is also possible to be critical of Rhodes without having rewrite Richmond as a selfless hero.
I can understand your frustration with the current regime, which is hoplelessly inert, but even you must accept that, after reading Markhams book, that GR was motivated by greed. He made £7m out of the club and that is a fact.
BTW, what exactly is the steering comittee for? has it actually done anything since it was installed?

[eurobantam]

The Rhodes's dividend was equal to the ammount they paid GR for the club, they turned down a further £900,000, that would have put them in front.

[ChuckleBantam]

I dont think that they are competant at all. It is possible to critical of Richmond and not by definition be happy with the way Rhodes runs the club today. It is also possible to be critical of Rhodes without having rewrite Richmond as a selfless hero.
I can understand your frustration with the current regime, which is hoplelessly inert, but even you must accept that, after reading Markhams book, that GR was motivated by greed. He made £7m out of the club and that is a fact.
BTW, what exactly is the steering comittee for? has it actually done anything since it was installed?.

See my earlier post. I would not begrudge anybody a return on their investment if they delivered success prior to their pay out. Those dividend payments were made after out promtion to the Premier League. I remember the issue being raised at the time and not many folk begrudging the payments. Surely we aren't or weren't the only Premier League Football Club paying a dividend tio their shareholders. GR is a business man of course he was motivated by making money, but it was his hard work that got the club to be in the position to do pay those dividends. Please don't paint the Rhodes'as whiter than white, they were privvy to all the decisions made during those now infamous 6 weeks, it's a conveinience for them to say they took a back seat, what kind of businessman would let that happen, nobody would, that's why that old chestnut does not and never will ring true. Had GR's gamble to keep us up paid off they would also have happily carried on drawing those Dividends too and quite rightly too.

GR could not have seen the collapse of ITV Digital or the bottom falling out of the Transfer market coming, I'm sure those 6 Weeks would never have happened if he had. At least he holds his hands up to his part in the club's demise, something the Teflon Rhodes' will never do, which is probably the reason they are in an all mighty sulk about Markham and Sutton's book.

[wykie]

I'v read it chucks and Geoff walked as he he was "unable to help" in providing any finance whatsoever. Page 220.

[ChuckleBantam]

I'v read it chucks and Geoff walked as he he was "unable to help" in providing any finance whatsoever. Page 220.

However he was perfectly able at running and marketing this football club and his achievements confirm this. What he was unable to provide financially he was more than able of providing professionally.....yet some Idiots still showed him the door.

[Rick]

However he was perfectly able at running and marketing this football club and his achievements confirm this. What he was unable to provide financially he was more than able of providing professionally.....yet some Idiots still showed him the door.

I've said it before he has been made bankcrupt so even if he stayed on at the club he wouldn't be able to be a director or anyone which would have majority power, it was Richmond that didn't pay his tax bill no one else so whether he was shown the door or not by these "idiots" the courts and law would of removed him anyway.

[wykie]

He would not or could not stick his hand in his pocket when both the Rhodes and Gibbs family's did so end of story. No witch hunt no bogey man. Having read the book its obvious we have no bad guys or good guys just a c*** up. Typical City.

[eurobantam]

"See my earlier post. I would not begrudge anybody a return on their investment"

The point is that he didn't INVEST anything whatsoever. Not a penny, it was all borrowed, but not by GR, by the club. So he was able to syphon off £7m and when it was payabck time it was the club that had to pay, not him. £7m, and he couldn't find £400,000 to match the Rhodes.

[B_i_N]

The way Richmond has convinced some people and still manages to convince them with the magic of his charm an charisma whilst lining his own pockets at the same time is incredible. What a guy, he should write his own book about how to do it, he'd make a fortune.
7 million? Isn't that just about what the club still owes.

I've got to give it to you Chuckle, you certainly know how to get a lot of bites with your rants about Richmond. I don't know why those that argue with you bother. It's like arguing that the sun is going to rise tomorrow. We all know it will and Richmond is a bankrupt.

[Zonnebloem]

These realities about Millions going out (I have the accounts) really put into perspective the fivers and the 50 P's put in by ordinary people at the time of the Admin. What could the club do now with 6 Million (My figures, not yours Simon - you say 7 M) taken out by the Richmond family and not offered back.

How anybody could still defend the one-way flow of funds OUT of City to the Richmond family is incredible. Please read the accounts.

It's all about history but the club is victim of its financial history. BEFORE the Rhodes era.

"Chump". Term used in abstracto.

[baldbantam]

He would not or could not stick his hand in his pocket when both the Rhodes and Gibbs family's did so end of story. No witch hunt no bogey man. Having read the book its obvious we have no bad guys or good guys just a c*** up. Typical City.

That's the most accurate observation on here.

Sometimes, Bad Things Happen To Good People.

There doesn't always have to be a villain. We fell prey to a combination of circumstances that crippled far more clubs than ours - we are not by any means the only lower league club to have been through administration.

Of course mistakes were made by all parties involved. Hindsight is 20/20 vision. To coin a phrase, a man who never made a mistake never made anything.

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.

[ChuckleBantam]

All I know is;

Richmond = Success and pride to be a Bradford City Fan

Rhodes = Bumbling Incompetence, complete faliure and a frightening lack of intellegence when it comes to even recognising the basics required to run a business like Bradford City.

Cannot belive that the "blame Richmond for everything" mob are still clutching at their straws if I'm honest, given that the current regime's errors and faliures are right here right now and slapping us in the face like a wet kipper and are in reality (remember that place folks????!!!) losing us OUR football club!

[axel]

Can't we just accept City have never had a competent chairman (including now), and the only one who looked like he might be managed to mess it all up as well. Too many amateurs in the boardroom.

[ChuckleBantam]

Can't we just accept City have never had a competent chairman (including now), and the only one who looked like he might be managed to mess it all up as well. Too many amateurs in the boardroom.

That's a fair point I S'pose......