Go for Mo, or is Mo a No-go?
Go for Mo, or is Mo a No-go?
Is supporting a single bid the right course out of admin for Port Vale?
In my previous post, -10, I mentioned that I felt a sense of relief with Port Vale going into admin. My first thoughts then went far back as last year, when the most serious bidder during the V2001 tenure had a 5 year plan on August 18th, 2011:
“My objective throughout my bid process, despite the conspiracy theories and negative PR campaign against me, was one of sensible commercial investment to ensure as much as the investment went into the club to benefit the club as opposed to paying off majority shareholders and debt. I sought to achieve a solid financial foundation upon which to project Port Vale FC towards the five year target of Championship Football, based at all times upon a viable business plan.” (Source: MoChaudry.com, 2011*)
*Page found via Google Cache, no longer on website – removed.
That is of course, assuming this five year plan (no pun intended) still stands. At the same time however, there was a snippet I found regarding a poll at WaterWorld, owned by Mo Chaudry and taken at a time of £1million improvements to the water park:
“The study also found that 85 per cent of visitors intended to return and almost 50 per cent would be willing to pay more for a visit to Water World.” (Source: South Parks Leisure, 2004)
Mo’s interaction with customers is commendable, and it is with customer polling that the new Fitness Gym, “M-Club” bears its name. I also have reason to believe that Mo echoed similar sentiments to the possibility of raising prices at Vale Park, already over £20 at current prices. This was on the condition that it was what customers wanted. There is also a caveat (I fear) that it may be inevitable – a ticket raise – if similar improvements are to come to Vale Park, they are needed, and the business demands it. Unfortunately for this exiled Valiant, with prices already as they are and with other costs to factor in, could rule me out. I wonder if those that have already sided with Mo, have forgotten about the potential ticket rise, when it is probably easier to remember the 10%-off season ticket pledge for SEO.
It is hard (perhaps) to consider other bids when one so forthcoming, so high profile seemingly still stands. But does it? At the moment, everything that went before – Mo’s previous bid, investment plans, on-the-pitch targets – is just one set of eggs in a basket.
There is now interest from other parties, such as International Piping Products who have issued a press release to this effect. And the great news is for the future of Port Vale, is that HMRC do not have enough to vote down a CVA, meaning the club can look for a buyer.
The important option now is not to ‘Go for Mo’ at all costs. I liked his bid on footballing vision, but with other bids on to the table I’d like to know more to form a better opinion. An outdated bid from Mo, a sign of interest from IPP but little information makes it hard to support one or the other without being ‘blind’. I find it unfortunate that some seem to have already have made their minds up but I hope the administrators consider all bids at their perusal and may the best bid win – ambition or security on the field; raising ticket prices or decreasing them for better value for money off the field.
There’s a lot to consider, look forward to and mull over.
Let’s not put all our eggs in one basket or carry one on a wooden spoon through to the exit of this tunnel of admin we are currently in. Should the best bid win and all other bids are given equal and rightful consideration, I for one will support the winning bid/new owners all the way and be a one very happy Valiant.