HOME PAGE | FACTFILES | QUOTES | COMMENT FORM |

Unicorn Dung!

Unicorn dung! Those were the words which sprang to mind when we heard that the Stuart-King e-mail address now sported Finance4Cricket in its title, presumably because he is now trying it on again under that banner. We say trying it on for good reason. There have been all kinds of grandly named ventures in the past which he has promoted. All have failed dismally. Like these, if you will read on.

1980 - Alan Hamilton, writing in The Times for 19th June about The Ark Royal Preservation Campaign, quoted Barrie King - same guy, fewer pretensions - saying "We have offered to cap any price offered by a ship breaker" and insisting the project's backers would raise £13.5M. The MOD were less confident. Result: A big zilch!

1998 - "Education Through Sport" put out a business plan hoping to raise £600K. Fair enough, really, as it expected to produce revenues of £2.7M in 2002 with CD-ROM training courses all called The Compleat Whatever - rugby, hockey, cricket, sailing, basketball, you name it. Stuart-King's helpers on the "experienced, highly-qualified, full-time Board of Management" were Graham Cooper and John Masterson (lately resigned from ICUS). Sadly, it was A Compleat Failure.

2002 - Stuart-King, (self-appointed) CEO of NRCC made a "Representation" to the Cherwell District and Oxfordshire County Councils about a planning appeal. He had brought together a "highly-experienced, professional, multi-discipline, Joint Venture Project and Sports Administration Team" to develop the former RAF Upper Heyford as a "community sports area". Cherwell and Oxfordshire were unimpressed.

2004 - In June, certain ACU&S officers read this: "As soon as the funding is cleared - I have asked for £470,000 for the 12 months from 1st August....." and so on. King claimed to be providing "support services" to almost two thirds of the 6,300 ECB affiliated clubs! It came as news to them, or would have if there had been any support services. Also, the next 3 months were to be "absolutely crucial" as "ACU&S and the 3 conferences" were to "play a major role in the restructured ECB". Did anyone notice that happening? No? Oh, well.

2004 - Meanwhile, the La Manga Club's auditors wanted to hear about the 45,634 Euro debt Stuart-King had run up. He told LMC that his "re-submitted proposal for 3-year funding has been favourably received." Not so favourably that anything came of it, of course.

In September, though, he told Tony Coles at La Manga of a new proposal for £1.3M. There would be a meeting on 14th and, he said, he "needed the money in NRCC's account no later than the 28th." You bet he did! Once again, nothing happened.

On 5th October, he e-mailed Martin Reed, Peter Freeman, Chris Rawson, Keith Smith and Derek Harman that the "first tranche funding was in the closing stages of being finalised." Nothing happened, yet again.

On 12th December, to quell criticism, he claimed that having been Projects Director on multi-million dollar oil projects for almost 20 years, he had "an advantage over you in the way I approach matters of - and delays in project funding." He was "about to review and discuss again the timing of release of funding." Seems the discussions did not quite work out. Surprise!

The same day, he urged Chris Rawson not to resign "if for no other reason than that I am not able to produce both the 3-year funding AND run the accounts detailing its subsequent allocations and disposal." As has always been obvious, he has never been able to do either.

2005 - By mid-February, the first of the letters from Debt Enforcement agencies started to arrive, demanding immediate payment of amounts due on the equipment leases Stuart-King had signed without any funding back-up. There were the customary threats of repossession.

Later in the month, in the ACU&S AGM notice, Stuart-King claimed "In 2001, I secured £200,000 in sponsorship from the Post Office." Oddly enough, how's that? no.275 for June 2001 reprinted the Post Office press release and that quite clearly showed that it was Basil Larkins who brought this about. No mention was made of Stuart-King playing any role in it, of any kind. Perhaps that fact slipped his mind, somehow, four years on.

So. Why unicorn dung? Simply because it is just like sponsorship funding, whenever Stuart-King is involved, and whatever new title he likes to give it. It is rarely, if ever, seen. To the best of our knowledge, it has never been seen. And, if it were, you would probably be better off not touching it.