Anyone who wants Carlisle United to 'flourish' must act now

Issued in response to reports of a short-lived approach for the club involving businesses and former players, an EWM Group spokesman said: “We’re supporters of the club because we’re passionate about the role it plays in the local community; we need a flourishing club at the heart of Carlisle.”

There was a further passage about being “quiet supporters”, being open to assistance from others and the need for such approaches to come through the right channels, and then one aspect was deemed so important it was repeated – that EWM’s core principle, amid its loans that were funding United, was “protecting the long-term interests of the club”.

Indeed, this, aligned with United’s role in the community, was “our priority”.

Now, it is true that that was 2019 and this is 2023. It is also true that EWM is not Purepay Retail Limited. But it is not as if we are talking maximum separation here.

There are those involved with EWM at the time who are part of Purepay now: John Jackson and Steve Simpson, namely, the only two directors of the latter, as well as long-standing directors of the former.

Philip Day, EWM’s ultimate figure, may not be a director or person of significant control with Purepay – and, according to his legal team, has no part in discussions over Carlisle’s current debt, John Nixon said in June – but it is not as if he is totally unconnected from this world, bearing in mind the Companies House documents demonstrating loans from Day to a firm called Banbury Street Limited, and similar lendings from the latter to Purepay.

These are all publicly available facts and it needs nobody to get bogged down in balance sheets to go back to the original point: that, a few short years back, EWM’s stated line concerned Carlisle United’s long-term welfare as a "priority". And if that was EWM’s line, presumably it was a line promoted or at least accepted by men such as Day, Simpson and Jackson.

The Piatak family, centre, have spoke of their exciting intentions for United, but warned of the debt hurdle that remains (Image: Barbara Abbott)

Since then there has been well-known turbulence: Covid-19, a takeover that never happened, the departure from Brunton Park of some individuals connected to EWM, and, next to dramatic improvement on and off the pitch under Paul Simpson, an ever-growing debt, thanks to interest.

And there is no question that Purepay, to whom the debt was “novated” from administration-bound EWM in 2021, are owed money by the Blues, no plausible denial available that a resolution must be sought.

But here, amid the flickerings of light and a suggested new dawn thanks to the interest of the Piatak family from Florida, is the nub of it. Are United’s “long-term interests” still treasured by those who were said to “prioritise” them back in 2019, or are they not?

Is this still a club that “needs” to be flourishing in its community, or have the events of the last four years reduced that “need” to a much more clinical, transactional arrangement?

With debt negotiations still not appearing anything other than glacial in progress – it’s still a “significant hurdle” in the takeover shakedown, according to United’s American suitors – it’s more pertinent than ever to ask why things are as they are, without the sort of settled state of play from which all parties can move on?

There are other undeniables which form the well-known context. Yes, Carlisle were helped out considerably by EWM’s loans and belt-tightening measures between 2017 and 2019. Yes, the reckoning could have been particularly troubling had such assistance not been forthcoming.

Yes, the current awkwardness is, to an extent, a case of the wages being paid on the enormous, prolonged debacle of the Yahya Kirdi “talks” which rumbled on far too long whilst the Blues spent dangerously close to their means and did not, for their duration, exactly present themselves as an open proposition for someone more credible.

But also yes – that credibility now appears to be at the door at last, given the advanced status of things with the Piataks, whose business background, wherewithal and broad intentions are at least clear even if precise plans are not yet (but ought to be detailed to supporters’ trust members next Sunday).

So this would, on the surface, appear to give United their best opportunity for some time to become that “flourishing club at the heart of Carlisle” that all of us, not least their former lenders, have long wished for.

Carlisle United fans have this week called out the debt stalemate with a fundraising initiative (Image: GoFundMe)

Is it not, then, on all parties to demonstrate relevant levels of proactivity to take the Blues into such a place of flourishment? And if such proactivity is not forthcoming, why and who is served by its absence?

Is it not, too, yet another highlighting of what is being yearned for here that supporters, desperate to get Carlisle over the line, have set up a crowdfunder to clear £2.7m of debt – not realistic/serious in intention, maybe, but deadly serious in its core wish, and the motivation to express that wish in as many vocal and creative ways as possible?

You can describe all this as a mess of the current owners’ making, a predicament they should have seen coming and one that is down to them to sort ultimately. Yet however much of that stance holds true, the potential flourishing of Carlisle United goes way beyond it, and for anyone sincerely keen on that happening, now is surely the time to participate in its legacy.