Muted Protests On Saturday?

[flammableBen]

The probably won't even be at the game knowing about the protests. But as Paul said at the meeting, if the protests have that affect then it means we've made them uncomfortable and that means we've achieved something.

[Digglie]

Maybe I haven't read the bits you have but it's not clear to me hence the post. I'm not playing devil's advocate and I have a general understanding that the protest is about discontent with the management of the club, but unless the main points are better articulated so that they are specfic and measurable then whatever their merits, the protests on Saturday may not be well understood.

read them then. taaaaa daaaaa

Guess you don't know either then.

[Iffy's Onion Bhaji]

No we need to keep this up. This is exactly what the board were hoping to do. Release today's statement and then hope we hold fire. No we won't. They only way to get them out is to keep up the pressure. Sell up now. That's the message we need to put across.

[Bennett]

Maybe I haven't read the bits you have but it's not clear to me hence the post. I'm not playing devil's advocate and I have a general understanding that the protest is about discontent with the management of the club, but unless the main points are better articulated so that they are specfic and measurable then whatever their merits, the protests on Saturday may not be well understood.

read them then. taaaaa daaaaa

Guess you don't know either then.

or you could read and interpret things your own way hun? hmmmm go on

[Spencer_White]

It's to get rid of Seton Wells and Mike Diamandis, the 2 worst things ever to happen to STFC.

Dunno about worst 2 things but agree with general sentiment.

How will the protests achieve this? Just curious.

How did the Berlin wall fall in 1989?

spammer.

[Digglie]

My interpretation is that the thinking behind the protests is muddled and unclear however I'd be persuaded otherwise by a rational and logical argument in favour of protesting.

Perhaps someone who went to Monday's meeting could provide this?

[TalkTalk]

My interpretation is that the thinking behind the protests is muddled and unclear however I'd be persuaded otherwise by a rational and logical argument in favour of protesting.

Perhaps someone who went to Monday's meeting could provide this?

Is your middle name Provocative?

The rational and logical argument is that protesting puts pressure on the board to sell up as fast as possible and to get out.

Or is that too muddled and unclear for you?

[Digglie]

It's to get rid of Seton Wells and Mike Diamandis, the 2 worst things ever to happen to STFC.

Dunno about worst 2 things but agree with general sentiment.

How will the protests achieve this? Just curious.

How did the Berlin wall fall in 1989?

spammer.

Look I'm not against protests per se, it's just that there needs to be some common agreement on exactly what the purpose is and how the protests will assist in acheiving this objective.

[Spencer_White]

I dont need your approval thanks no mark whatever your name is.

I dont care if your head is muddled.

[Digglie]

My interpretation is that the thinking behind the protests is muddled and unclear however I'd be persuaded otherwise by a rational and logical argument in favour of protesting.

Perhaps someone who went to Monday's meeting could provide this?

Is your middle name Provocative?

The rational and logical argument is that protesting puts pressure on the board to sell up as fast as possible and to get out.

Or is that too muddled and unclear for you?

But isn't that what they're trying to do already with or without protests? I don't think they want to be in charge any more than we want them there. Protests aren't going to magic up buyers.

Sorry for being controversial - I'm just looking for info.

[flammableBen]

Is your middle name Provocative?

The rational and logical argument is that protesting puts pressure on the board to sell up as fast as possible and to get out.

Or is that too muddled and unclear for you?

But isn't that what they're trying to do already with or without protests? I don't think they want to be in charge any more than we want them there. Protests aren't going to magic up buyers.

Sorry for being controversial - I'm just looking for info.[/quote]

No at the moment they appear to be trying to rinse out as much money as they can before they leave.

[Spencer_White]

My interpretation is that the thinking behind the protests is muddled and unclear however I'd be persuaded otherwise by a rational and logical argument in favour of protesting.

Perhaps someone who went to Monday's meeting could provide this?

Is your middle name Provocative?

The rational and logical argument is that protesting puts pressure on the board to sell up as fast as possible and to get out.

Or is that too muddled and unclear for you?

But isn't that what they're trying to do already with or without protests? I don't think they want to be in charge any more than we want them there. Protests aren't going to magic up buyers.

Sorry for being controversial - I'm just looking for info.

No they want someone to pay about 10 million for a majority share, so they can stick around. Then probably steal off the new owners, just like they stole from Bill Power last time they had an arrangement like this. Anything that weakens their position (something like protests) will lower the asking price, thus making it more likely that someone will come in.

I want to see them gone. Full stop. Forever. But Diamandis has an unhealthy obsession with keeping control because a) he's made a lot of money out of STFC. b) he hasnt done it legitamately and some things will come back to haunt him if they get out.

Thanks for wasting my time. Now go back to sleep please.

[redbullzeye]

I'm protesting for two reasons:
1) To show my disgust that the club has been financially run into the ground to the extent that our survival is on the line.
2) To demand that the current board sell up and leave with as much speed as is possible.

I sure there will be hundreds of people who feel the same way and will want to make these 2 simple points.

[glos_robin]

I will still be protesting on Saturday................as far as I'm concerned this is the usual shit from the club and it was all too predictable!

[Digglie]

My interpretation is that the thinking behind the protests is muddled and unclear however I'd be persuaded otherwise by a rational and logical argument in favour of protesting.

Perhaps someone who went to Monday's meeting could provide this?

Is your middle name Provocative?

The rational and logical argument is that protesting puts pressure on the board to sell up as fast as possible and to get out.

Or is that too muddled and unclear for you?

But isn't that what they're trying to do already with or without protests? I don't think they want to be in charge any more than we want them there. Protests aren't going to magic up buyers.

Sorry for being controversial - I'm just looking for info.

No they want someone to pay about 10 million for a majority share, so they can stick around. Then probably steal off the new owners, just like they stole from Bill Power last time they had an arrangement like this. Anything that weakens their position (something like protests) will lower the asking price, thus making it more likely that someone will come in.

I want to see them gone. Full stop. Forever. But Diamandis has an unhealthy obsession with keeping control because a) he's made a lot of money out of STFC. b) he hasnt done it legitamately and some things will come back to haunt him if they get out.

Thanks for wasting my time. Now go back to sleep please.

So the point of the protests is to reduce the value of our club so that new buyers emerge at that price level?