ADVER: Fitton Back In Uk to Finish Takeover

[STFC_Gazzza]

Who had the banner that said "SIDNAMAID TUO" In the ground?

[Bogus Dave]

 are you serious?

[OneAndrewFitton]

Do you think we have another week at most? this is what is being indicated by people like banbury, i just cannot see it being completed that quickly.

[STFC_Gazzza]

 are you serious?

It said "DIAMANDIS OUT" and was backwards when held up, It would have def been caught on TV when the players were going in after the game.

[pauld]

I think it said "Diamandis out" but was being held up to be read in the Exec area in the Arkells at the end of the game (ie facing away from the pitch) so from the other sides of the ground it looked backwards. It was good timing as those in the Exec area applauding the team off the pitch looked like they were applauding the Diamandis out banner.

[glos_robin]

 are you serious?

It said "DIAMANDIS OUT" and was backwards when held up, It would have def been caught on TV when the players were going in after the game.

 :roll: every thought it was aimed at the directors enclosure?

[STFC_Gazzza]

Ah right, Thought it would have been caught on the TV when the players went in etc... to get national exposure etc...

[sonic youth]

So what do you think of the situation paul? do you think it is likely to be resolved? or is this issue going to scupper the takeover? i know it's a fairly big legal issue but how much of a problem is it?

Until we establish exactly what the nature of the problem is, it's very difficult to tell. The claim that SPD/Holding Co hold some form of rights to do ANY ground redev has always seemed extremely tenuous, but Fitton clearly wants to buy the club unencumbered by any residual problems or anyone stomping up and saying "Aha, I see you're planning on doing a ground redevelopment, we'll have £25m for that, ta". They might not have such rights, but it may be a question of wishing to avoid any prospect of a legal tussle in the future. Most likely, the current incumbents are waving the SPD claim around in an attempt to secure a pay-off, rather than there being any hard and fast black and white certainty over it. The problem is as others have pointed out that any such issue may be complex and hence timeconsuming to unravel and determine the full legal position. And time is not something we have here. Hence the current lot are holding this over Fitton's head - either give us the payoff and you're guaranteed not to have any trouble down the line on this or we'll sell you the club without it and you run the risk of a complex legal battle in the future if you try to redevelop when we turn up again and try to stick our snouts in the trough again.

in other words: spanner in the works.

no prizes for guessing who the spanner belongs to (or who the spanner is)

[pauld]

So what do you think of the situation paul? do you think it is likely to be resolved? or is this issue going to scupper the takeover? i know it's a fairly big legal issue but how much of a problem is it?

Until we establish exactly what the nature of the problem is, it's very difficult to tell. The claim that SPD/Holding Co hold some form of rights to do ANY ground redev has always seemed extremely tenuous, but Fitton clearly wants to buy the club unencumbered by any residual problems or anyone stomping up and saying "Aha, I see you're planning on doing a ground redevelopment, we'll have £25m for that, ta". They might not have such rights, but it may be a question of wishing to avoid any prospect of a legal tussle in the future. Most likely, the current incumbents are waving the SPD claim around in an attempt to secure a pay-off, rather than there being any hard and fast black and white certainty over it. The problem is as others have pointed out that any such issue may be complex and hence timeconsuming to unravel and determine the full legal position. And time is not something we have here. Hence the current lot are holding this over Fitton's head - either give us the payoff and you're guaranteed not to have any trouble down the line on this or we'll sell you the club without it and you run the risk of a complex legal battle in the future if you try to redevelop when we turn up again and try to stick our snouts in the trough again.

in other words: spanner in the works.

no prizes for guessing who the spanner belongs to (or who the spanner is)

Maybe, maybe not. It's a bargaining chip to secure a pay-off would be my take at the moment. It's chicken - who blinks first?

And who, should it all go belly up, could be facing some serious questions about their roles as directors of 3 companies (club, Holding Co, SPD) from the relevant authorities? I hope they've read the new laws on the responsibilities of directors.

[Bushey Boy]

It was aimed at the directors box, did the trick, just a shame they have the people who held it up on camera.

[reeves4england]

It was aimed at the directors box, did the trick, just a shame they have the people who held it up on camera.

Can they actually do anything though?

[Bushey Boy]

Have to find us first, which sadly they wont! Wasnt just me but im not naming the others.

[Arriba]

Who had the banner that said "SIDNAMAID TUO" In the ground?

i've always thought you a bit of a plank.
but fuck me you have exceeded all expectations.
 

[STFC_Gazzza]

Who had the banner that said "SIDNAMAID TUO" In the ground?

i've always thought you a bit of a plank.
but fuck me you have exceeded all expectations.
 

I know you have you miserable bar steward perhaps you have not seen what I did there. Clearly you haven't.

[Arriba]

i can only see what is there in black and white.
if you are joking then haha.
as i can see only your previuos posts as evidence then do you blame me?