New board press conference thread

[ronnie21]

Reading through these threads absolutely depresses me!!  A lot of posters were obviously apprenticed on the This is forum!!  I am not happy with what went on, would far prefer to be on the ride with Black bankrolling Wray and PDC - but that ride collapsed!!  I just feel a lot of posters are jumping to conclusions and everybody has an air of negativity.  When McCrory's name was first mentioned I seem to remember somebody jumping to the conclusion that he was Safestyle windows and everybody jumped on that bandwagon, now they don't like the look of the people picking up the pieces after Black.  A lot of things have happened quickly, let's give them a chance at least, see where we are come June - and if we need to get the orange hats and blimp out of storage then so be it.  But until then can we not just give them a honeymoon period - but never forget the most important thing today, get behind the team tonight!!

[pauld]

Crikey that is a scary list.

John Batchelor York City Soccer Club

Batchelor's proposals for Mansfield and Accrington were even more scary than what he did at York. Although I don't think we need to worry that he is one of the secret names behind the Small Faces.

[pauld]

I just feel a lot of posters are jumping to conclusions and everybody has an air of negativity.

I think people are making some limited judgements on what we've seen so far and worrying about what we haven't seen. And given not only our history but the recent history of many lower league clubs in our situation over the last couple of decades, it would be extremely foolish not to be at least a little concerned. "Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them"

[Flashheart]

I think people are making some limited judgements on what we've seen so far and worrying about what we haven't seen.

Or in other words..... jumping to conclusions.

[iffy]

Three simple questions

1. Who are their backers?
2. What are they paying themselves?
3. Do they have any plans to add debt to the club's balance sheet?

The reason they do not get the benefit of the doubt is that they are too closely associated with people who in general, have been bad for lower league football (Deakin, etc) and unfortunately you are judged by the company you keep. So if they are serious, they will want to disassociate themselves from these people. Transparency is the best way of doing this.

Until we get solid answers to those three questions I will assume they are going to pay themselves huge amounts of money, load the club up with debt, leave when their property adventure fails and we find ourselves back where we started. As always.

[Flashheart]

Just watched that interview with Callum Rice, he hasn't got a clue has he. I was cringing watching it.

 

Where?

[pauld]

Or in other words..... jumping to conclusions.

"Legitimate concern" would be the phrase I think I'd use I think iffy summed it very well in the post after yours, FWIW

[Ralphy]

 

Where?

Go back to the previous page, Batch posted it.

[jimmy_onions]

Havent read all of this thread so this may have been posted already but...

<<<as an aside, we need an acronym for the above...anyone care to propose one>>>

Anyone else think its a little amusing that up until a few days ago the NDA was being used as an excuse for silence, but when NDA is lifted...well, there is nothing there.

At risk of getting on the negative train, I get the feeling the NDA was being used as a convenient excuse for having nothing of substance to say...

[Flashheart]

Some people do have some genuine concerns Paul, which is furry muff.

However, there's no denying that some that have jumped to conclusions and have them down as a bunch of crooks already.

[Arriba]

If the unknown backers chose that rabble to front the board it hardly installs confidence does it? 
Its like four sad uncles in the morning after a night on the piss.

[pauld]

Some people do have some genuine concerns Paul, which is furry muff.

However, there's no denying that some that have jumped to conclusions and have them down as a bunch of crooks already.

Maybe. I think most people though are airing worries out loud, but haven't reached any conclusion. I certainly haven't - I know I've been one of those airing concerns but that doesn't mean I've firmly decided they're crooks, bad people or anything really. But I am very worried at the lack of transparency (NB bullshitting on twitter != transparency) around the ownership/backers because I'm very aware of the precedents, both here and elsewhere. And until those concerns are addressed, people will worry about them. Given our history, that's not only understandable, but I'd say we'd be very foolish to do otherwise. And if Jed and co address those concerns, brilliant, all's good, tie or no tie

[pauld]

If the unknown backers chose that rabble to front the board it hardly installs confidence does it? 
Its like four sad uncles in the morning after a night in the piss.

In the piss? Yuk!

[Flashheart]

(NB bullshitting on twitter != transparency)

Eh?

[Arriba]

In the piss? Yuk!

still aint got to grips with this phone.
Adver site has more up now by the way folks.