Iffy's Onion Bhaji
petulant
 Offline
Posts: 15863
|
 |
« Reply #90 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:19:23 » |
|
So basically on onereally has a clue what is going on. Great. One thing I will say though is that the board did a very good job with the Power/Emmell case and I turst them to do the same here.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #91 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:24:58 » |
|
I'm a bit confused as to why they didn't apply to get the statutory demand set aside (there seems to be a few good grounds they could have used) which would have meant no winding up order. Unless Fitton wants a court case to get it resolved once and for all.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pauld
Aaron Aardvark
Offline
Posts: 25436
Absolute Calamity!
|
|
« Reply #92 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:27:23 » |
|
ace, old school finacial problems..I feel a blimp coming on!
Monday statements are crap though....I think there should be a "restore statements to Friday" campaign.
There's your blimp, yeo (Sorry Reg, couldn't resist) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #93 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:36:26 » |
|
There's your blimp, yeo (Sorry Reg, couldn't resist)
T shirts would be a good idea....fB could design a campaign logo, give him something to do with his insomnia. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Spencer_White
|
|
« Reply #94 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:37:53 » |
|
Just to say the money wasnt wasted because we had a bloody good season that year!  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pauld
Aaron Aardvark
Offline
Posts: 25436
Absolute Calamity!
|
|
« Reply #95 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 18:40:43 » |
|
Just to say the money wasnt wasted because we had a bloody good season that year! You're assuming of course that it actually went into the club. Large chunks of Bill Power's money didn't |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
leefer
Offline
Posts: 12851
|
|
« Reply #96 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 19:18:29 » |
|
St Modwen gave the club a loan on the understanding the club went forward with them on ground improvements etc...the club pulled out of this deal which in the eyes of SM was a breach of contract regarding the loan,its up to people in high places to decide if Town are liable or not...in the meantime my feeling is that Fitton will make an offer so both sides come out of it with something.....i agree with Aribba that the new board are trying to clear alot of past debt on the cheap by saying ware new owners and its not our fault etc......nothing wrong with that in my opinion but at least let us know whats going on....i for one want the hiding of facts days behind us.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Crozzer
Offline
Posts: 2487
|
|
« Reply #97 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 23:23:57 » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36319
|
|
« Reply #98 on: Monday, November 16, 2009, 23:44:12 » |
|
Now I know why SM were willing to work with our general manager.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Crozzer
Offline
Posts: 2487
|
|
« Reply #99 on: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 00:14:04 » |
|
It was a legitimate business deal.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
deltaincline
|
|
« Reply #100 on: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 00:23:11 » |
|
Fuck me, this brings back some memories!
My take is that SM are just trying it on. I'm sure Fitton and the board could do without shit PR of this kind when they are trying to do a redevelopment deal with the council, but they cant be held responsible for the actions of SM.
The major difference between a headline like this popping up when Diamandis, Holt and Grey were around, and now, is that Fitton's bunch know just how to see off cunt outfits like SM.
Gazza probably has it right; the Brummie wankers probably got pissed off when they found out that Fitton isn't going to redevelop the CG with them.
We'll never know if SM's money 'saved' the club all those years ago when Donegan and Blachley first brought them in, but any company willing to deal with an odious prick like Diamandis deserves everything they get.
'Business is business' as they say. I aint losing any fucking sleep over it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Crozzer
Offline
Posts: 2487
|
|
« Reply #101 on: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 00:39:22 » |
|
Possibly, SM's money payed for the helicopter hire and bottles of plonk.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
|
« Reply #102 on: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 08:11:21 » |
|
I'm a bit confused as to why they didn't apply to get the statutory demand set aside (there seems to be a few good grounds they could have used) which would have meant no winding up order. Unless Fitton wants a court case to get it resolved once and for all.
Sorry Johnny but no WUP has been served. Stat Demand yes, WUP no |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Summerof69
Offline
Posts: 8598
|
|
« Reply #103 on: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 09:39:45 » |
|
Those prats at the Sun has said in today's paper that we will have to go into Admin for a third time.
Maybe someone should tell them that the judge, who allowed us to go into admin for the 2nd time, said we will not be allowed to go into admin again.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
jonny72
Offline
Posts: 5554
|
|
« Reply #104 on: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 09:57:35 » |
|
Sorry Johnny but no WUP has been served.
Stat Demand yes, WUP no
If that is the case, why the fuck is this thread called "winding up order"? I checked the original article and its not really clear about where things are. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
