Thetownend.com

I want this noted that I am now not posting in any official Trust capacity.

I agree with Reg and I for one will not be attending.

Dont get me wrong, I have not turned into a board apologist, its just the fact that at Saturdays meeting Mr Bowden stated that the fans forum would be attended by available BOARD MEMBERS.

This was an offer that was accepted gratefully by those present.

Now I read that our manager, hours before a home fixture against a side "on the up" that have already beaten us once this season, is due to attend the same meeting beggars belief in all honesty.

I bet that isn't part of his usual pre match build up.

An awful lot of you know me personally, even more of you know me via the forums, and although I may be outspoken at times, you must all accept that I am a passionate fan first and foremost.

The most important thing is that we BEAT the Maccs !

It is with this in mind that I refuse to lend my support to a meeting that wheels out our manager just hours before such an important home fixture.

That is all.

Good Post. Completely agree with you.

agreed

Im deffinitly going then 8)

what the hells happened? what meeting?

First annual man kissing club meet at the winners

You would !   :wink:

 :doh:

its too late, im off to bed to have a wet dream, less depressing than this!

 I would like an orange picket of this meeting....to try and explain to any takers why its important not to attend.

Tsk I cant cross a picket line :x

Could it be... Could it be that this is the final straw? Or is this initial reaction and everyone will be in attendence against Macclesfield?

As Reg has indicated fans must act because if attendences remain steady then both parties will remain in this media tug-of-war - it's pathetic.

Something's gotta give. Hasn't it?

My sensible head tells me that we should try and get it rearranged without our manager present, allowing him to concentrate on "more important matters" or it gets arranged at a time that he can attend without being distracted Reg

Are you suggesting people dont go to the game?

The only people saying they arent are Sonic and Pie,Im deffinitly going to the game no matter what.(bar hangover or lethargy)

Nooooooooooo

Go to the game......................got to !!!

I for one will not go to the meeting

Wheeling our manager out just hours before the kick off is blatantly wrong for him, the club and the players

That was aimed at at Rich Pullen to be honest

Yeovil - no, not really - it's someone's choice whether they go or not. I'll be there.

Regardless to whether people like the board/trust or not - this needs to be sorted out because all of this statement rubbish is annoying.

 :tea:

I'm with you Fred.  Bowden offered this meeting knowing we'd be shagged if we agreed to go along and shagged if we didn't.  The Trust need to get together and sort out a strategy to counter this to demonstrate they have the fans behind them.  Sorry too much wine to suggest anything sensible at the moment

sorry YR

Its updating so quick I missed Rich's post

I doubt Ill be at the meeting as Ill be in bed but will def be at the game.

Is anyone free to go this meeting thing? I might go, but not in protest really. I don't fully understand the whole consortium situation at the moment because I'm too lazy to read all the stuff that's come out. I think I'll focus on supporting the team now, I fully believe any kind of protest won't benefit the team on the pitch.

At first I really liked the idea of the fans consortium and I got all the orange stuff, but I'm a bit undecided now tbh. It's probably because I don't fully understand the Consortium's proposals... Would we progress on the field if the consortium take over? More so than we are currently doing? I dislike the board, but they've made 2 great appointments this season.

Wise was appointed by Power as a family friend and Sturrock was appointed using the money we got for Wise so not all credit is due to the board.

Power as stated when he originally joined would personally fork out some cash if an exciting player came along. Also I think the proposals contain a reasonable playing budget far in excess of the current one. Tails you need to remember that we have one of the smallest playing budgets in the country thanks to the board, last season I think it was the 2nd lowest in the whole football league. So doesn't take much to be an improvement

Tails is a Scab.

The boards offer of a forum is a stunt.  What would be perfect is everyone leave it to 3 or 4 members of the consortium/trust to attend and all those that can get there to wear orange and stand outside the Arkells giving it the appropriate verbals.  First point at the meeting Please let Mr Sturrock go back to his normal routine and prepare the team for the match.  That way the board have to answer directly to those who have the knowledge to confront them whilst having a vocal fanbase outside driving the point home.  Just a suggestion....although it sounds a bit crap standing outside the Arkells 5 and a half hours before the match, maybe if they opened the Winners....I'll get my coat...

I agree with Fred.........smacks of complete desperation. And if Luggy allows himself to become embroiled, then he is setting him self up for a fall im afraid!

Once again Millom I dont think he has been given a choice

The ORANGE protest has been going on for quite a while now and we have produced a stunning run of performances(Maccs away aside), so dont tell me that is affecting performances on the pitch !

Oh

and another thing

Who have we signed this month with our 30 k from the Monkey deal ?

Ill tell you who

Johnny fucking nobody.................thats who

Look at the transfer activity of our rivals and tell me your'e not fucking jealous






Cos I am !

oh come on Sturrocks still trying to find someone thats a pointless post Elliot.

Deep breaths...Deep breaths
The minute he is asked to do somethin he aint comfortable with, will be the day he walks ? Surely thats how it really is? If not , i will be very disappointed.

I disagree Yeovil

not pointless at all

Quite clearly, and on his own admission that choices 1,2, and 3 have fallen out of bed

Why do you think that is ?

All the talk of "you will be playing league 1 football next year, but you will have to take a wee bit of a pay cut to get us there" is not happening, is it ?

I am exasperated tonight, I honestly am

Pure speculation..you do yourself no favours saying stuff like that because when you say other stuff that you have proof for people wonder if its fact or just your view.

Take a deep breath.

I've been scouring the sports pages for any possible clues towards transfer targets but I honestly have no idea who it could be. Sturrock seems good at keeping tight lipped to avoid speculation. Sure he will bring someone/2 people in soon.

Bowden should not have Just turned up..Plain wrong imo.

Sturrock admitted in the Adver that choices 1,2 and 3 were "dead in the water"

I am not speculating YR

You are specualting that its about money Sturrock said its because clubs dont want to lose players at this time.

Trust meetings have always been "open meetings" Millom, as I have posted I was approached by Mr Bowden in the car park where he asked my permission to attend which I agreed to.

I think the sugestion is to write to the club to thank him on his attendance but specify that if STFC wanted to be represented in the future then prior acceptance must be sought and the said representative would be allocated a slot on the agenda.

And yet other League 2 clubs can entice good quality players from higher divisions during this transfer window ?

Did you see the new striker that walsall got to play alongside Butler last night ?

doesnt matter Fred its speculation not fact stop trying to push it as fact.

Then it should not have been published as a quote in the Adver Yeovil.

should it really ?, otherwise we should just take everything the Adver reports as pure speculation

It hasnt hes been quoted as saying option 2-3-4-5  are non starters but hasnt given the reason for this as being money.

It has been quoted as option 1,2 and 3 Yeovil

and I concede that he has not come out in the media by saying that it is based on money, but there was a press release stating that he was allowed to spend the 30k from the Monkhouse deal.

So tell me, why would an agreement be reached with a club for a player, the player travels down here to discuss personal terms, a weekend of speculation develops, only for the deal to fall through ?

He must have been interested to join us to make the trip down here to see what we had to say

who?

Oh Fred whatever you say mate I can't be arsed anymore

ok

Have to say Fred I tend to agree with Yeovil on this - there's a myriad of reasons why players change their minds. Rodgers for example clearly just got delusions of grandeur about dropping a League or more likely just preferred Port Vale because it's closer to Brum where he's based, given that we're likely to go up with some momentum (and so will hopefully kick on in  L1 next season), whereas Port Vale will continue to arse about mid-table in League One like they have done for the last 8 millenia.

On the topic of boycotting the pre-Macc meeting, not sure what this would achieve, other than allowing the half dozen pro-board posters on thisis to engage in some "ha! Bottlers!" stuff. Surely would be better if people attend in numbers and ask them the questions that need asking? Like all the ones they refused to answer at the AGM about the financial situation for one thing.

Have to agree about Sturrock being there tho - that's a disgrace dragging the manager into this on the morning of a game. But if we all keep saying we won't attend if he is there, I think that's all the more likely to make them insist he attends. Because then they'll get a nice easy ride and can say "See? What was all the fuss about?"

And this is purely my own late-night musings, not an official Trust position or anything, although obviously I suspect this may arise as a topic in conversations between Trust board members over the next couple of days. Possibly. Ah well, back to the code.

OHHHHHHHHHHHH you had to do that didn't you !

I was just getting back to work work and then you do this to me.

So................................ this statement you have just made clearly applies to us and maybe a couple more clubs in this division then ?

If not why are players from higher divisions quite happy to sign for clubs that are below second in the table ?

Will I ever get this HSBC proposal finished ?

Answering your last two questions in order:

1) Erm dunno
2) Unlikely I'd have thought - you're far too easily distracted.

Actually I didn't mean it as a general explanation of all clubs in this League, just that there's a whole host of reasons why players decide not to sign, not just dosh. It may be that Sturrock has targeted a few individuals compared to other clubs going into scatter-gun panic buys, hence they've signed more but they may turn out to be indifferent quality. God knows we've had a few players come here over the years who've dropped down a division and the only thing you felt after seeing them was "keep dropping"

Yeah ok


So................................. what if the fresh water supply gets cut off to our building in Canada Square that feeds the cooling towers that in turn feed the Air con system and the ambient rises on the Trading Floor to 19 C.

What would you do as a disaster recovery plan peeps ?

Having accused you of being easily distracted, I've realised I can hear the pot calling the kettle black. So to respond in similar terms, should the correlation id for an async web service call be client-specified which creates the danger of colliding ids from separate clients, even if you add in IP addresses etc (due to firewalls, proxies etc), or generated on the server which runs the risk of introducing statefulness and means the client has to map the generated correlation ID into a meaningful ID within their own domain?

I'd have a crack squad of big blokes with palm fans like in them Cleopatra films on 24/7 emergency standby if I were you.

The pair of you are unbelieveably random.  :o

We're both still working at 2.30 in the morning - wouldn't you be? :)

Edit: Actually Fred might not be - either that or he's just jibbed out on answering my perfectly reasonable async correlation ID question. And after I suggested the blokes with the palm fans as well! Tcchhh! Some people.

I wouldn't be working at 2.30 in the morning full stop but fair play to you! Can't believe everyones gone, especially Flammable Benji! I thought he was a hardcore late nighter!

Im here :x

I thought you may have been hidden!

 :bow1:

Im the most hardcore on here!  :beers:

Da Vinci?

 Attendance legitimises the presence of Newbury at the club.....in my eyes they've lost that ... the only meeting I'd attend would be a valedictory meeting......as Bullzeye points out this meeting is just a charade aimed at spliting the fan base.

 They've aleady stated no questions on the consortium so what's the point, there'll still be no answers....if they wont answer to an AGM, when there is some sort of legal obligation they're unlikely to do it at a fan's forum.

 Nothing against PS in this.....he's said he likes to get his hands dirty.....but a FF with the boss to talk football should be in the evening.....an orange picket has to be organised.....we could probably loan a brazier from the Fire Station.

Fair points Reg.

FWIW, Ben Lambert has responded to Rob Tuck's thread on thisis to say the meeting will not be before the Macc game so that PS can attend:

http://www.thisisstfc.co.uk/Forum_New/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=32491

Most likely be an evening next week or the week after apparently.

aw, fred still thinks we're going to sign some players  :Ride On Fatbury's Lovestick:

Yes, we got money from Monkhouse...but when was the last time we put money from a transfer back into the team?

No I dont DV

That was the whole crux of my issue, players do want to come here

players....we've put in a bid for one player....thats all....

One who had already turned down several league two claims claiming he didnt want to drop down a division.

He was never going to come here, but this way it looks like the board have tried.

We wont sign anyone in the window, apart from Blair Sturrock.

Then why did he come down on Thursday to discuss personal terms ?

no idea...why did he come down when he had no intention of joining us?

did he come down, I see no proof that he did....

he did

fred that proof is overwhelming

You also said weston would not play for us again.exuse me if i dont believe you  :D

The adver reported that he was seen leaving the CG, which was the entire basis for their excusive story on whom our transfer target was. Whilst its not cast iron proof, and the adver has been known to be wrong its not their style to make things up entirley.

So stop talking bollocks

Surely the simple reality is players either don't want to move down to league two, their monetry demands are too high, clubs want too large a fees or not release the players at all, coupled to the pretty high cost of living in Swindon which although well paid league two players are hardly rolling in it.  I'm guessing Mr Rogers will be able to buy a whole lot more house in Stoke then Swindon.  Frankly the kind of player we need is pretty scarce, and to find those available at the right price is a major challenge.  On the evidence of Sturrock major signing Zaboub, I'm not gonna question his judgement yet.

I might be alone on this one - but what is the problem dragging sturrock out on the morning of the game? I have interviewed sturrock before a game before - the players don't arrive until 12/1ish so why not? His team will have been decided on Friday and until the players arrive - what will he be doing, reading the papers? Chatting to coaching staff?

Don't see the issue here? Is the argument that he'll take his mind off the game becuase of the off-field situation? I don't think he'd be that unporfessional to be honest.

That is all.

as for transfers, Rodgers may well have been to the CG, heck he might even have decided he wanted to join us following 'his visit' - but until he signs a contract he can do whatever he wants and if a club from a higher division comes in for him - well I know what I would do. Just by spotting players at the CG - it means nothing. When I worked there players would pop in and see the manager or a member of the coaching staff see other players - it all means nothing. Some even pop in - they may be interested, look in and decide it's not for them...

Please find a extract of an e mail received from Ben Lambert this morning


Andy/Rob

 

There seems to be some confusion over the day and time of the public meeting. Mike Bowden at the Trust meeting last Saturday suggested the Saturday morning before the Macc game as you know. Paul, however, also wants to be part of the meeting, so obviously the Saturday morning before the Macc game is now out of the question.

I think that this is not a meeting for Sturrock to attend, fan's will not be interested in team matters but of asking questions of the board...very serious questions at that.

Sturrock's job is to worry about what happens on the pitch not get involved off it, I'm sure they have asked him to come along though and say how happy he is with them.....of course he is though they have given him a little transfer kitty and are probably bending over backwards to accomadate what ever he wants.

It's also possible that Sturrock's policy of wanting all players to live within 30 miles of the CG might put off some potential signings. Not that it's a bad policy to have imo.

The key is for people to get star struck IMHO, and be more intersted in Jamie Vincent Vs Nicho questions than asking what's happening with the club.  Frankly I suspect most questions will be fended off under the guise of being about the takeover, leaving Sturrock to explain the need to keep ten men behind the ball at corners.

It's definitely a good idea in principal but I agree, it will put so many potential signings off that inevitably that policy will have to be reviewed.

If it worked at the arse end of the world (Plymouth) It can work here.

There's nothing wrong in Sturrock having a meet the fans evening where the topic of conversation is football based......but wheeling him out as a shield for the Board is despicable.   No board member in my experience has ever shown the slightest interest in these occasions previously....and that's how it should stay....Holt has always been wheeled out as Newbury mouthpiece.

   If the Board wish to answer questions then they should call a proper meeting....its called an AGM, where they can present accounts and answer questions to do with the running of the club.

  In fact they had one a while back, and couldn't be bothered to show to that beyond Smarmes and Gray.

The meeting will not take place before the match don't worry.

 Are you now Diamandis's mouthpiece?

To be fair reg, he's probably read freds post and the official site, which clearly states the meeting won't be on sat morning.

Quote
'Apologies if you assumed this to still mean Sat 27th Jan - as soon as a date is found that Willie C, James Wills, Paul S and the rest of the Board are available a new date will be announced - I would assume it will take place on an evening next week or the week after that. '

I assume from this that the General Manager, Tsar or great one will not be attending...

no pioint if he isn't

No I was told that the meeting would be moved to a week night as Paul Sturrock wants another fans meeting and he can't do that on a Saturday as it interupts the pre-match activities.

 Well I've read that....so I'm wondering why Gazza has to try and present himself as having knowledge which isn't in the public domain....looking at his recent postings he know appears to have effectively infiltrated this site, littering it with pro Board propaganda.

 We also have the issue of legal procedings against  Whits....something not seen since the halcyon days of Gazza's uncle on thisis...when the site was closed down, and the likes of me received threatening letters from The Adver.

 Coincidence?

Possibly?

Dunno.

Red I think you are being harsh on Gazza.  I've talked to him a couple of times and stand near him in the TE.  His views may be different from ours but I thnk that is all it is, a different view.  He isn't the pro-board actavist you think he is, though he can get a bit tetchy if his food order takes 2 hours to arrive.

On the legal action front, if anyone wants a heart rendering story of chairman threatening fans go the Cov City GMLK (Gary Mabbets Left Knee) Rivals site and talk to the admin Neville.


Viva la Orange.

I am not pro-board. I have not read Fred's post or even looked through this thread properly all I done was say that the meeting had been moved. I haven't once say the board are kings of all. I couldnt organise a piss up in a brewery let alone get involved in politics of a football club. If you want to know more about me and what I do etc there are plenty of people here that know me. I think it is a bit harsh that you are judging me and even if someone was pro board, does that make them evil? Why should they be slated because their view is not the same as yours. You have always had it out for me and thats fair enough, I have been a tosser in the past I hold my hand up but I am in no way someone who is trying to stir things up amongst the fans, especially as I know quite a few off here.

any idea when the meeting is going to be Gazza?

One evening either next week or the week after

Date to be confirmed Rich

I don't want to get torn into but I've been told it will be a week night next week or the week after, well that's what they are hoping anyway.

I'm only passing on what I've been told and this is because I have asked. If anyone wants information all they need to do is contact the club, whether you believe it or not is another thing.

cheers Gazza and Fred. much happier now its been moved. although im still not overly happy with the fact that Sturrock is involved. surely he should just concentrate on the players and getting results?

I agree Rich

I will now be attending armed without a single question for Sturrock but an armfull for other people

 It doesn't alter the fact that Sturrock should not be used as a shield to deflect from the Board.....its just wrong and should be boycotted.

http://www.centralchronicle.com/20060301/GeoffreyBoycott.jpg

Better still, get Boycott to attend.

I agree Reg, but if there is sufficient support then the floor will be hard to ignore on certain issues.

MB has already stated that no questions will be answered about the consortiums bid.

However there is a bucket full of other issues that need to be addressed.

As I said, I only withdrew my support because I thought it would be criminal to bring in Sturrock just hours before a kick off.

We need to see this as an opportunity to press some issues in a public arena that in the past have been, shall we say, somewhat shady ?

  Up to you Fred, but personally I  couldn't stomach such an event....the chances of getting an honest answer to a question are remote, so what's the point.

I respect that my friend.

But the last thing I want to happen is that there is complete apathy to the event, or some form of boycott that will dilute the current feelings

I think that that would only give certain quarters fuel to pour on the situation IMO.

At the end of the day I cannot stand by without at least trying.

Heavy heart today mate

Agreed Fred a boycott would be in principle good, but the aforementioned apologists would be able to utilise it to say the consortium etc had no backing.  A few well chosen questions from those with the right inclination could make Stanres et al look a bit daft.  All it needs is the right knowledge and some awkward wording making them hard to wriggle out of, that shouldn't be too tricky.

I agree Matty,

I am not going into the meeting with the sole purpose of trying to "trip" people up however.

I just want old fashioned honest answers to old fashioned honest questions mate

not a lot to ask I know ......................

 On the contrary the Board will doubtless use anybody that  turns up as a stooge for their propaganda machine.....if you wish to be exploited in that way, its entirely your decision......is it possible to make the Board look any more incompetent?

So your idea reg is to not turn up and let the pro board supporters (Yes there's still some about) have the floor.
Then the board can issue an honest statement regarding the meeting with no criticism levelled at them?

I know what I need to know to make my opinion.  What I hope to be achieved is that theboard are allowed to gdig themsleves a deeper hole and persuade the undecided that Power et al is the way forward.

I concur

 Why not.....I'm sure there are very few pro board supporters, they might get Gazza to drag along a few retards....but its an irrelevance...the damage for them is long done and there can be no way back.

   Can you imagine a more nauseating charade than Smarmes, Gray, Blodwyn, Diamandis, Holt, Carson .....(can't imagine they'll get a Wills) all getting feely touchy with Sturrock  :chunder:

Fuck off reg! What a load of bollocks! Sturrock, as an employee, is bound to toe the company line, they pay his fucking wages!!

Questions should be raised in front of the fans who are unsure of what's going on.

Your way would just give the board a free rein to spin things the way they want.

What a load of total bollocks!

If you don't want to go, don't fucking go! But don't tell anyone else that your warped logic makes any sense.

Cos it doesn't..............

I think my Geoffrey Boycott idea was better in all honesty.

Well I guess the board have got what they wanted, for the meantime anyway

Chill Hertha

Different views, thats all mate   :wink:

Herthab

I think I've made it abundantly clear that I wont be attending....and reserve the right to argue the case why others shouldn't ....if you feel differently then I would suggest you attempt a coherent argument rather than going off on one.

I had the same trouble when I announced I wouldn't be attending games Reg

  Personally I'm totally against not attending games,  but its up to the individual....certainly by attending games there's no chance of having to share the same space as the Board members listed.

I might have used a couple of 'fucks' too many, but the main thrust of my point still stands.

(I think the fucks can be atributted to me going to the pub and having a few.)

Apart from my abusive language (Sorry) I feel I made my position very coherent.

Reg, your stance would allow the board to say whatever they wanted and not be objected to.

If Fred and others with a differing view, attended the meeting and asked the 'difficult' questions, then surely the wavering fans would be more inclined to support the consortium?

My thoughts exactly

I think if Geoffrey Boycott attended people would be more inclined to support the consortium.

Only if he had an orange band on his panama hat,a matching orange tie with his sports blazer.

I'm going to go the meeting but not the game.

No that's wrong, I'm going to go to the game but not the meeting.

I mean I'm going to both.....

Oh, bollocks to it. I'm confused. I'm not going to go to either :?

I really don't know what you have against me and calling me a retard. I'll just ignore you now because no matter how much I try to make peace with you, who has already had it out for me, you take another jab at me. I cant fucking stand people like you who always think they are right. You say its only an opinion which your right, if someone else has a different one to you they are wrong. I explained in my other post which you didnt read obviously, or maybe it made sense so you thought you wouldnt slate me for a moment. I'll just pretend you don't exist much the way you want me to get hit by a bus or something. I'm not even going to the meeting before the match anyway it doesn't interest me in the slightest.

 Have you ever been to any of these type of meetings?  These people are skilled in being economical with the actualite...they wont answer any questions.  They will however use PS to suggest that everything is rosy and there are some horrid people out there trying to destabilise their 5 year plan.....so why don't you go away and leave Mr Blodwyn to try and make some money for our shareholders.

But isn't that all the more reason for some of our  more eloquent supporters who can see through the bullshit (perhaps those such as your good self Reg) to actually turn up and at least attempt to give them a hard time?

I suspect Reg has probably done this before...

I also suspect that he knows it will be of little use (from his perspective).

Gazza

Reg didnt call you a retard mate !

And could I ask you why the meeting wouldn't interest you at all ?

Just asking like

[/b]

Well, I think the fucks were well justified in your case.

Anyone who disagrees with you is wrong?

What a deluded old fart you are.

I think you underestimate the intelligence of the fans. If questions are asked, then not answered, I'm sure people will realise.

Or is it only you that can identify this deception?

What a total plank.

Disagree with me fine, after all it's one opinion against another.

But to imply I'm pro board...................

Wanker.

Meeh! You're probably right. Reg is probably right, he usually is :shrug:

Goodnight!

Hertha I'm not visually impaired  :wink:

1. Because it will cause unrest amongst the fans

2.  Am sick about hearing about takeovers and they did this, they done that.

3. The whole story will never come out

4. It will piss me off thinking why the hell did I go there because nothing was answered.

As I said in another post and agreed with OST. If the consortium are going in great, but lets hope its all done in the background and that includes the club as well. Enough of the statements, get down to business.

I was merely suggesting that good old Reginald has probably been to a few AGMs in his time and has probably applied his experiences to his view. He might be giving you lot a friendly warning as opposed to forcing his view onto you.

Or he's an old fart who should know better  :)

That's right....he just implied you might know some.

Ok maybe he did, but I am not pro board, If I was to march into the ground wearing all orange and anything he would say Im alright because "Im for the cause" end of the day, I dont care what he says anymore, Ive tried to be nice etc but he doesnt want to know so fuck him. Me and Herthab are judged because we havent said "sack the board"

I know your stand at the moment Gaz and I respect you for that

BUT

in answer

1.  Unrest ?..................WTF are we at the moment ? happy ?

2. Come june next year we aint got no club mate..........FACT

3. I agree

4. Then we push the issues until the questions ARE answered, prevailing that, if they refuse to answer dont you think that gives more credence to the bid (please refer to item 2)

In my defense, I have said sack the board.

I just don't like being TOLD what to think.

Not by the board.

Not by the consortium.

And definitely not by some senile, decrepit, incontinent old fart.

1. OK more unrest I just want this shit to go away

2. If the CVA question I posted was answered correct, we would, If a consortium is interested and the current board cant meet the CVA payments they can be forced to sell to someone that can if they have made it public they are interested? This could have been answered wrong

4. Pushing will just cause more statements and everything else. I am not against a bid or a consortium for the football club, you know that. I would love to see BP come into to the club or any consortium that has money etc and the ambition like the consortium does to take it forward.

Just my opinion,

So then...herthab and Gazza. One last question before I go upstairs with my cup of ovaltine.

Why exactly are you both SO pro board????

 :mrgreen:

I know your saying that as a wind up now!  :soapy tit wank:

1. It aint going to

2. Viable option, but all tangible forms of negotiation must be explored before we go down that route

4. As long as the mud slinging and statements do not come from us I dont particuarly care, ok I will get pissed off but as long as we dont get involved in lengthy rebuttals that's fine.

BP will bring our club back to us

I can't really stomach it anymore, I meant I've tried to worry only about the football side of things but you cant ignore this, its all giving me a headache now  :-))(

You are not alone in that Gaz, I am sure.

But I can't let it drop unfortunately.

If we stop now then SN1's grip on everything just gets stronger in my opinion.

I will not rest until we achieve this

Im not telling the consortium or anything to stop mate dont get me wrong, Not at all. Think Ill venture away from these topics on the forum as it gives me a headache, much like my rambling does to others!!!!  :soapy tit wank:

:mrgreen:

ok mate

Can we all just chill for a short while..........

Trying to Millom   :)

Similar to what I posted about you earlier today  :wink:

You and me both fred! And awkward being my middle name, ive got some questions that need answering, so im going dressed in my orange garb ready for war.

Surely the Dalek outfit would be more impressive for that?  :D

Your not the only one Fred. I will be my beligerant(sp) self as ususal, and i suspect that your questions will be similar to mine.
Ive calmed down a bit...........but not a lot!

The dalek is ready for action Paul.