Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
 Offline
Posts: 15736
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:34:01 » |
|
I can't believe this :| What Si ? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #16 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:35:18 » |
|
I think there is a lot to be said about heavy leverage, but this could kill the club entirely.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
redbullzeye
Offline
Posts: 1319
|
|
« Reply #17 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:35:40 » |
|
I voted yes because I'm sick of the prospect of another season of political shit taking everyone's energy away from the footy. We are going to have to face the financial music and I'd rather it be sooner than later. If a WUP gets Diamandis and co out of the boardroom instead of hanging in there playing stupid fucking games them so be it. We know there are viable alternatives waiting in the wings - it's time for them to be given the opportunity.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
|
« Reply #18 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:36:03 » |
|
I think there is a lot to be said about heavy leverage, but this could kill the club entirely. Wrong All depends on who issues it Si |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #19 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:37:34 » |
|
I think the FL won't be so namby pamby about it
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fatbury
|
|
« Reply #20 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:40:25 » |
|
Yes - I want Power in!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DV
Has also heard this
Offline
Posts: 33888
Joseph McLaughlin
|
|
« Reply #21 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:43:24 » |
|
Its only a good idea, if it results in the desired result.
Unless you can guarentee it will give us the result we want, then no its not a good idea.
I'd rather have a shit club run by a bunch of no nothing wankers than not have a club, sadly
If thats the choice that needs to be made, the board win it.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
pauld
Aaron Aardvark
Offline
Posts: 25436
Absolute Calamity!
|
|
« Reply #22 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:44:13 » |
|
Its only a good idea, if it results in the desired result.
Unless you can guarentee it will give us the result we want, then no its not a good idea. Same as. Although I also voted no for the option of calling Fred a cunt  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #23 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:45:30 » |
|
Spot on DV
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
|
« Reply #24 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:45:45 » |
|
I think the FL won't be so namby pamby about it The FL just want to know that we are going to run an orderly ship. If, by bringing the situation to a head and giving it a timescale, a WUP is a vehicle to achieve that then I think it is viable |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
|
« Reply #25 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:46:57 » |
|
Its only a good idea, if it results in the desired result.
Unless you can guarentee it will give us the result we want, then no its not a good idea. Same as. Although I also voted no for the option of calling Fred a cunt No impact mate you call me it every day anyways |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #26 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:48:06 » |
|
If the court battle doesn't have enough impact I don't know what will.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TalkTalk
|
|
« Reply #27 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:48:36 » |
|
Its only a good idea, if it results in the desired result.
Unless you can guarantee it will give us the result we want, then no its not a good idea. Hey hey. I was pointing out that we may get one whether we want it or not. By third party creditors. Who don't give a shit. They will go the whole hog just to get their money back from liquidation as the instigator. Wouldn't it be better to pre-empt that - as Fred is suggesting? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Kinky Tom
Snow Master Sandwich King.
 Online
Posts: 9049
|
|
« Reply #28 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:52:09 » |
|
Can we, as a stakeholders in the club, issue a winding up order ourselves? No mate, legally in order to issue a W.U.P you need to be a creditor (without interest) of £750.00 or more So there's no way of staging some sort of 'citizens arrest' as it were? If you catch my drift... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BB12
|
|
« Reply #29 on: Thursday, October 4, 2007, 20:55:23 » |
|
I voted no because I think this thread is a wind up. I beg your fucking pardon  ?? sorry BB12 Missed that the 1st time I'm a bit slow at the moment None taken. Yeovil started it. It was just my bit towards the "80% bollocks" and my miserable attempt at humour.  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Poll
