Power phone in tonight 6pm

[Flashheart]

Why is it that people are so often accused of getting upset when they disagree with something? It's sort of how debate and discussions work.

[Reg Smeeton]

Surely the very nature of this football club demands that suppirters act with an air of caution at all times?

In Flashers world, you're innocent until proved guilty, which is fine as an appreciation of jurisprudence, but one of the joys of being a football fan, is such lofty idealism needn't apply.  As far as STFC owners/chairman go....guilty until proved innocent, twas ever thus.

[FreddySTFC!]

lolz.

I explained where my criticism was directed quite clearly. It's there for you to read again at will.

Do you not have a sense of irony? This didn't even involve you and you're taking it to heart.

Hahahaha. Nice try on turning the tables. It involved me no more than it involved you and you're very much 'involved' in the debate. Your contribution to the thread initially was to suggest changing 'Where's the paper gone' to 'I'm a fuckwit' implying the guy who asked was a fuckwit even though you, like him at the time, had no evidence to back up your argument. That in itself is covered in irony!!!!!  

[FreddySTFC!]

In Flashers world, you're innocent until proved guilty, which is fine as an appreciation of jurisprudence, but one of the joys of being a football fan, is such lofty idealism needn't apply.  As far as STFC owners/chairman go....guilty until proved innocent, twas ever thus.

Quite. Which is why we've been in the shit on so many ocasions. Benefit of the doubt has been offered too freely & for too long.

[Flashheart]

"had no evidence to back up your argument."

I wasn't making any argument that required evidence.

This is silly, you're making no sense and seem to be struggling to understand what's written. I'll leave you to it. Toodle-pip.

[DarloSTFC84]

Why is it that people are so often accused of getting upset when they disagree with something? It's sort of how debate and discussions work.

I disagree.

[Flashheart]

I disagree.

OH MY GOD. NO NEED TO THROW A TANTRUM.

[DarloSTFC84]

OH MY GOD. NO NEED TO THROW A TANTRUM.

 

[FreddySTFC!]

"had no evidence to back up your argument."

I wasn't making any argument that required evidence.

This is silly, you're making no sense and seem to be struggling to understand what's written. I'll leave you to it. Toodle-pip.
[/quote
Hahaha. I could pretty much copy & paste your last few sentences as my reply to you. My point is you seem to know where money has been spent even though you have no evidence yourself. I can understand you're struggling to grasp it though.
Up the wooden hill with you now then.

[horlock07]

In Flashers world, you're innocent until proved guilty, which is fine as an appreciation of jurisprudence, but one of the joys of being a football fan, is such lofty idealism needn't apply.  As far as STFC owners/chairman go....guilty until proved innocent, twas ever thus.

I do live in fear that if I ever ended up in court in front of a jury it would happen in the Swindon area where evidence seems little required to make and sustain accusations and guilty until proven innocent is the stock response...

This is getting silly now, I am almost hoping for the return of Audrey.....

[horlock07]

Serious question for a minute - do we actually have any shareholders anymore outside Power and associated companies? Do we need to present any detailed accounts above what is needed to keep Companies House happy?

Strangely no one is demanding written evidence of how much Power has spent on the club?

[FreddySTFC!]

Serious question for a minute - do we actually have any shareholders anymore outside Power and associated companies? Do we need to present any detailed accounts above what is needed to keep Companies House happy?

Strangely no one is demanding written evidence of how much Power has spent on the club?

If you mean individual shareholders with minimal shares then yes. My uncle's old man has got some. He used to attend the AGM's but age & illness prevents him from doing so these days.

[Flashheart]

Actually.....

Initial court cases do not decide whether or not a person is innocent, they simply decide whether or not there is enough evidence to find that person guilty. Just a little Monday morning pedantry for you.

[horlock07]

If you mean individual shareholders with minimal shares then yes. My uncle's old man has got some. He used to attend the AGM's but age & illness prevents him from doing so these days.

Didn't Saint Fitton et al seriously dilute much of the private shareholding, still needs some manner of AGM I suppose.

Actually looking at the last return to Companies House dated last Wednesday, Seebeck 87 have the majority of ordinary and deferred shares by a country mile, with Power and Shah as directors.

Last abbreviated accounts (as required) up to end May 2014 lodged 28th April 2015 - so assume we will see same end April 2016.

[Reg Smeeton]

Didn't Saint Fitton et al seriously dilute much of the private shareholding, still needs some manner of AGM I suppose.

Yes, I tried to enter into a discourse with Nick Watkins over the status of my father's shares when he passed away. 

Completely ignored