Joe Elliott is attending the Sky Blues Kenilworth Supporters Club tomorrow -Wednesday (15 Viewers)

[Grendel]

Grendel it seems it was you Mr Hoffman was referring to when he suggested people were saying he wanted to pick the club up for nothing


Arrogant and stupid is in there for good measure as well

I think Mr Hoffman was spot on to have a pop back and mabe it is not quite as outrageous as you suggest

He was quite gracious really by adding that you are a passionate Cov fan who would think differently if you really knew what he was doing.

Originally Posted by kduffy:
Look this club had been living on borrowed time financially for many years. We must be the only club that have gone down and after the parachute cushion retained league one status and / or not fell into administration.

Crowds are very poor given the size of the city. Sisu are business focused and cannot be expected to have affinity with the club. We are a white elephant to them. In truth I am amazed that they still back this club at all. I would have pulled the plug last year.

It's an unholy mess. Elliot and ransom are culpable and the fool mcginnity should have pushed admin on us years ago, we are existing on life support. There are no solutions until the public support the club in numbers and generate revenue.

To me Hoffman is the voyeur looking on. It's very obvious the money he has is limited and he wants the club for nothing. For a so called astute business brain this is arrogant and stupid. If you spent £30 million on an investment opportunity would you give it away for nothing? No you wouldn't.

Ultimately we will get what we deserve.

Once again a quote based on a response to a post well in the past. What point are you trying to make?

 

---

[Nonleagueherewecome]

You can say that now, but the info we have in them now wasn't being banded about back then. I can't recall facts about what they'd done with other companies being presented; in fact I haven't seen any recently either - still just people being vague and generalising. Anyone got the name of a company they've done this to? I've never seen one put forward.

You didn't need to. You just needed to realise that they are a Vulture Fund and look at the general modus operandi and that their stated plan here was entirely contrary to their nature. It was like a worm saying he is going to fly today.

 

[torchomatic]

Can't see the point in dragging up old quotes to point score. When we write something on this forum it is generally about "here and now". I'm sure there are posts we ALL wish we hadn't written, but with Dongo's patented Hindsight Goggles it seems he doesn't take that into account.

Once again a quote based on a response to a post well in the past. What point are you trying to make?

 

[Grendel]

Agreed, but equally, do you not think Hoffman and Elliott have learnt from their SISU experience? It's not as if they headhunted SISU anyway, and one of them resigned in protest at their ownership whilst another was booted out by them. Don't you think their desire to see fan representation on the board is a reflection of that rather than just spin?

What people have learned is not really relevant. More to the point is where does the money come from as whoever's it is will dictate terms of use age

The club itself is unworkable whoever owns it unless the ground is leased to it with all income streams. Will this be allowed to happen?

What is the role of Elliot in future plans. Prior to sisu he was part of a board which overspent and nearly broke the club. Does this not raise concerns regarding future active roles?

The club has to achieve self sufficiency stabilise and live within its means. Will this happen or wi it be spend spend and fail again?

Perhaps if we engaged in this discussions than don blocking every thread with old posts the debate may become more grown up.

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

I agree. SISU could go tomorrow and I would welcome it. However, I would love nothing more than a fresh start with our football club. Not people who have been involved with failed regimes in the past. As you stated may people have been good for the club in the past, but that doesn't mean to say that they'd be any good here now in 2013. It's pointless getting rid of one lot of failed owners for another. Or, if not pointless, then risky.

Saying that, if they took over then they would get my support. As SISU did. I was vilified for that, and continue to be.

If JE and GH did take over and it went wrong then I think we could almost guarantee that they'd still come out of it smelling of roses.

I'd accept that your approach has always been to support the club - and by implication - whoever is owning/running it.

I respect that, but differ from you in that I supported SISU until their behaviour became such that I could no longer see a positive future for the club with them at the helm.

I don't personally share the doubts about GH for reasons that I've stated on here previously (previous involvement was as a NED, resigned when Board strategy changed to one he disagreed with etc), but at the moment there appear to be only two (potential) games in town - and of the two, I prefer the one that isn't SISU.

As for your final point, given that GH was given stick for trying to find investors ("fantacist" etc) and the negative posts of the last few days - I'm not quite sure where you're coming from......

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Can't see the point in dragging up old quotes to point score. When we write something on this forum it is generally about "here and now". I'm sure there are posts we ALL wish we hadn't written, but with Dongo's patented Hindsight Goggles it seems he doesn't take that into account.

Why even last night I myself was pondering the great football we saw under Thorn during his caretaker reign. Maybe we were playing so good because we didn't have any pressure (not much to play for), or teams we were playing were in a similar mindset to our team now-had something to play for, dropped out of contention, nothing to play for so there for the taking? And we had some very, very good players-good enough to carry the side and put on the show when given tremendous creative freedom after being tied to the Boothroyd leash? Almost the opposite of our side/situation now, really.

But don't tell me that lots of people who wanted Thorn in the job didn't flip last season and decide that that they never did! There would have been uproar from the majority fans if he hadn't got the job, but you're hard pressed to find many that will admit that they were amongst them.

 

[Grendel]

Why even last night I myself was pondering the great football we saw under Thorn during his caretaker reign. Maybe we were playing so good because we didn't have any pressure (not much to play for), or teams we were playing were in a similar mindset to our team now-had something to play for, dropped out of contention, nothing to play for so there for the taking? And we had some very, very good players-good enough to carry the side and put on the show when given tremendous creative freedom after being tied to the Boothroyd leash? Almost the opposite of our side/situation now, really.

But don't tell me that lots of people who wanted Thorn in the job didn't flip last season and decide that that they never did! There would have been uproar from the majority fans if he hadn't got the job, but you're hard pressed to find many that will admit that they were amongst them.

Don't think you'll find any double standards from me. Just shows fans know not very much and is why board representation is pointless unless it is restricted to input on fan issues regarding non strategic elements.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

Don't think you'll find any double standards from me. Just shows fans know not very much and is why board representation is pointless unless it is restricted to input on fan issues regarding non strategic elements.

The point of fan representation is not that they make decisions, it's that the fans can't be abused in the ways that they have been by the current shower.

 

[Grendel]

The point of fan representation is not that they make decisions, it's that the fans can't be abused in the ways that they have been by the current shower.

But the fans have not been abused any more than they were under Richardson fletcher mcginnity etc.

Sale of the original ground was the killer. Don't think the SBT member on the board would have stopped that. They wouldn't want to stop operation premiership as that was spend spend and spend.

Unless its someone with boardroom experience and gravitas I don't see the point. I fit the bill but I might be too busy.

 

[Nonleagueherewecome]

They have been abused a lot more. I'm not going to write the list out as it's been done a hundred times before. You can argue that the real damage was done by the Richardson regime, sure, but in terms of outright maliciousness towards the supporters, SISU are the worst we've ever had-and amongst the worst in the game ever.

 

[dongonzalos]

I agree. SISU could go tomorrow and I would welcome it. However, I would love nothing more than a fresh start with our football club. Not people who have been involved with failed regimes in the past. As you stated may people have been good for the club in the past, but that doesn't mean to say that they'd be any good here now in 2013. It's pointless getting rid of one lot of failed owners for another. Or, if not pointless, then risky.

Saying that, if they took over then they would get my support. As SISU did. I was vilified for that, and continue to be.

If JE and GH did take over and it went wrong then I think we could almost guarantee that they'd still come out of it smelling of roses.

I don't believe they will be worse than SISU

If Haskell is telling the truth he wants

Half the stadium
Half of ACL
Wants to work with the council
Wants transparency with the fans
Wants a level one academy

So even if he comes in and most if the above does not happen and we stay stagnant, but he is honest with us and speaks to us and tells us what is happening.

That alone for me would be an improvement


However SISU are proving to be a big stumbling block.

Also even SISU are removed from the equation

It is only then that Haskell will get to look at the figures and

Then he may have a change of heart!

 

[DazzleTommyDazzle]

Unless its someone with boardroom experience and gravitas I don't see the point. I fit the bill but I might be too busy.

And to think I used to reckon that Grendel didn't have a sense of humour

 

[grego_gee]

They have been abused a lot more. I'm not going to write the list out as it's been done a hundred times before. You can argue that the real damage was done by the Richardson regime, sure, but in terms of outright maliciousness towards the supporters, SISU are the worst we've ever had-and amongst the worst in the game ever.

I don't want to appear to be defending them, but how would you define what they have done in respect of being the worst we've ever had in terms of maliciousness towards supporters? Point me to a list if its been done before!

imp:

 

[Grendel]

I don't want to appear to be defending them, but how would you define what they have done in respect of being the worst we've ever had in terms of maliciousness towards supporters? Point me to a list if its been done before!

imp:

The only thing I can think of is they recruited that lazy tub of lard Thorn.

 

[dongonzalos]

Once again a quote based on a response to a post well in the past. What point are you trying to make?

You were making out you never had a pop at Mr Hoffman and you were shocked he had a pop at you.

Well you did and you specifically were the individual who said he was trying to get the club for nothing.

 

[dongonzalos]

At the end of the day you Torch and Lord have had a few pops At Gary Hoffman.

It is an Internet forum that is your opinion I can disagree with you that's my opinion that is what it is about.

I just don't think the three of you should be that shocked or outraged when he has a dig back.

 

[Godiva]

The point of fan representation is not that they make decisions, it's that the fans can't be abused in the ways that they have been by the current shower.

I am afraid it not that simple.

Consider this:
The board is meeting in September and they are discussing next years budget.
It is clear that the club is overspending and decisions have to be made about balancing the in's and out's.

One issue is that the top scorer is already the highest earner and he is out of contract at the end of the season. His agent has told the club that there are other clubs asking for his service. The player is happy where he is, but a new contract will cost an extra 2k per week plus extra bonuses.
Three members of the board are in favor of selling the top scorer as this would provide the necessary means to secure the cash flow for the next year.

The fans representative on the board know that selling the player will cause a major uproar, but as he is outnumbered - and outvoted - there is little he can do to stop the decision.

What do you suggest the fans representative do in this situation?
- Go public defending the decision?
- Go public and state he voted against the decision, but was outvoted? (Not really an option as a confidentiality agreement probably blocks this).
- Resign from the board in protest?

When it is publicly known that the player is being sold, the chairman make a statement:
The decision to sell the player was not an easy one to make, but the board has a duty to make sure the club is financially safe and as the player was out of contract by the end of the season we could not allow him to run down his contract and leave for free. The board wish to thank the player for his excellent service and wish him luck as he pursue his career elsewhere. As chairman I especially want to thank the fans representative for his valuable and constructive work with the rest of the board.

 

[dongonzalos]

Can't see the point in dragging up old quotes to point score. When we write something on this forum it is generally about "here and now". I'm sure there are posts we ALL wish we hadn't written, but with Dongo's patented Hindsight Goggles it seems he doesn't take that into account.

Gotta say cracking phrase :-

Dongo's patented Hindsight Goggles

 

[torchomatic]

Re: Joe Elliott is attending

At the end of the day you Torch and Lord have had a few pops At Gary Hoffman.

It is an Internet forum that is your opinion I can disagree with you that's my opinion that is what it is about.

I just don't think the three of you should be that shocked or outraged when he has a dig back.

im not 'outraged' and im not sure why the pair of them are either.

I am mystified oftheir unfounded allegation regarding my supposed unfounded allegations. And their insistence of the three of us hiding behind our keyboards. What about everyone else on here?

Sent from my GT-S5830 using Tapatalk 2

 

[grego_gee]

The only thing I can think of is they recruited that lazy tub of lard Thorn.

In fairness he was hanging around already and ready to make himself available!

imp:

 

[Sick Boy]

Why are they even talking about posters on an internet forum anyway? It is bizarre.

 

[Grendel]

Why are they even talking about posters on an internet forum anyway? It is bizarre.

It is but not as bizarre as dons behaviour.

 

[dongonzalos]

Why are they even talking about posters on an internet forum anyway? It is bizarre.

They were just dispelling some myths and false information

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Why even last night I myself was pondering the great football we saw under Thorn during his caretaker reign. Maybe we were playing so good because we didn't have any pressure (not much to play for), or teams we were playing were in a similar mindset to our team now-had something to play for, dropped out of contention, nothing to play for so there for the taking? And we had some very, very good players-good enough to carry the side and put on the show when given tremendous creative freedom after being tied to the Boothroyd leash? Almost the opposite of our side/situation now, really.

But don't tell me that lots of people who wanted Thorn in the job didn't flip last season and decide that that they never did! There would have been uproar from the majority fans if he hadn't got the job, but you're hard pressed to find many that will admit that they were amongst them.

That's because if the average fan were placed in charge of a football club it would end in disaster 9 times out of 10.

 

[lordsummerisle]

The Chinese takeover may well have happened; the chairman at the time (can't think of his name) said he thought he could get the deal done (the deal on un-headed paper), however after a confidential meeting down in London someone from the meeting ran straight to the Sun newspaper, who gave an exclusive on Allardyce being involved etc. The trust with the Chinese was at that point lost, and they walked away.

What happened to the second Chinese takeover last May?

Was there ever anything in that at all?

 

[chiefdave]

Go public and state he voted against the decision, but was outvoted? (Not really an option as a confidentiality agreement probably blocks this).

why would that be confidential, surely that kind of thing is the whole reason for having fan representation. look at the Marlon King situation for example, would have been a lot easier if there was a fan rep on the board to tell us what actually happened with his contract renewal rather than the mess we ended up with. has happened many other times as well.

 

[Godiva]

why would that be confidential, surely that kind of thing is the whole reason for having fan representation. look at the Marlon King situation for example, would have been a lot easier if there was a fan rep on the board to tell us what actually happened with his contract renewal rather than the mess we ended up with. has happened many other times as well.

That's one of the points I try to make. Boards usually have people from outside the company and it is common practice they all sign a confidentiality agreement (with a hefty fine for breaking it) to ensure the board are able to discuss all and every aspects without risking sensible information being leaked.
So if the fans are to gain full board membership the representative will attend and vote on sensible issues like finance, strategic plans (like an action plan to obtain lower rent), staff numbers and wages, hiring and sacking of the CEO and possibly other senior officers etc. etc.
That information cannot be leaked from the boardroom until the moment the board find ís optimal.

Alternatively the fans can have a consulting role at the board ... pretty much what the Trust already have. In this capacity the representative(s) will only get filtered information he/they can pass on via websites and forums.

 

[sky blue john]

Don't mention confidentiality agreements around Grendel he believes they don't exist !!!!!

 

[letsallsingtogether]

I Don't believe Grendel exists not in the real world anyway

Don't mention confidentiality agreements around Grendel he believes they don't exist !!!!!

 

[Grendel]

Don't mention confidentiality agreements around Grendel he believes they don't exist !!!!!

In the context you suggested they don't and owners also don't give a former manager a bung to say nice things about them and bad things about a local council.

 

[Deleted member 5849]

I'm a total Jonah. "Go into Local Government" they said, "they can't go bust". That was 7 years ago. The cutbacks started soon after my first day I think...

Ha, was looking for another quote about something completely different, found this... and boy does it ring true!

Sorry, as you were!

 

[skybluetony176]

Yes,

Is your surname Tant?

I think it's actually Vanilli.