They would be gone though if they liquidated.Whether I or others want them to stay or go is irrelevant in terms of liquidation.
If they choose to liquidate that would be disastrous.
I suspect though, they whether I like the twats or not, they would do what suits them, regardless of how feel about our club.
I can't remember what this thread is aboutbut at least now it's moved beyond Nick, at least I feel I can interject.
I don't understand what's wrong with saying yes, I'd like SISU OUT really.
Yes I agree, your example is not a fabulous future. Nor, for that matter, would I see an Elliott led group in charge, and Haskell was not an appropriate alternative. Voicing my viws on the last two had people confuse that with not being SISU OUT but, also... not agreeing that yes, SISU OUT would be good when asked a simple question leads to doubt even if unjustified... and that's needless doubt.
We can get back to the ramblings about what should replace a SISU-led club but, tbh, SISU OUT is surely such an obvious thing that needs to be done then yes, it doesn't need to be stated most times but also yes, why not just agree it's a good option if it stops doubt?
It's almost like you aren't listening to anything you get in reply.
What are the consequences of them going tomorrow?
You do realise that asking the same thing over and over doesn't change anything.
Would you be happy with there being no ccfc again if sisu go tomorrow?
I think its more about trying to paint Nick as some fervent sisu lover just because he tries to look at the bigger picture.
We'll give you a boolean choice and if you dont give us the answer we want we'll start the witch hunt, its pathetic.
For what its worth, I think it would take something pretty disastrous to be worse than sisu post sisu.
But if supporting city has taught me one think, it can always get worse.
Just give a straight answer.
The majority , you know the ill educated, mob rule Brexit 'Leave', Sun reading, minions Nick, would like our owners relieved of the Golden Share.
Do you think that they should be relieved of the Golden Share?
Or do you think that they are worthy custodians of that Golden Share?
What do you think?
Exactly. It needs to really say a scenario.But then answer the question, however fatuous, and then move on by pointing out how disastrous an Elliott led regime would be.
There's agreement here, but the phrasing's leading to a pointless argument.
Not everybody is a shouty person Nick.
You twist everything without actually nailing any colours to the mast.
The most any member of this forum can glean is that your non-committal view leans very much towards our wonderful owners.
I have wasted the last 2 hours asking questions that every sane, logical Coventry City fan already knew the answer to.
So chaps,
Nothing new to see here.
Good night
I have already said that I didn't hear the phone in.
You are very selective in what you choose to hear ir read.
I will, however listen to the podcast? (Im guessing).
At what point should I stop it to listen to your views?
Stockholm syndrome !
Over the last 9 years, our current owners, who according to the EFL have passed the fit and proper persons test, despite absolute anonymity, have divided our club, THAT's OUR CLUB, in to many different and utterly confusing parts.
We have no divine right to competing in an league.
I do, however believe that the least that we should expect as fans, is that those that control the Golden Share, are obliged to at least attempt to improve us as a team / business .
That we should have ambition and hope, because without these, after half a century they can fuck off or I will.
Sky Blues Talk is a great site and I will continue to check in.
Thanks for the healthy debate Nick
And if the debate fails, just go on a random rant
Are you going to say why it's Stockholm Syndrome because I wouldn't want the club to go out of existence for example as a scenario where I wouldn't say go?
You keep demanding all of this answers to your leading questions that don't really make sense but won't answer others yourself.
Too late to get professional help.How late was Nigel on?
Yep, picked up on that too. It's always thinly veiled put downs.I can't tell if the thread is still about Linnell or not, but I noticed yesterday in particular he used his crafty code. when talking about people protesting or slagging someone off he'll make a point of saying how they're entitled to their opinion, which is his subtle way of calling the callers clueless morons.
Of course, he's entitled to his opinion.
Good save Otis!Errm .....but in saying that, can I just add that I love my wife just as passionately and with as much vigour as I did last year and the year before that and the year before that.
Just to clarify something the Golden Share is owned by Otium Entertainment Group t/a CCFC. Not by SISU Capital Limited. Indeed SISU Capital Limited does not as far as can be seen own any part of Otium or SBS&L ......... they are agents for the investors in SBS&L and ARVO
Take the share away from Otium and CCFC ceases to be an EFL club and that share is then offered to some other entity.............. not really what we want surely? Not an action the EFL is likely to take either unless they could prove without an doubt, fraud or some other major breach of EFL rules & regulations. Being completely useless at running a football club is not a breach of said regulations
As for Linnell - yes he likes his own voice and opinion but when I have heard from him on the radio recently he has seemed as exasperated as the rest of us about matters on and off the field at CCFC
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?