sisu: 1 week till we hear the truth (2 Viewers)

letsallsingtogether · Jun 1, 2014

Read the posts on here it is very clear who they aer?

Negativity with everyone who tries to do something. OK some of the protests / ideas are shit but at least they are trying, others unfortunately do nothing but slag everyone off but have no ideas of their own. Maybe we all need to meet and have an old fashioned brainstorming session.?

stupot07 said:
Apart from "RFC" who are those fans?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

letsallsingtogether · Jun 1, 2014

Sack the council storm the Ricoh hand it to sisu then stand back and watch the success they make of our club...:facepalm:

skybluetony176 said:
I'm all ears grendull. Tell me your master plan.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 1, 2014

letsallsingtogether said:
Maybe we all need to meet and have an old fashioned brainstorming session.?

Not the worst idea... although go above half a dozen and it threatens to stop being brainstorming, and become general carnage.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 1, 2014

I even resisted the obvious joke about not having a brain between us all to storm...

MichaelCCFC · Jun 1, 2014

letsallsingtogether said:
Read the posts on here it is very clear who they aer?

Negativity with everyone who tries to do something. OK some of the protests / ideas are shit but at least they are trying, others unfortunately do nothing but slag everyone off but have no ideas of their own. Maybe we all need to meet and have an old fashioned brainstorming session.?

Are the Trust due a meeting?

stupot07 · Jun 1, 2014

The term Brainstorming is now viewed as politically incorrect, and offensive to those who have brain disorders, e.g. Epilepsy, etc. the terminology now is 'thought shower'

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

shmmeee · Jun 1, 2014

stupot07 said:
The term Brainstorming is now viewed as politically incorrect, and offensive to those who have brain disorders, e.g. Epilepsy, etc. the terminology now is 'thought shower'

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I heard this. What a load of bollocks, I thought.

To be fair, as a teacher I use and see others use "brainstorm" a lot, so it can't be that offensive. Always seemed like another "baa baa nice sheep" type thing to me.

skybluetony176 · Jun 1, 2014

stupot07 said:
The term Brainstorming is now viewed as politically incorrect, and offensive to those who have brain disorders, e.g. Epilepsy, etc. the terminology now is 'thought shower'

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

I have epilepsy, I'm not offended.

Surely thought shower is offensive to people with personal hygiene problems;-)

letsallsingtogether · Jun 1, 2014

Carnage now maybe just maybe that would work :thinking about:

Deleted member 5849 said:
Not the worst idea... although go above half a dozen and it threatens to stop being brainstorming, and become general carnage.

letsallsingtogether · Jun 1, 2014

That is why I put "old fashioned" not sure what you want to call it know?
As a six sigma black belt we used to do this all the time and as the quality of our football experience is in jeopardy maybe we could set up a team and see what changes we can make.

stupot07 said:
The term Brainstorming is now viewed as politically incorrect, and offensive to those who have brain disorders, e.g. Epilepsy, etc. the terminology now is 'thought shower'

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

mighty quinn · Jun 1, 2014

letsallsingtogether said:
Well if Joy and Tim are to be believed then nothing will come out of the JR except the truth.
No matter who wins the result will not change where we are.
Council win stay in Northampton until new ground is built.
Sisu win stay in Northampton until new ground is built.

Then we are going to be in Northampton a long time then because they will never build a stadium its never been their intention.

Ian1779 · Jun 1, 2014

stupot07 said:
The term Brainstorming is now viewed as politically incorrect, and offensive to those who have brain disorders, e.g. Epilepsy, etc. the terminology now is 'thought shower'

Did you steal that from 'The Thick of It'?

stupot07 · Jun 1, 2014

Ian1779 said:
Did you steal that from 'The Thick of It'?

No heard it at work ages ago,

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

Hobo · Jun 1, 2014

I fear the JR will muddy the waters further. I think a lot of the 'truth' the fans want to hear won't be covered by the JR.

But I do think it will bring us closer to SISU showing their final hand....which may not be good news for the club.

Buster · Jun 1, 2014

Why would some people have red faces if The JR was to go against the council?
The council were trying to protect the Ricoh from a hedge fund and if you believe what SISU say ,the council were willing to listen to other offers . If that was true I don't blame them one bit . Wonder why they didn't want to deal with Seppala.

Gary.j · Jun 1, 2014

letsallsingtogether said:
Maybe we all need to meet and have an old fashioned brainstorming session.?

If one is arranged, pm me, I'm up for it.

lordsummerisle · Jun 2, 2014

letsallsingtogether said:
. Maybe we all need to meet and have an old fashioned brainstorming session.?

Lets run it up the flagpole and see who salutes.

MichaelCCFC · Jun 2, 2014

lordsummerisle said:
Lets run it up the flagpole and see who salutes.

RoboCCFC90, me and a couple of others are having a drink at the City Arms Fri 13 June to shoot the breeze while watching Sp v NL. If RoboCCFC90 doesn't mind, anyone else would be welcome too??

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Buster said:
Why would some people have red faces if The JR was to go against the council?
The council were trying to protect the Ricoh from a hedge fund and if you believe what SISU say ,the council were willing to listen to other offers . If that was true I don't blame them one bit . Wonder why they didn't want to deal with Seppala.

Similar to my thoughts.

Whilst the council might yet be found guilty of breaking state aid rules, surely we should congratulate their motives?

We all agree that sisu are unsuitable owners of the club. No fans like sisu apparently.

If the council saw an opportunity to oust sisu, bring in new owners, and unite the club and stadium ownership together, then shouldn't we be grateful to them for trying to do that?

sky blue john · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
Similar to my thoughts.

Whilst the council might yet be found guilty of breaking state aid rules, surely we should congratulate their motives?

We all agree that sisu are unsuitable owners of the club. No fans like sisu apparently.

If the council saw an opportunity to oust sisu, bring in new owners, and unite the club and stadium ownership together, then shouldn't we be grateful to them for trying to do that?

Agreed.
My thoughts also.

Spionkop · Jun 2, 2014

Buster, Ron, exactly. Hit the nail on the head.

Grendel · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
Similar to my thoughts.

Whilst the council might yet be found guilty of breaking state aid rules, surely we should congratulate their motives?

We all agree that sisu are unsuitable owners of the club. No fans like sisu apparently.

If the council saw an opportunity to oust sisu, bring in new owners, and unite the club and stadium ownership together, then shouldn't we be grateful to them for trying to do that?

No - only a troll or a moron would think that

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Grendel said:
No - only a troll or a moron would think that

How about rather than name calling you actually put forward your argument as to why I'm wrong?

Astute · Jun 2, 2014

Grendel said:
No - only a troll or a moron would think that

Just like only a moron would blame CCC for what has gone on the last few years. The last few years has been nothing but SISU ripping our club and supporters apart whilst putting their plan into action. Not only have they ripped our club and supporters apart but it looks like a plan that is doomed unless they change it a fair bit.

Grendel · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
How about rather than name calling you actually put forward your argument as to why I'm wrong?

Frankly you are beyond help.

What you are suggesting is that the Council are able to judge fit and proper owners for the club. Their definition of "fit and proper" is someone who pays their grossly inflated bills and offer some carrots regarding re-development. The club could suffer relegation after relegation as long as they kept the bloated ACL belly full they would not give a toss.

If sisu were still picking up the tab they would pass the fit and proper test.

No genuine supporter would want that

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Grendel said:
Frankly you are beyond help.

What you are suggesting is that the Council are able to judge fit and proper owners for the club. Their definition of "fit and proper" is someone who pays their grossly inflated bills and offer some carrots regarding re-development. The club could suffer relegation after relegation as long as they kept the bloated ACL belly full they would not give a toss.

If sisu were still picking up the tab they would pass the fit and proper test.

No genuine supporter would want that

Most genuine supporters want what is best for the club.

For me that means the club playing at the Ricoh, with competent owners, and ideally owning the Ricoh.

Now as you claim to "only want what is best for the club", why would you care what happens to sisu? Surely you want them out as much as the rest of us?

Grendel · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
Most genuine supporters want what is best for the club.

For me that means the club playing at the Ricoh, with competent owners, and ideally owning the Ricoh.

Now as you claim to "only want what is best for the club", why would you care what happens to sisu? Surely you want them out as much as the rest of us?

But you mentioned the council -- they don't want what is best for the club only for themselves. They are not representative of what supporters want - just someone to pick up their tab.

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Grendel said:
But you mentioned the council -- they don't want what is best for the club only for themselves. They are not representative of what supporters want - just someone to pick up their tab.

But if their motives were to get better owners, and unite the club with the stadium, that can only be a good thing.

Deleted member 5849 · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
Most genuine supporters want what is best for the club.

For me that means the club playing at the Ricoh, with competent owners, and ideally owning the Ricoh.

Now as you claim to "only want what is best for the club", why would you care what happens to sisu? Surely you want them out as much as the rest of us?

Unfortunately, the council's choice of owners didn't seem overly competent. Two figureheads tied up in the failures of the past (one not just SISU's failures, but the failures before - a more consistent level of failure than SISU!) along with a bloke selected more for his property development background than any interest in the football club or, more to the point, the wherewithal to actually buy it!

So the council's fait accompli actually wanted to deny the football club the opportunity to come up with the best and most suitable owners in a fair fight and, worse, was more interested in the land developement and getting that right, then what would benefit the football club.

The club, after all, is a sideshow to the Ricoh.

Grendel · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
But if their motives were to get better owners, and unite the club with the stadium, that can only be a good thing.

Sisu fitted the bill once didn't they?

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Deleted member 5849 said:
Unfortunately, the council's choice of owners didn't seem overly competent. Two figureheads tied up in the failures of the past (one not just SISU's failures, but the failures before - a more consistent level of failure than SISU!) along with a bloke selected more for his property development background than any interest in the football club or, more to the point, the wherewithal to actually buy it!

So the council's fait accompli actually wanted to deny the football club the opportunity to come up with the best and most suitable owners in a fair fight and, worse, was more interested in the land developement and getting that right, then what would benefit the football club.

The club, after all, is a sideshow to the Ricoh.

But "all experts agree" that the club needs to own its stadium. Now what the council are accused of would have given the club that. So how can that be a bad thing?

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Grendel said:
Sisu fitted the bill once didn't they?

Yes they did.

Unfortunately they then changed their business plan.

Grendel · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
Yes they did.

Unfortunately they then changed their business plan.

They stopped stuffing ACL with money

bigfatronssba · Jun 2, 2014

Grendel said:
They stopped stuffing ACL with money

No they sold our best players for a quick small profit, concerned themselves about an overweight elephant, and installed a piece of fruit as chairman who liked to sit on the bench.

Grendel · Jun 2, 2014

bigfatronssba said:
No they sold our best players for a quick small profit, concerned themselves about an overweight elephant, and installed a piece of fruit as chairman who liked to sit on the bench.

And if they had still fed ACL the council would have done nothing to try and change them. They would have been "good" owners.

On the other hand if they were top of a league with a good policy on recruitment but stopped paying the over blown rent the council would want them out to bring in a "good" owner - one like sisu when they paid the bills.

sisu: 1 week till we hear the truth (2 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Deleted member 5849

Guest

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 5849

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency