Time to Unmask Himself (3 Viewers)

[Grendel]

How about SISU unmask their investors at the same time? Just for balance of course, would hate people to think that you whre being one sided.

So now you think the businessmen are as shady and secretive as hedge fund investors!

Wow just wow.

 

---

[idm1975]

So now you think the businessmen are as shady and secretive as hedge fund investors!

Wow just wow.

Do you believe in fairies?

 

[sky blue john]

Given that even people who share your views on here now cringe with embarrassment when you make a post your comment is somewhat amusing.

I'm just being real I didn't realise supporting Cov was a popularity contest !

 

[mark82]

After months of Michael wanting talks and "all it takes is one phone call", it seems odd that he would threaten to walk away over such trivialities.

Someone is pulling his strings, I reckon.

Only possible explanation for me. I do feel a bit for Michael though. He's stuck in the middle a bit and in a no win situation. If the deal is good then mystery backer will move forward and take the credit. If it turns out the offer isn't good when they get into the detail then the backer will stay in the background and let Michael pick up the flack.

One question that does come to mind is why this wasn't channeled through the trust, which would be the obvious choice. Reasons for this I can think of:

1. Offer is not good and trust didn't want to be associated with it.
2. Offer is not genuine and is just meant as added propaganda. Maybe there are not really any funds or possibly no real backer (although I don't think this is true).
3. As an individual Michael was seen as an easier target than the trust and is being used.
4. These are people Michael knows personally or has found himself, the offer is good and CCFC will go back to the Ricoh (I'm sure everyone hopes this is the correct reason).

 

[Grendel]

Do you believe in fairies?

You said secrecy from investors was undesirable did you not?

 

[idm1975]

You said secrecy from investors was undesirable did you not?

This is my favourite.... show me where i said those words? I think thats how it goes isnt it?

 

[Grendel]

This is my favourite.... show me where i said those words? I think thats how it goes isnt it?

Well, you said "how about sisu unmask their investors" - this has nothing to do with sisu but its you who is comparing their behaviour to the businessman - not me.

You either have a problem with secret investors or not.

Do you?

 

[idm1975]

Well, you said "how about sisu unmask their investors" - this has nothing to do with sisu but its you who is comparing their behaviour to the businessman - not me.

You either have a problem with secret investors or not.

Do you?

So you cant show me where i said that then?

 

[lewys33]

Is it going to be like undercover boss where Ryan Haines suddenly walks out suited and booted with a bulging briefcase?

 

[Grendel]

So you cant show me where i said that then?

You said "why don't sisu unmask their investors" - I have to assume therefore you believe in an open policy or why make the statement? You appear to be struggling here, do you want to call it a day?

 

[fernandopartridge]

It's probably John Armstrong the head of one of the city's best window firms

 

[will am i]

I think you are missing the point.

This scenario is possible;

Someone wants to create some more negative headlines.
They conclude a good headline for kcic is "sisu do not want to double attendances in Coventry for free"
They use Michael Orton to front this.
Sisu call the bluff and accept talks.
They want to discuss some of this over the phone. Its decided this can be used as a get out of jail card - sisu will not talk.

There is no deal. There was no deal. A plan aimed at mischief went wrong and one person now carries the can while others stay away waiting for another escapade.

Now this could be wrong and is pure conjecture. The only way to prove this is show the deal and the investors.

Its interesting that you seem to think KCIC need to be open and transparent but not the investors in our club.

Anyway, this is simple for SISU - tell Michael you want to meet give him some dates times and place. I would turn up at the venue with The Telegraph having my photo taken outside too if I were them. We will then see who wants deal and who doesnt. In that case I might even turn up at Sixfields next year.

 

[Nick]

Is it going to be like undercover boss where Ryan Haines suddenly walks out suited and booted with a bulging briefcase?

Do we call them briefcases now?

 

[Nick]

Its interesting that you seem to think KCIC need to be open and transparent but not the investors in our club.

Maybe because they are the ones calling for transparency and it just makes them look silly as they should surely be setting the standard of how shit should be done properly rather than just doing what they complain about?

It is also interesting that 90% (yes that number) lf people's defence is to compare them to SISU.

 

[Grendel]

Its interesting that you seem to think KCIC need to be open and transparent but not the investors in our club.

Anyway, this is simple for SISU - tell Michael you want to meet give him some dates times and place. I would turn up at the venue with The Telegraph having my photo taken outside too if I were them. We will then see who wants deal and who doesnt. In that case I might even turn up at Sixfields next year.

They will - Michael won't pick up the phone.

 

[idm1975]

You said "why don't sisu unmask their investors" - I have to assume therefore you believe in an open policy or why make the statement? You appear to be struggling here, do you want to call it a day?

Dont think I am struggling at all you said i said something which i did not, if i did please show me and i will call it a day.

 

[olderskyblue]

They will - Michael won't pick up the phone.

I haven't read everything on this, but is that an established fact?

 

[Nick]

I haven't read everything on this, but is that an established fact?

Yes! He has now given ML somebody else as a contact. (Not the investors or main men). A middle middle man, which is unfair again!

 

[idm1975]

Yes! He has now given ML somebody else as a contact. (Not the investors or main men). A middle middle man, which is unfair again!

Unfair on who?

 

[Nick]

Unfair on who?

The people being put into the action? Just let whoever is running it to speak to them, cuts out on the back and forth then doesn't it?

 

[italiahorse]

Yes! He has now given ML somebody else as a contact. (Not the investors or main men). A middle middle man, which is unfair again!

Unfair? :facepalm:
FFS channel your efforts at the people that took us to Northampton not the people who are trying to get us back, regardless how they try to do it.
Telling this forum what is going on will not help anything as the past few days has proven.

 

[olderskyblue]

Ok, I admit it, I'm one of the mystery businessmen. I left Michael strict instructions to not take any crap from ML. If he's serious about wanting a return to the Ricoh then he will meet. If not, he'll make some excuses and get his forum stooges to spread the PR message. Probably make up some sh** about Michael not returning calls. They'll all swallow it.


Some, all, or none of the above maybe true.

 

[Nick]

Unfair? :facepalm:
FFS channel your efforts at the people that took us to Northampton not the people who are trying to get us back, regardless how they try to do it.
Telling this forum what is going on will not help anything as the past few days has proven.

OF course it is unfair, if Michael is being stitched up it isn't fair on him either.

So telling other fans the situation won't help but bitchy statements against the people they are negotiating will I guess?

 

[Grendel]

Dont think I am struggling at all you said i said something which i did not, if i did please show me and i will call it a day.

Do you have a problem with secret investors or not?

 

[skybluetony176]

Maybe because they are the ones calling for transparency and it just makes them look silly as they should surely be setting the standard of how shit should be done properly rather than just doing what they complain about?

It is also interesting that 90% (yes that number) lf people's defence is to compare them to SISU.

So if ML turns around and says we can't do the deal with KCIC because they wont say who there backers are and we need to know who we're dealing with you will in no way blame MO for the deal not happening?

 

[Samo]

So if ML turns around and says we can't do the deal with KCIC because they wont say who there backers are and we need to know who we're dealing with you will in no way blame MO for the deal not happening?

I certainly wouldn't, it's not up to Michael who chooses to remain anonymous.

 

[Grendel]

So if ML turns around and says we can't do the deal with KCIC because they wont say who there backers are and we need to know who we're dealing with you will in no way blame MO for the deal not happening?

You don't even know they've agreed a deal with ACL do you?

 

[will am i]

Maybe because they are the ones calling for transparency and it just makes them look silly as they should surely be setting the standard of how shit should be done properly rather than just doing what they complain about?

It is also interesting that 90% (yes that number) lf people's defence is to compare them to SISU.

Perhaps we agree. I want all of them to be transparent - I'm not asking it of one side or the other. So, do you think SISU should be transparent about the investors in your club or not?

 

[skybluetony176]

You don't even know they've agreed a deal with ACL do you?

You dont know they havent? what did that have to do with my post anyway?

 

[Godiva]

All this person is doing is providing funding to facilitate a return to the Ricoh. He is not making any business decision on behalf of the club and therefore there is no real need to know who it is. The aim of remaining anonymous is probably because the focus should be on the club not on who a benefactor is.

Like sisu's investors?

 

[will am i]

They will - Michael won't pick up the phone.

So why doesnt ML email Michael with some dates and times for a potential meeting and stop dicking about?

 

[idm1975]

Do you have a problem with secret investors or not?

So your admitting you cannot show me where then?

 

[Godiva]

The disappointment is PWKH doesn't post in here anymore - he would at least clarify if a deal has been set up.

No, he only speaks when it's about the charity.
Or he said so last time around.

 

[Grendel]

So why doesnt ML email Michael with some dates and times for a potential meeting and stop dicking about?

He wants to clarify a few things - oddly the phone has been in existence for well over 100 years. It's a way of having a two way dialogue - there is no justification for ignoring phone calls.

 

[idm1975]

He wants to clarify a few things - oddly the phone has been in existence for well over 100 years. It's a way of having a two way dialogue - there is no justification for ignoring phone calls.

Do you know there is not a valid reason for allegedly ignoring these supposed calls?