Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Backtracking eh? That's not what you said in earlier posts. (Highlighted) Once again you don't know that!
What I do know is that there is no coherent and supported proposal on the table
If Hoffman and Haskell came backwith similar statements they would be laughed at
Seeing as they bought the other half....Yes I would say they did.
Exactly.
The fact it is straight to the telegraph to whip up some anger again gives it away really.
Did WASPs produce proof of funds to buy the other half owned by the Council?
Not disagreeing with you. Of course she will sell... just a question of how much. She says I don't want to sell. Someone has to come and say I'll give you, say, 10 million and then she says not enough, but come and look at books showing how well we are progressing....
Why am I back tracking?Backtracking eh? That's not what you said in earlier posts. (Highlighted) Once again you don't know that!
The sale has been completed so you can only assume yes.
Higgs started negotiations with SISU with no proof of funds, they shook on a deal, SISU reneged on it, came back with a "charitable donation" and then couldn't provide proof of funds. To suggest that talks wouldn't happen without proof of funds is bollocks and we've all witnessed the court case that proves it. The proof of funds happens after talks have begun and a figure has been agreed on. Unless you're SISU it seems.
That's what I meant earlier, with the trust rocking up with the Telegraph waiting round the corner to get an exclusive it is a bit different from a rich arab rocking up throwing cold cash her way.
OK offer a quid - so where does the remainder ongoing investment come from?
Comes under the category 'worth a try'... plus the publicity and the discussion may just reach the ears of someone mad enough to join in with English football and take a punt...
Yes = from the Council with an initial loan from them!
The purchaser makes a bid and the vendor says have you proof of funds?
No point agreeing something to find the puchaser is broke!
Fishing exercise... this whole thing is to flush her out... we/ they want a figure - any figure - which would mean she wants to sell. Then perhaps someone who wants to buy will come out of the woodwork... she is cute enough to see this and repeats not for sale... she is waiting for a sensible bid...
You might like your men to have ladies names but my names Pete sorryWhat you're doing is taking one stament I made and equaling that to another statement you've invented. No half wit fans doesn't equal sisu forever. Getting it yet Susan?
SBT quiet rightly won't be conducting their business to suit individuals on here. Are they backed financially I would think definitely. Is it significant this has come out the day after big Steve moved aside from the chairman role.
Yes but not to suit you. As said this is obviously the opening shot and a way to go but significantly has been made public.
Were member consulted on this?The members don't know do they about anything?
Why should they ?Were member consulted on this?
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Conducting their business to suit their members. You would think that was a given surely?
Why wouldnt/shouldnt they be? I thought they were supposed to be transparent and work on behalf of its members. Offering to buy the club is a pretty big move strategically, I would have thought it would have at least have consulted with its members first.Why should they ?
Yes like sisu, that's exactly what I mean, any businessman who is waiting for sisu to go tits up hasn't got the where withall to take this club forwards, my point is that 20,000 turning up week in week out might attract the right kind of owners, not the kind that want to sit back watching the football club being distressed so they can get it for naff all. Oh and I don't mean to work with sisu I mean to replace them.
Do you really think business men are out there that will work with SISU? I don't know personally, but from what I've read that any business will touch them with a barge pole. (Highlighted) Like SISU did do you mean?
Why wouldnt/shouldnt they be? I thought they were supposed to be transparent and work on behalf of its members. Offering to buy the club is a pretty big move strategically, I would have thought it would have at least have consulted with its members first.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I've already read them thanks. Regardless of their constitution, they should have consulted with their members on this IMO.Maybe you should read their constitution http://www.skybluetrust.co.uk/index.php/about-the-trust which has been the same since inception.
The Trust’s Aims are to:
To achieve these Aims the Trust will:
- To build and maintain membership of the Trust;
- To secure supporter involvement in the ownership and management of the club;
- To advocate financial stability for CCFC, with a business model based on avoiding unsustainable debt, and profits being reinvested directly in the Club;
- To have City fans recognised as the lifeblood of the Club and at the heart of everything CCFC does.
- seek to work in partnership with the Club and all other stakeholders in CCFC;
- represent and give voice to the views of Trust members;
- pursue any viable opportunity to gain an ownership stake in CCFC;
- campaign for improvements to the match day experience.
Why wouldnt/shouldnt they be? I thought they were supposed to be transparent and work on behalf of its members. Offering to buy the club is a pretty big move strategically, I would have thought it would have at least have consulted with its members first.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
What is there to consult about? They have not spoken to JS ( she knocked them back ). Should the members vote on whether they ask if the club is for sale? I thought the idea of a trust is for the fans to have some form of representation or even some share of ownership. They seem to be doing their job. When they are at a point to obtain ownership or fan representation, then I can see the point of consultation as to whether to go forward with the deal or not.
I knew it was in their plans to try and takeover, I hope it still is.I've already read them thanks. Regardless of their constitution, they should have consulted with their members on this IMO.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
What is there to consult about? .
Do you think Martcov that joy is looking to sell? You seemed to suggest she is looking for a way out?
Making a formal approach for talks about fan ownership, given that it was always going to be made public.
That's my opinion, fair play you have a different opinion.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
I knew it was in their plans to try and takeover, I hope it still is.
I think it would have been nice for her to meet them after all they said they were going to communicate more with the fans .She could still have said no sale but could have told us her plans going forward but there again why talk to your customers.
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?