It isn't strange that no-one on here believes anything you say
Do do you think I care?
Not me sunshine! So am (waiting) but Iv'e got more patience than you, obviously.
If they're sharks, what are CCC??????????
I think you need to go to a couple of parties.
Do do you think I care?
I think you need to go to a couple of parties.
That means you do :claping hands:
Who is Mr Chambers?
Do do you think I care?
What makes you think that? Its not on naming people, however the research I've done says it isn'tMy spider senses lead me to believe that Pete Chambers and RFC are the same person, although I could be wrong. I'm going with it anyway..
If they're sharks, what are CCC??????????
What makes you think that? Its not on naming people, however the research I've done says it isn't
I think you need to go to a couple of parties.
My spider senses lead me to believe that Pete Chambers and RFC are the same person, although I could be wrong. I'm going with it anyway..
It could well be, I haven't find any proof though.Ha ha well I guess I will take your word for it given that you have the research in front of you.
Damn it. I just thought that because they both whittle on and share similar views that no-one else on this forum (or planet). Back to the drawing boardI'll get you next time Chambers!
I think you need to go to a couple of parties.
I was writing about SISU, not CCC. If you are interested in a debate about whether or not SISU would be poor people to do business with then I'm up for it. I'm waiting, make your case for them being good counterparts.
Ha ha well I guess I will take your word for it given that you have the research in front of you.
Damn it. I just thought that because they both whittle on and share similar views that no-one else on this forum (or planet). Back to the drawing boardI'll get you next time Chambers!
Not Mr Chambers, look at the SCG I would suggest.
without wishing to put you on the spot is there anything new in the Observer that has not. been dealt with before?
without wishing to put you on the spot is there anything new in the Observer that has not. been dealt with before?
Strange timing to release this now as it was included in the JR.
Poor effort at a smokescreen, though for what I ask, to take us away from the case of SISU have given up on CCFC football matters ?
Still laughing
Many fans seem to forget only 6 months ago we were playing at sixfields and that was down to sisu, no-one else.
I've got my own theory on who she is, but it is only a guess.
Les Reid at it again. Bringing out an article form last summer hahaha and some fans like RFC go in up roar.
It's the smoking gun. I guess it's only come out now as the appeal got rejected?
So the thing people are pissed off about is the fact that lucas said ACL didn't need ccfc when they did?
so the ACL was ok while CCFC paid the rent, so the only thing lucas has lied about was saying that ACL was not viable without CCFC ?
so the judge is right saying no problems for ACL while ccfc was there and is also right saying sisu tried to distress ACL by not paying the rent.
So the thing people are pissed off about is the fact that lucas said ACL didn't need ccfc when they did?
and people are pissed off that SISU tried to screw CCC out of the stadium by distressing ACL ?
So they are both as bad as each other ?
For me there's a follow on from that. When CCC kept claiming then didn't need CCFC for ACL to be sustainable and that it was making a profit without the club that in my mind meant CCC could quite happily hold on for ACL pretty much indefinitely. Keep it ticking over running at a small profit or break even. They could basically outlast SISU and then when a new owner was eventually at the club everything would fall into place.
Now I'm in the position where I can't be sure who has told the truth about what. It turns out some of thing things Fisher, Sepalla and even Labovich claimed were actually true, you have to then start and wonder what else they said may have been true.
I agree with that chief but the fact that sisu was trying to distress ACL to get the stadium makes them just as much a liar as lucas(if its all true) and just as bad because they did not have the best interests of the fans or the club at heart ( same as the council) because they want the stadium for their own investors not CCFC ? does that not make them both as bad as each other using CCFC and the fans as pawns for their own gains ?
I agree with that chief but the fact that sisu was trying to distress ACL to get the stadium makes them just as much a liar as lucas(if its all true) and just as bad because they did not have the best interests of the fans or the club at heart ( same as the council) because they want the stadium for their own investors not CCFC ? does that not make them both as bad as each other using CCFC and the fans as pawns for their own gains ?
For me there's a follow on from that. When CCC kept claiming then didn't need CCFC for ACL to be sustainable and that it was making a profit without the club that in my mind meant CCC could quite happily hold on for ACL pretty much indefinitely. Keep it ticking over running at a small profit or break even. They could basically outlast SISU and then when a new owner was eventually at the club everything would fall into place.
Now I'm in the position where I can't be sure who has told the truth about what. It turns out some of thing things Fisher, Sepalla and even Labovich claimed were actually true, you have to then start and wonder what else they said may have been true.
I agree with that chief but the fact that sisu was trying to distress ACL to get the stadium makes them just as much a liar as lucas(if its all true) and just as bad because they did not have the best interests of the fans or the club at heart ( same as the council) because they want the stadium for their own investors not CCFC ? does that not make them both as bad as each other using CCFC and the fans as pawns for their own gains ?
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?