Grendel
Well-Known Member
Of course you should mention them - they have been complicit with wasps and aren’t even subtle
Because nobody took my advice about press releases and not mentioning the trust at all. I'd say my advice doesn't come cheap but hey, alas it does indeed come cheap. Nonetheless, that advice was actually offered knowing full well what would happen.
You either create revolution from within and change things at the trust, or you ignore them and work in building up your own credibility. Batshit suspicions and innuendos aren't the way to do the latter.
Absolute bollocks. There's one board member who I think the Phoenix club accusation can be aimed at and I don't think any of them are 'in' with Hoffman. There's plenty to criticise them over, no need to make things up.
He can talk for himself on here and I’d prefer to seek ways to move forward than to continue arguing
Dave Johnson claimed to have been given the deal Hoffman could sign for the Ricoh lease if he took over? Kalns and CJ were clapping and shaking hands with the wasps guy?
Is there a chance he has different options and may be mistaken on things or is it 100% he just makes things up?he’s a bullshitter
What will happen is that you will be fed stuff so you don't ask questions. It will be "I'll put it to the board" to try and appease.He can talk for himself on here and I’d prefer to seek ways to move forward than to continue arguing
According to their own minutes they have regular meetings with Hoffman.I don't think any of them are 'in' with Hoffman.
Johnson and Kalns are thick as thieves. Removing one and not the other is a token gesture IMO. Not to mention there has never been any communication from the trust to its members regarding his removal, we're just going off a post CJ made on here. And of course doesn't mean he's not still associated as I believe I'm correct in saying both Kalns and Johnson were attending board meetings prior to standing for their 'expertise'.Kalns is no longer on the board.
Have they uploaded the minutes where he was told he couldn't be on the board?According to their own minutes they have regular meetings with Hoffman.
Johnson and Kalns are thick as thieves. Removing one and not the other is a token gesture IMO. Not to mention there has never been any communication from the trust to its members regarding his removal, we're just going off a post CJ made on here. And of course doesn't mean he's not still associated as I believe I'm correct in saying both Kalns and Johnson were attending board meetings prior to standing for their 'expertise'.
Kalns is no longer on the board. Johnson is who I was referring to regarding the Phoenix club agenda.
Does CJ support a phoenix club? I haven't heard him say it. Being too close to wasps doesn't necessarily mean supporting the idea of a phoenix club.
Though accusing the trust of being too close to wasps or at best ambiguous about them is a valid criticism of the trust in my opinion.
According to their own minutes they have regular meetings with Hoffman.
Johnson and Kalns are thick as thieves. Removing one and not the other is a token gesture IMO. Not to mention there has never been any communication from the trust to its members regarding his removal, we're just going off a post CJ made on here. And of course doesn't mean he's not still associated as I believe I'm correct in saying both Kalns and Johnson were attending board meetings prior to standing for their 'expertise'.
Already mentioned that a few posts backHonest Question:
If the Trust are as insignificant, useless and insular as most people on here seem to think
(They maybe, I don’t know) Why are they afforded so much time and energy on here.
The Trust backed Hoffman’s bid (which SISU claimed included Wasps).
It’s whether a supporters trust should actively support a process that may lead to admin and restarting at level 10 that I have an issue withI backed it, I'm not 'in' with him. And I'm not sure what is so bad about backing regime change to be honest (After Dale Evans and Overson leaving I don't back him any longer) but if a competent potential new owner came on the scene why wouldn't anyone back them?
they have meetings with a lot of parties, that doesn't mean they're 'in' with them.
.
There are a other people with influence, people like Lionel bird who aren't on the board. I'd put money on Roger Ellis being involved still too.
Why have regular meetings with someone then? To make sure he buys his round? ffs
Honest Question:
If the Trust are as insignificant, useless and insular as most people on here seem to think
(They maybe, I don’t know) Why are they afforded so much time and energy on here.
Probably all that dancing on the ceiling :emoji_relieved:Lionel definitely has a huge chip on his shoulder.
There are others with that obsession too. Ellis, Johnson etc. They have more sway than CJ and Moz when it comes down to it.Lionel definitely has a huge chip on his shoulder with Sisu (not surprisingly?) but it does appear to focus his view in one direction only. Not healthy if you actually have the clubs welfare at heart.
Not due until tomorrow and then allow upto 5 days for filing
Calm down!
None of the board go at all so that’s a bit odd. No I would not attend at all for the reasons I’ve given
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?