If all the trust have to do is have a word with the telegraph why don't the club try it . Or are you saying the telegraph would print anything that comes out of the club?
You really are a dumb ass.
No I wouldn't expect SISU to reveal all to them to give to the council. I would however expect a period of confidential preliminary talks before a period of confidential due diligence while a bid is being tabled. I'm sure you're familiar with a phrase by now called commercial confidentiality by now.
Did you really just claim that it's all a smoke screen to fish for information for the CT or CCC? That's a bold statement. Do you have more than a tin foil hat to confirm this revelation?
So Nick in your view ACL, The Council, The Telegraph, The Trust and assorted fan groups are all schemers aiming to unfairly discredit Sisu.
Only you know why you have spent years and masses of time pushing this very strange line as a 'fan' who has witnessed 9 years of utter chaos under Sisu.
You really are a dumb ass.
No I wouldn't expect SISU to reveal all to them to give to the council or telegraph. I would however expect a period of confidential preliminary talks before a period of confidential due diligence while a bid is being tabled. I'm sure you're familiar with a phrase called commercial confidentiality by now.
Did you really just claim that it's all a smoke screen to fish for information for the CT or CCC? That's a bold statement. Do you have more than a tin foil hat to confirm this revelation?
Why would they entertain it?
Why does it need a tin foil hat? Did the trust hand on heart expect to be called into a meeting?
It was a fishing exercise, nothing more. The fact again, it's straight to the telegraph to break the news the other day kind of makes it obvious.
Yes, like the confidentiality when the council went to meet with SISU and the telegraph happened to report it then as well?
So you can confirm then that the bid was just a fishing exercise by the SBT to glean information on behalf of CCC and/or the CT? That's your official line? You stand by that very bold statement?
So you can confirm then that the bid was just a fishing exercise by the SBT to glean information on behalf of CCC and/or the CT? That's your official line? You stand by that very bold statement?
It wasn't even a bid. They were asking for information, has that not been confirmed? It goes back to the Telegraph, who report it and whip up a frenzy amongst the fans as SISU won't sell (surprise surprise). This adds weight to their petition campaign. Adds pressure on SISU to extend Ricoh deal. It's the same as the MP Fletchers meeting. It's all to build pressure.
A bit like TF's shit about new stadiums etc, it was to apply pressure on ACL. I find it hard to believe when we have seen this being played out before, people can't see it happening again. The club is being pressured, fans ok with it as SISU are shit owners. ACL is being pressured and fans are up in arms. Wierd.
I have my opinion on stuff, so does everyone else. This is not the time for that anymore.
no matter what your opinion of steve, the trust, or any other fan - this is exactly what they wanted to happen - fan disunity. It is time to unite.
Yes, I confirm is my opinion it was just a fishing trip.
The fact it is straight off to the telegraph with an exclusive for the news shows how serious it was.
Who knows who it was for...
You'll forgive me if I never take you seriously again. I'm starting to think Buzz of Wasps face book group isn't a hoax after all. That's certainly worthy of it.
You mean the same day as it was on the trust website?Why would they entertain it?
Why does it need a tin foil hat? Did the trust hand on heart expect to be called into a meeting?
It was a fishing exercise, nothing more. The fact again, it's straight to the telegraph to break the news the other day kind of makes it obvious.
Yes, like the confidentiality when the council went to meet with SISU and the telegraph happened to report it then as well?
What because i think it was a fishing trip? They were asking for info, of course it was a fishing trip for FFS.
Did you think they would be entertained?
Was it not straight to the telegraph to give them an exclusive or did I make it up?
You mean the same day as it was on the trust website?
What info did they ask for?
Unite behind what though?
All of the blaming SISU for fans not being united, what are we meant to be uniting behind as it is obviously not CCFC.
It seems to be trying to unite people behind a telegraph petition, or a boycott, or whichever fans group has been made this week and which childish name they have given their gang.
Can't really call for unity and then arrange divisive things like boycotts.
(thats not you, but in general)
Like I said at the time, I'd need to see the letters
They quite clearly knew it wasn't going to happen, then it was back to get people wound up about the news.
Unite against the owners. For the 10% that was actually helpful we say thank you, but for the 90% of failures it is time to go. The club is as good as dead while they own us - we need our own ground to be financially viable yet they won't build anything, and can't anyway because of the political embargo.
There are too many fan groups agreed, so this is where the trust needs to get some bollocks and just go for it - perhaps a vote from members as to whether they sever all ties to the owners and become an official protest group?
A petition does nothing. A boycott a slither more than that. Supporting CCFC but being against the owners also achieves nothing.
Is it not getting to the point where we would take (for example) league 2 football with new owners? It is all well and good saying "but who and with what money" but I would rather watch the club die fighting than a slow pathetic death due to sisu.
Sitting on a forum questioning why fans have differing opinions about who is to blame, questioning why this paper and that paper are biased, whilst sitting and doing nothing is nonsense and a waste of time.
We all know the story. We all know the score. We know it isn't simply black and white. We - as a collective - can still try and salvage our club.
So when you said that they asked for info you don't actually know that they either A) did indeed ask for info, or B) what that information requested should it have been requested was. Tell me again what your tin foil hat conspiracy theory is based on again?
Anybody could have read it on the trust website. But if they did tell the telegraph what's wrong with that they're the local paper.Funny also the SCG minutes out five days after meeting normally it takes ages.Yes, it was a Telegraph Exclusive wasn't it?
They are a protest group, they have been for years.
We should be united behind CCFC, that is what it's all about isn't it?
We don't have to thank SISU for any % though, neither do we the council, wasps or any other person involved in the mess. If we want unity it should be either against everybody or just behind CCFC.
When the trust shout about ccfc moving but wont say a bad word about Wasps. When we have trust board members giving interviews saying how great a wasps match was then going ape shit at the thought of our club moving. It won't get unity.
Unity between fans should be the aim before any protest against anybody else.
Were they offering to buy the club,no. Secondly when Portsmouth fans took over the club do you think they had noney beforehand no they raised it so you don't actually have to have the money. But this wasn't about buying the club ur was to have talks re the selling of the club. Also who is this director of another club?
Anybody could have read it on the trust website. But if they did tell the telegraph what's wrong with that they're the local paper.Funny also the SCG minutes out five days after meeting normally it takes ages.
But carry on one little dig at SISU after all I don't defend them and dozens against everybody else.
I used to give you the benefit of the doubt but now am moving to believe what some people have been saying about you for a while.
I completely agree with you. The issue being I think to actually achieve getting rid of the owners it may be detrimental to CCFC.
But surely anybody with eyes could see it is being done just to go to the telegraph with and try to twist against them? Why would they even entertain it?
That is where people can't unite, the whole idea of harming the club thinking it will get rid of them. All of the NOPM, cut the revenue, they cut the budget. Easy as that.
I'm not going to say what it is therefore nobody can use anything to discredit you with.Ha, what's that then? I wonder who could try and discredit me pointing out things going on that is a bit against the grain?
I can guarantee I haven't worked with a council's PR company. Do I win?
Have you not seen me say the SCG is pointless and needs to be reworked without people like Strange?
Nothing is wrong with the Trust working with the Telegraph on a campaign, just don't act surprised if Seppala doesn't invite them in with open arms and when people think things about it.
I wasn't specifically talking about NOPM - but unless people realise that for something to change it may be detrimental to CCFC then nothing will change.
They were not offering to buy the club. They were asking for discussions about buying the club or someone buying the club ( in other words the club being sold - same thing). According to Tim they wanted to have control.
You don't have to have large amounts of money if you have backers lined up, but you do have to do things professionally ( e.g. file Accounts on time) if you want to convince people you are serious and capable of getting a takeover group together.
I don't know which person from another club who Tim was referring to.
With that approach though, nobody can ever put forward a good argument to say why though.
I'm not going to say what it is therefore nobody can use anything to discredit you with.
There isn't anything, that's why
Unless it was somebody taking something I said sarcastically as serious again, like when I said I was Tim Fisher and somebody believed it!
Pot,Kettle,Black comes to mind... How many embargo's was it now?
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?