Grendel
Well-Known Member
I've shown you. I know you want answer the question as you are crucified either way but let's try one more time.
Do you have a problem with secret investors or not?
So your admitting you cannot show me where then?
I've shown you. I know you want answer the question as you are crucified either way but let's try one more time.
Do you have a problem with secret investors or not?
When you answer my question I will then screw you over on that one.
a classic
we go over 5 years without knowing who our owners are, yet less than 5 days after not knowing who the rent backer is, Grendal is calling for them to be revealed.
a classic
we go over 5 years without knowing who our owners are, yet less than 5 days after not knowing who the rent backer is, Grendal is calling for them to be revealed.
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.
If the backer is serious and has had already agreed the deal with ACL why have any secrecy? Surely if they are wishing to get the club back an involvement in negotiation will be required anyway? Is it really that hard to work out anyway?
This arguing amongst ourselves is just as pathetic really! No wonder nothing ever advances ..........
If somebody said to me at work "I wont take a call, only email me" I would probably pull a funny face and say "right .... ok". Then I would do it. This also works vice versa.
I have answered it. You employed deflection technique as does jack Griffin. This ends up backfiring - when asking the question why remain secret you- thinking you are being clever - say why don't sisu show their investors.
That suggests;
Sisu having secret investors is a bad thing - so by the very nature of your argument you are also admitting the same practice conducted elsewhere is bad.
You could of course be praising sisu for the strategy in which case I am wrong and will apologise. Are you praising sisu?
As for "screwing me over" you would have done that already. You can't. You've set Kcic benchmark of behaviour in line with a hedge fund. You have done that - not me.
I really have not for the simple reason I did not say what you said I did. Am not trying to be clever just trying to get you to admit you are wrong when you are, there is nothing deflective in that.
Have you ever admitted to a mistake at any point in your pathetic life? Or is that well above you?
Argument lost.
Let the insults begin.....
If someone refused to take a call at my work, I'd sack them...
Is that a FACT is it?
If the backer is serious and has had already agreed the deal with ACL why have any secrecy? Surely if they are wishing to get the club back an involvement in negotiation will be required anyway? Is it really that hard to work out anyway?
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!
who's the next person? It's beyond parodyhaha!! What are joke.
It is pathetic, why would people support someone like this and want them some how involved with the club.
who's the next person? It's beyond parody
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.
The Kcic tea boy will take the call and relay wants said to Michael who duly informs "the businessman"
Laughing stock.
Without question it is a fact. You have nowhere to go now.
Is this for real. Michael has passed it on to another middle man???
Have to say if someone offered me a deal and it is one that may benefit me.
If I say lets chat about it on the phone and the person says no this is to important for that lets do it face to face.
Can you guess what I would do next.........
This situation does appear to have become overly complex.
We have a group offering to act as a third party between the club and ACL. But the investor backing that group doesn't want to deal directly with the club so is using the KCIC group to front that offer. Now the head of the KCIC group has asked another person to deal with the club's representative.
Of course that club representative is an independent director essentially representing Tim Fisher who is the club's chief executive, who is employed by the owner of the club who has the power to agree a deal and is not directly involved yet.
Frankly, my head hurts.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk
Depends if you thought it was a load of shite or not though. If they struggled to answer simple questions then wouldn't you want to check credibility?
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?