Let's wait until ThursdayConstant boring talk going on and on about Reeves this, Duggins that Jesus !! Bottom line.
Do you want “big” Mike to be successful in acquiring the stadium ?
Do you want “big” Mike to be successful in acquiring the stadium ?
Someone on the bond forum saying the offer is 15.8 million. 45p in the pound for bond holders.
Not sure that would be correct as other creditors will want their share.
Not sure if that’s Ashley’s offer or something unrelated
Yes or no, no time to sit on the fence mate.It's impossible to say as we know absolutely nothing about it, the deal, what's involved etc.
Yes or no, no time to sit on the fence mate.
Offer to the bondholders or to buy ACL?
Doesn’t say. Can’t see it being an offer for just bond holders. No one else has mentioned it yet. So guess we will wait and see
The conflict of interest stuff is a red herring in that I’d expect people to have mutual interests in his role and actually it’s really useful when people understand different perspectives of complex deals
Genuinely funny.Slowpoke isn’t interested m8
So it will be Thursday 17th then, maybe as late as Friday. But definitely not Wednesday 16th.Court case is the 17th, don’t know when the out come will be known
Just a repeated of his tweets basically. Council say council didn’t consider it, Reeves did. CWR find it ridiculous Reeves could do it without Duggins knowledge. They’ve asked Reeves for an interview.
Cat properly among the pigeons at CCC now
Someone on the bond forum saying the offer is 15.8 million. 45p in the pound for bond holders.
Not sure that would be correct as other creditors will want their share.
Not sure if that’s Ashley’s offer or something unrelated
The red herring is that people don’t have conflicts of interests. They do. And often that makes for better decisions. Maybe I don’t mean red herring I mean it’s not the silver bullet with which to hang him onIt's not really a red herring because he has been involved personally with all of the shit that has happened with the stadium since 2010.
Including HMRC ?The trustees take primacy over all other creditors so it could be right.
Normally if it’s a secured asset, but this case seems to be defying normalcy.Including HMRC ?
HMRC should be paid in full then the rest shared out. Pisses me off that taxpayers ultimately end up paying the price in these administrations where HMRC are owed money. And how the hell the football creditors rule bs is allowed to carry on is another grievance as well.Doesn’t say. Can’t see it being an offer for just bond holders. No one else has mentioned it yet. So guess we will wait and see
And the Council even thinking about £30m more of taxpayer money to cover Wasp failure. Scandalous.HMRC should be paid in full then the rest shared out. Pisses me off that taxpayers ultimately end up paying the price in these administrations where HMRC are owed money. And how the hell the football creditors rule bs is allowed to carry on is another grievance as well.
In the comments some people normally extremely pro council are calling for Duggins and Reeves to resignCat properly among the pigeons at CCC now
Nobody is saying the leader of the council has to get permission for any conversation. But do you not think with something that would clearly be hugely controversial and involve such a large amount of money it maybe would have at least been mentioned?I am not one to stick up for the council but realistically how could a CEO carry out his role effectively if he needed prior permission from the leader of the council in relation to any conversation? I think Gilbert is being a bit obtuse on this.
Just quoted the same, a turn up for the booksEven @Grendel mate the alleged Chris west is calling for resignations.
The positive thing in all this is that CCFC and the fans are now being universally seen as the victims of a shady stitch up by people who were at least as dodgy as SISUIn the comments some people normally extremely pro council are calling for Duggins and Reeves to resign
You're in fantasy land. I've worked in Councils and the Councilors and Leaders are obsessed by reputations, bad publicity and the next election. They smell a fiasco and a bad story even when it's not there. To imagine that this could be done as such a sensitive issue without any reference to the Leader is absolute nuts. Whether you agree, disagree or don't care about that is another issue - cue slowpokeI am not one to stick up for the council but realistically how could a CEO carry out his role effectively if he needed prior permission from the leader of the council in relation to any conversation? I think Gilbert is being a bit obtuse on this.
Even @Grendel mate the alleged Chris west is calling for resignations.
Nobody is saying the leader of the council has to get permission for any conversation. But do you not think with something that would clearly be hugely controversial and involve such a large amount of money it maybe would have at least been mentioned?
If Duggins and the council knew nothing about it why did he tell Ridley to arrange a meeting with Reeves at the council meeting after the news of the Friday meeting that never happened was leaked?
For me there's two options, either they are in it up to their necks an we're I'm resignation territory or Reeves is incompetent to an even greater level than previously suspected which again is resignation territory.
Oops date wrong, surely a hanging offence.Court case is the 17th, don’t know when the out come will be known
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?