[cite]Posted By: KenTred[/cite]plan a was to sell the club and get their money back. there is no plan b obviously
Ken, I know you have been saying this for a long time and I still disagree.
1. Even if they sell the club the board will only get a fraction of their money back and will not have made anything like what they could have made sticking it in a building society account.
2. I disagree that selling the club was the only plan. It was and still is an option but all the cost cutting, the bond issue etc are about stabilising the club as much as possible for when the parachute money runs out. That was plan A and as far as I can tell still is. If that at the same times makes the club an attractive proposition to an external buyer then all well and good but that does not mean it was the sole or even primary reason.
[cite]Posted By: KenTred[/cite]plan a was to sell the club and get their money back. there is no plan b obviously
Ken, I know you have been saying this for a long time and I still disagree.
1. Even if they sell the club the board will only get a fraction of their money back and will not have made anything like what they could have made sticking it in a building society account.
2. I disagree that selling the club was the only plan. It was and still is an option but all the cost cutting, the bond issue etc are about stabilising the club as much as possible for when the parachute money runs out. That was plan A and as far as I can tell still is. If that at the same times makes the club an attractive proposition to an external buyer then all well and good but that does not mean it was the sole or even primary reason.
Ken, please take in what Henry is saying. I've no inside track but this has to be right 100%. Why because the alterative is ruination with the Directors losing everything?
[cite]Posted By: bingaddick[/cite]I agree Off_it. The Board have always acted in good faith in all of this. To be fair, there were very few on here who thought that Pards would screw things up so badly. I accept that some on here felt the Board had cut the squad to the barest of bones but I don't think most, including me, thought we would be third from bottom come the begining of November.
It is a difficult decision to axe the guy on who's shoulders all theirs and our hopes were pinned but to me anyway, I can't see him turning this around. Since the 25th minute of the Brizzle game, we have seen gutless, rudderless performances one after the other. I thought it couldn't get any worse after the first half against Burnley. I thought it couldn't get more diabolically bad after 70 minutes against Ipswich where we had mustered no shots and the players couldn't string more than one or two passes together. Then today..........
I wish I could wave a magic wand and all this would go away, but I cant........
the thing that really gets me though is that after the game at Ipswich he comes out and says he was happy with the performance. Twat.
Comments
Ken, I know you have been saying this for a long time and I still disagree.
1. Even if they sell the club the board will only get a fraction of their money back and will not have made anything like what they could have made sticking it in a building society account.
2. I disagree that selling the club was the only plan. It was and still is an option but all the cost cutting, the bond issue etc are about stabilising the club as much as possible for when the parachute money runs out. That was plan A and as far as I can tell still is. If that at the same times makes the club an attractive proposition to an external buyer then all well and good but that does not mean it was the sole or even primary reason.
Ken, please take in what Henry is saying. I've no inside track but this has to be right 100%. Why because the alterative is ruination with the Directors losing everything?
the thing that really gets me though is that after the game at Ipswich he comes out and says he was happy with the performance. Twat.