Protests?

[Virtuoso 27,180]

21 minutes ago, buster. said:

A pathetic attempt at whataboutery is all you've got to defend yourself # serial joker

As far as the conversation between you and I,....I wasn't in the RST and called Green out from the beginning, as I did CW. 

 

Should have stuck with 'Spin City' - the emphasis being on 'spin' 

[Smile 26,600]

5 minutes ago, gj923 said:

Lets see

- Transparency unlike the previous boards.....nope

- Nomad within 30 days.......nope

- External investment.........nope

- Extra revenue streams and increased sponsorship........nope

- A scouting system..........nope

- 30-50 million front loaded investment.............................................................................................................................nope

- Investment in the playing squad....................well money has been spent but most likely can't be got back

What have they brought

- A UK first with the takeover panel taking out chairman to court

Its fine though as big bad Ashley is not there and The Easedales who loaned money on the same terms have been chased out.....plus we managed to drive the share price down

Our Board is like the old board the scum had before McCann - every so often a player will be bought,,,,and a manager sacked when needed but apart from that fuck all will be acheived

It's no point pointing this all out as they ignore it all like it didn't happen.

[Smile 26,600]

1 minute ago, Virtuoso said:

Should have stuck with 'Spin City' - the emphasis being on 'spin' 

He's slavering wee quotes from comedy shows now, I feel a wee bit sorry for the Guy as I think he's not right it's a bit of a shame.

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

27 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

The scum get slagged off for being outside the doors .

I don't see it that way .That kind of thing forces change . Just like the 2 amigos themselves .

Higher profile as media get involved

We are apathetic or merely shouting at others . Oh "but that's taig like""

Fuck that  " We are the people "

Used as a deflection to hide their true colours, or just don't care enough. Either way, neither very loyal nor Ranger's like. 

[buster. 1,114]

Just now, Virtuoso said:

Should have stuck with 'Spin City' - the emphasis being on 'spin' 

What's difficult to understand...........

You have tended to get calls wrong and I have tended to get them right.

If anyone needs spin, it's you because you'll need to spin a hell of a story to persuade me why I should listen to you, repeatedly saying the same thing like some badly programmed robot. 

[Blue Avenger 22,567]

11 minutes ago, buster. said:

......and it's simple for me to say it'd be better if DK sold his shares but the hypothetical question is who would buy them ? Both in terms of who would want to (given current circumstances) and their intentions.

Upstairs, we need a medium to longterm strategy and not reactionary management that leads nowhere but costs a lot.

The medium to long strategy is unwritten and that is how this board maximise their investment. That much is very clear and it's showing both on and off the park.

[gj923 1,457]

3 minutes ago, Smile said:

It's no point pointing this all out as they ignore it all like it didn't happen.

Aye but do you remember the howls of protest that greeted Graham Wallaces failure to deliver his 100 day review on time. Or bombarding any company involved with the board then

[JWAC 2,234]

3 minutes ago, Virtuoso said:

I don't think anyone actually hates King, it's just that he's failed to deliver on every promise made prior to coming in - and not being held to account for it. Where as had it been any of the previous boards doing the same then there would be demands for all sorts. Double standards much?

As for C1872 asking questions, forget it.

It's not comparable with Ashley and the dodgy bastards we had operating the club at the time, that's what I mean about being too simplistic. We're a more stable club without a doubt but completely failing at football, I'm not sure I trust whoever is making the decision to get the next appointment right. It's incompetence I worry about, we aren't progressing and it's costing us a lot of money.

Like I said i can't see club1872 standing up to them either but as a shareholder and a large one it would seem to be the sensible thing to ask why are we failing and what's being done to stop it.

[buster. 1,114]

4 minutes ago, Smile said:

He's slavering wee quotes from comedy shows now, I feel a wee bit sorry for the Guy as I think he's not right it's a bit of a shame.

Here comes Oliver...........#Laurel & Hardy

 

[buster. 1,114]

1 minute ago, Blue Avenger said:

The medium to long strategy is unwritten and that is how this board maximise their investment. That much is very clear and it's showing both on and off the park.

I don't get the point you are trying to make. Can you make it clearer please.

[Smile 26,600]

Just now, gj923 said:

Aye but do you remember the howls of protest that greeted Graham Wallaces failure to deliver his 100 day review on time. Or bombarding any company involved with the board then

Yes, I asked will you do this when King and Co got in I was assured they would. Sadly it was lies.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

3 minutes ago, Smile said:

It's no point pointing this all out as they ignore it all like it didn't happen.

That's why I love this forum - folk that have never managed a football team being experts on doing it - folks that never run a company ( especially a distressed company) thinking it's easy. 

The board have stabilised the club - sorted out some of the off field nonsense - kept the doors open, invested in back room staff, pumped some cash in - they seemed to inherit a financial mess - none of which gets fixed day 1. There is still some lags shite holding progress back. 

... and guess what - 3 more wins over the last few weeks and we wouldn't even be discussing this. 

[Bears r us 30,794]

1 hour ago, Smile said:

This is it so do their supporters who said at the time they would just be as Vigilant of them as they were of the last board.

I doubt it mate. 

[.Williamson. 82,178]

14 minutes ago, Smile said:

That's you Fucked then.

 

Cushy wouldn't ban me mate. He just deletes all my threads instead

[Smile 26,600]

8 minutes ago, JWAB said:

It's not comparable with Ashley and the dodgy bastards we had operating the club at the time, that's what I mean about being too simplistic. We're a more stable club without a doubt but completely failing at football, I'm not sure I trust whoever is making the decision to get the next appointment right. It's incompetence I worry about, we aren't progressing and it's costing us a lot of money.

Like I said i can't see club1872 standing up to them either but as a shareholder and a large one it would seem to be the sensible thing to ask why are we failing and what's being done to stop it.

We had Graeme Park Andrew Dickson and Stewart Robertson Picking a Guy who had a Managerial Cv that would have been lucky to get him an Asst Managers gig at us which has Probably cost with all the payoffs and wasters signed the best part of 10 million that we do not have it's madness.

We need more professionalism in every department we are needing to get at the very least competent people into every department.

[buster. 1,114]

5 minutes ago, Smile said:

We had Graeme Park Andrew Dickson and Stewart Robertson Picking a Guy who had a Managerial Cv that would have been lucky to get him an Asst Managers gig at us which has Probably cost with all the payoffs and wasters signed the best part of 10 million that we do not have it's madness.

We need more professionalism in every department we are needing to get at the very least competent people into every department.

The disturbing angle to this is that it appears that we fell for a sales pitch that may have been conflicted in that the agent (Pedro Mendes) was 'too close' to one of the directors who was involved in the selection process. I'm not talking about corruption, just about being partialy blinded to the facts.

I think it also reflects badly on the MD, Stewart Robertson who is plainly out of his depth.

 

This is something that a large shareholder like C1872 might at least like to get an assurance that it won't happen again. I'm fairly sure that the board won't be looking to repeat anything like that.

[Smile 26,600]

8 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

That's why I love this forum - folk that have never managed a football team being experts on doing it - folks that never run a company ( especially a distressed company) thinking it's easy. 

The board have stabilised the club - sorted out some of the off field nonsense - kept the doors open, invested in back room staff, pumped some cash in - they seemed to inherit a financial mess - none of which gets fixed day 1. There is still some lags shite holding progress back. 

... and guess what - 3 more wins over the last few weeks and we wouldn't even be discussing this. 

The doors were open the lights were on  they never saved us they didn't even invest when they had the chance to do so, they came along and got control once everything was done for them.

[Smile 26,600]

1 minute ago, buster. said:

The disturbing angle to this is that it appears that we fell for a sales pitch that may have been conflicted in that the agent (Pedro Mendes) was 'too close' to one of the directors who was involved in the selection process. I'm not talking about corruption, just about being partialy blinded to the facts.

I think it also reflects badly on the MD, Stewart Robertson who is plainly out of his depth.

 

This is something that a large shareholder like C1872 might at least like to get an assurance that it won't happen again.

See this is something we agree on, As you know Club1872 too close to the board to rock the boat.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

3 minutes ago, Smile said:

The doors were open the lights were on  they never saved us they didn't even invest when they had the chance to do so, they came along and got control once everything was done for them.

I don't see it like that - some have extremely short memories about how bad it was 

[gj923 1,457]

2 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

That's why I love this forum - folk that have never managed a football team being experts on doing it - folks that never run a company ( especially a distressed company) thinking it's easy. 

The board have stabilised the club - sorted out some of the off field nonsense - kept the doors open, invested in back room staff, pumped some cash in - they seemed to inherit a financial mess - none of which gets fixed day 1. There is still some lags shite holding progress back. 

... and guess what - 3 more wins over the last few weeks and we wouldn't even be discussing this. 

Whilst most if not all have never managed a football team a lot of people here have companies or work in a professional capacity or in a senior management position within one. Prior to King coming in the company (our football club) was suffering from reduced revenues as a result of boycott organised by certain fans. The club was taken over with a 5M loan facility in place with was transferred to a new director.

The new directors would have then or should have drawn up a 3-5 year business plan which would have included cash flow projections for 12-36 months. They sanctioned the signing of new players whilst seeming not to bring or increase any new revenue streams. We now have an increased playing budget which has been sanctioned again by the directors along with an increase in the loans owing.

At the same time it has also been held back until the release by the TAP of the judgement by King which has potentially hindered investment.

Lots of people have been discussing it as they see no progress on lots of fronts.

Perhaps this should be moved to boardroom section - apologies but it seems the thread is going down this way.

[buster. 1,114]

Just now, Smile said:

See this is something we agree on, As you know Club1872 too close to the board to rock the boat.

That's because there is actually something of substance to agree upon.

On this, give C1872 a chance to communicate with the club.

 

[JWAC 2,234]

2 minutes ago, Smile said:

See this is something we agree on, As you know Club1872 too close to the board to rock the boat.

But it's not upto the 5 or 6 people who govern it. It's the members who ask the questions and then polled. What the poll would be isn't clear but maybe it's to ask for a review of the footballing board and their appointments.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

1 minute ago, gj923 said:

Whilst most if not all have never managed a football team a lot of people here have companies or work in a professional capacity or in a senior management position within one. Prior to King coming in the company (our football club) was suffering from reduced revenues as a result of boycott organised by certain fans. The club was taken over with a 5M loan facility in place with was transferred to a new director.

The new directors would have then or should have drawn up a 3-5 year business plan which would have included cash flow projections for 12-36 months. They sanctioned the signing of new players whilst seeming not to bring or increase any new revenue streams. We now have an increased playing budget which has been sanctioned again by the directors along with an increase in the loans owing.

At the same time it has also been held back until the release by the TAP of the judgement by King which has potentially hindered investment.

Lots of people have been discussing it as they see no progress on lots of fronts.

Perhaps this should be moved to boardroom section - apologies but it seems the thread is going down this way.

Senior managers - shudders !

putting your own cash in to a company, especially one where the chance of getting a return is nil - is a whole different type of commitment. Putting your cash in and being second guessed at every stage and your 'commitment' question - I think that takes a special sort of person. 

 

 

[The Beast 9,211]

47 minutes ago, buster. said:

I don't get the point you are trying to make. Can you make it clearer please.

Ok, I'll have a go; the previous boards were castigated for lack of a business plan and strategy for taking the club forward. Remember the foaming at the mouth when the "hundred day review" was a few days late? Then it was picked over and dissected word by word.

What is the business plan and strategy of this current board? Have they even published one after two and a half years?  Have they even said how they are going to challenge for primacy in Scotland other than Kings lies about front loaded £50M investments?

[Smile 26,600]

6 minutes ago, JWAB said:

But it's not upto the 5 or 6 people who govern it. It's the members who ask the questions and then polled. What the poll would be isn't clear but maybe it's to ask for a review of the footballing board and their appointments.

Should be asking Park and the other two stooges to bear the brunt of their fuck up by losing bonuses or their jobs or in Parks case replace the money wasted.