Well the problem, you see, smug, is that the facts in this case and the words of the current owners about this very specifically not being a takeover, contradict what you've said. I actually have no problem with you guessing, or even basing it on a rumour etc, but I found it amusing that you had decided a few months ago that when the conclusion of someone with some evidence didn't suit you, you would hound me for something that you knew would be difficult if not impossible to get access to. Now when the boot is on the other foot, you should at least be able to accept scepticism from someone you were sceptical of.
This is absolute lunacy. I literally have thread with an opening post that is based around me explaining what is corroborated by facts, and what is me filling in the blanks, and I was up front about it. It's called finances chat. The fact you disagree with the conclusions is the only difference. As for not loving the club? I want the club to do well, and I have felt for a while that this would be more likely with other owners. Whether it's financial or footballing, they've been far from ideal owners in my opinion. Does thinking or saying that make me some kind of fifth column as you imply? Again, you're just playing the man and not the ball. Your choice.
And Monty, I agree with the lot btw, he was banned from rtg for potential defamation of our owners, and, I understand, several posters having the same ip address, all having a pop at the owners, make of that what you want, but an agenda certainly seems to be in play here.
"Now when the boot is on the other foot, you should at least be able to accept scepticism from someone you were sceptical of." Dear me, what kind of fantasy world do you live in, you make the assumption that everyone is like you. I've always made it quite clear that I'm totally indifferent to what people think. Whether people are skeptical of what I post, or not, isn't of the slightest interest. Unlike yourself I'm not spending my days trying to convince people I'm right. Why on earth do think I should accept that you're skeptical, you're nothing to me. You really do come across as a bit manic, it's not healthy.
Unless we start winning some (lots of) football matches soon...forget financial matters we will be in the sh1t!
Haha the old 'I'm completely wrong here so I'll just act like replying is beneath me' line. You seemed bothered about my opinion when you were daring me to say things to your face etc.
I have no issues with anyone holding an opinion, but when you pass your opinion as fact to undermine the club you need to be challenged. Your explanation(s) in the post you refer to are your interpretation of events as you see them and certainly not corroborated by the facts available, two respected posters schooled you in your capricious assessment and you ran for cover. Now, with a new bone to chew on, you have resurfaced to continue your unsolicited attack on the owners, as well as the respected poster who relayed the initial information. There are very few “facts” in this latest financial arrangement, but you still fabricate a tirade against the owners/club based on nothing more than your biased view of what may be happening behind closed doors and protected by NDA’s, and you call my comments "lunacy" The saying “A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing” seems particularly relevant in your case.
Thanks for this. It is pretty much what I've been saying all along e.g. in the Finance Chat thread. I just thought I'd mention that it's actually £37m not £40m because SD asked ES to reduce the price for all the **** he discovered that hadn't been disclosed.
That is indeed correct. But it was £40m originally, later agreed to be reduced to £37m. But it wasn’t £15m was my point. What SD said they bought the club for was truthful at the time. The fact that they financed the purchase with (at least) £25m of borrowed money doesn’t change that fact.
I did reply and was logical, unlike you with your 'it was just a text' nonsense. The way you sidestepped that was pitiful tbh. What I'm saying is that I don't care whether you're skeptical or not, that's a fact. Your credibility is shot to pieces so no one appears to take you seriously ... you've changed your position more times than a high class hooker. All you seem interested in now is to prove me wrong, seems I've taken over from Donald.
Black: Close. He actually said (according to your evidence) "They could have done it in a number of different ways and in the end they chose this one". Red: This is an interpretation of what you believe SD implied by what he said (above in black), not a fact. For example, they may have made an offer that SD wasn't happy with. He says there was no haggling. SD asks for 40m, FPP say nah 20m. No more haggling yet a 20m bid has been made. See how things can be interpreted differently with the same "facts"? Blue: This final sentence is actually null and void as it's your opinion, or more precisely, facts as you've chosen to interprt them.
What type of boats have you had? Love boats me. My Great Grandfather Robert Lumley Cook owned Sunderland Tug Boat Company and his Tug The Stag was sunk by the City of Manchester. My Dad also worked the Coble Truevine. Like the Fisher 37 mind.
So let me get this straight, you think that a bid was made and they literally said 'No, and don't bother asking what we would accept!'? that is absurd. Beyond all comprehension that a man looking to sell the club, with buyers with deeper pockets than everyone else, simply walked away rather than shift even a tiny amount in asking price, or haggle at all. Bizarre interpretation and again, there is not a shred of evidence that they made a bid for the club, and all of the statements and facts corroborate that no bid was made. Apart from anything, and this goes for absolutely everyone challenging me for no apparent reason, Methven himself has said this was never a takeover. Most importantly, this agenda chat is absolutely ****ong ridiculous. I praised Donald for doing the deal he did. It really is the only way to keep them around and us in their field of vision. But aye, great analysis lads, you've somehow worked your way into a corner where you're so desperate to disagree with me that you're creating fantasy scenarios such as these to try and have a pop.
I mean we are rapidly approaching the point where some of you people would argue that the sky is green if I even alluded to it's blueness.
No one is denying that a bid was or wasn't made, certainly not me. What i am saying is your statement of fact thet no bid was made is not actually a fact but rather your interpretation of the evidence that you have before you. Nowhere in that article that you posted does SD say that no bid was made, what he does say is that there was no haggling. Surely you can see that whilst they could be interpreted as being similar they are not exactly the same and therefore not a "fact"
"But aye, great analysis lads, you've somehow worked your way into a corner where you're so desperate to disagree with me that you're creating fantasy scenarios such as these to try and have a pop." Believe it or not people are simply more interested in the good of the club than having a pop at a blathering fantasist. For you to twist your mind into believing you're more important to people than the club they love is beyond weird. You really are showing yourself up. There's only a handful of people on this thread yet you seem to have convinced yourself that you're on Question Time
I remember when desfartes over on rtg used this one, Are you him as well? Jesus how many names you got m8?
Not really? I just pop in on a night and chuckle at the fact that people have started arguing that a bid was made, despite no evidence, not even circumstantial or a verbal indication of any kind by any party. Now when I say that 'no bid was made' that is backed up by the outcome, the owner's words (even if you won't accept the quote, anyone who heard it understands) and CM's words that it wasn't a takeover. So you tell me, what is going on? Why are people playing devils advocate and arguing semantics about something that didn't happen? As for the good of the club... what have I said in any way that is against the club, causes problems for the club, or is even critical of the owners in these last couple of days? Seriously, if you actually read it, I haven't criticised any of them. I'd say it was far worse for the club and us as fans to be telling people that this is definitely a takeover, and raising expectations of that happening when it very clearly may not.
