Macky
Gruntled Member
Totally agree Alex.
I also agree with Dunc! :icon_lol:
Totally agree Alex.
I also agree with Dunc! :icon_lol:
The bid being good enough for the club and the bid being good enough for the shareholders are two different things entirely.
As a director you have a responsibility to make decisions in the best interests of the shareholders. It is widely accepted that this part of the deal is not a good one for shareholders
Erm, excuse me if I'm missing something here, but are these the same shareholders that rescued the club (we are not worthy), claiming that they did it to save the club and didn't expect to see their investment returned, or make any money etc etc. Or are these a different set of people all together?
Doesn't matter, it's a legal obligation the directors have.
Doesn't matter, it's a legal obligation the directors have.
Absolutely. Do you see where I am coming from Webbo?
Fair enough, but if the shareholders are not in it for personal gain, why all the messin and buggerin about
Fair enough, but if the shareholders are not in it for personal gain, why all the messin and buggerin about
They haven't had their say yet. Maybe now is when the buggering about starts.
so FT can we expect any kind of conclusion now (either mm takes over or he walks away) within the next week-or is it set to drag on longer
Before we start slating MM, the FT or LCFC, do we have a valid reason why MM has lowered his bid?
Sorry, not been on again until now.
We do not know his logic for this latest change.
We don't want to speculate as this will be viewed as the FT being negative again
Could it be down to the current financial position of the club and the fact that now that the transfer window has slammed shut the club has no opportunity to cash in and sell players, there were rumours that 3 or 4 players were going to be sold to raise necessary funds to clear an unnamed debt and possibly allow the club to manage it's cash flow throught to the end of the season, possibly during the window weakening MM's bargaining position.
Now that opportunity has passed by MM has the club over a barrell even more so than before, my fear is if it does fall through and the club has no means of raising immediate cash by selling players then we are in real danger of administration.
Sorry, not been on again until now.
.
We don't want to speculate as this will be viewed as the FT being negative again
Those rumours were rubbish, we can only speculate who would have profited from putting them around the press association.......
Reckon it will be 2 weeks
A Pompey fan at a Q & A with Harry Redknapp last week, when asked about MM said, "I spoke to him yesterday, he's getting cold feet about Leicester as he thinks he may have to put some of his own money in".
It's all starting to stink a bit.
"he may have to put some of his own money in"
- what not £25m then, better ring Bill A........
That's what 48 shareholders did who keep getting lambasted.
So is Harry telling us all MM's "investment" will be loans?
"he may have to put some of his own money in"
- what not £25m then, better ring Bill A........
That's what 48 shareholders did who keep getting lambasted.
So is Harry telling us all MM's "investment" will be loans?
P | Pld | Pts | |
1 | Liverpool | 21 | 50 |
2 | Arsenal | 22 | 44 |
3 | Nottm F | 22 | 44 |
4 | Chelsea | 22 | 40 |
5 | Manchester C | 22 | 38 |
6 | Newcastle | 22 | 38 |
7 | Bournemouth | 22 | 37 |
8 | Aston Villa | 22 | 36 |
9 | Brighton | 22 | 34 |
10 | Fulham | 22 | 33 |
11 | Brentford | 22 | 28 |
12 | Palace | 22 | 27 |
13 | Manchester U | 22 | 26 |
14 | West Ham | 22 | 26 |
15 | Tottenham | 22 | 24 |
16 | Everton | 21 | 20 |
17 | Wolves | 22 | 16 |
18 | Ipswich | 22 | 16 |
19 | Leicester | 22 | 14 |
20 | Southampton | 22 | 6 |