Jump to content

ktf

Saints
  • Content Count

    474
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by ktf

  1. I think it was only advertised as a one day thing - they went for at least one and a half. 10000 Hours, over delivering!!!
  2. That's your understanding of it. Mine is that it is unsecured and can't be recalled in a similar way to a bank loan. You waxed lyrical about this very fact back in the mk1 days We don't know the reason why the essennpee minister refused to sign off the grant funding element in mk1, this is true. But I think you and I are agreed that it was more to do with the Insecurity of the essennpee than of the CiC.
  3. I think, added to that, the fact that the funder, who has loads of experience funding this sort of stuff ad working with co-op types models, is confident means that it is likely to be sustainable. They'd be out in a jiffy, if they thought it was dodgy!
  4. Ok, so maybe I have presented the facts slightly in favour of my argument. You'd never do that, would you...?
  5. What I just wrote above. It'll be tabled. I think it'll be accepted. The official line is there insn't much chance - I think that's just talk...
  6. REA says there's little chance of that being accepted... My instinct tells me otherwise
  7. I have every respect for your decision, I am simply pointing out that I believe you are wrong with your assertion that we aren't getting fan ownership and governance and that (even) if we don't get that fully, there is nothing we can do about it. We will, and even if we don't 100%, it can be altered. I know what to expect - an interim period where the CiC and the club are steered by experienced and safe hands until respective AGMs where votes can be made on the board members going forward. One or two of the 'safe hands' may need to stay on due to funder requirements but that isn't forever and even if it was, you've said yourself that you would rather have REA involved than not. Hey ho, we don't agree and that's fine. Just don't make assertions as fact that are simply opinion
  8. FFS Billy, you know this! 10000 Hours right now is REA and whoever else help him voluntarily. If the deal goes through 10000 Hours will be 750 members, however many successful business people, a good number of community groups and existing and former club directors. It's hardly the same thing!
  9. Couldn't agree more. There is no hope for such technophobe types - my missus is one.
  10. Come on John, you know that is what is being offered! You also know that once it is underway it can be altered and shaped if it isn't what was expected. The info re the payment is all there, the structure too - more of less. If I get you correctly it's about personnel that you have an issue... Is that right? What I don't get is that you moan about BII insisting that REA/GLS are on the BoD (whichever) for a period but at the same time put up other posts saying you'd be happy for REA et al to sta at the helm. Can you do me a favour and clarify your position, as I'm confused.
  11. This is what worries me. If we get someone in who is no use and drive the club to the wall, has nothing to invest, passes on debt and undoes all that has been done (I said IF) then there will be complainers and moaners and "sack the board" ers etc - all of whose voices will mean nothing cos the one chance we had was squandered in doubt and dithering.
  12. Exactly Bud! Although, I think that is a good thing. The differences in the values of our supporters means that no one element would get too much sway. The corporate folks won't, the community folks won't and the "pick the team" types won't either! We have all that is needed to make this work - it just needs people to show a little faith and sign up!!!
  13. Well done Charles, you managed to go so long without being abusive and offensive! That must be some kind of record for you, eh Bud! I only had the info cos I made the calls, sent the emails and asked to meet. Nothing more than that. I cared about where the club might end up and into who's hands it would fall - so I put in the leg work. You can't blame me for that, can you? The truth is, I loved CiC mk1, cos I'm involved with a community group who I thought could really benefit from that kind of relationship with the club and vice versa. I was disappointed when it failed but made a decision to stick by the fan buyout concept. After a subsequent one or two changes, I am even more disappointed with what we have a model for fan buyout. Not because I don't think it will deliver - it will, but because it doesn't require and so doens't have the community at the heart. I think this is a crying shame but was probably the only way that it could now be delivered. Anyway, it's really a good thing that we have folks like Chic and Somner (whoever he is) and Sid AND folks like Poz and Div (who really ARE up REA's anus ) because the diversity in the support will make fan ownership stronger and healthier, if and when it goes through.
  14. I don't disagree. I think it's unfair to claim it's REA's fault... Anyway, you're right, history will tell - it could go either way!
  15. There's a "print and post a paper form" option online. Bit late though...
  16. Sorry bud, I made my decision to support the bid 2 years ago. I have the courage of my convictions to stick by it. You should try it sometime, it feels good.
  17. I'm glad this is your issue, as it was answered on Thurs eve and on the Q&A thread here. It has been offered to the other main shareholders in the 48% and is open to all shareholders. The deal for them would be the same as the one for GLS. They would begin to receive payments when all the social funder loan is paid off and the CiC has a certain amount of funds in reserve (for GLS this is £100k). Satisfied...?
  18. FFS John, you have too much time on your hands!!!
  19. He invites it. He has offered nothing constructive. He has accepted no answers given to him. He has taken offence at the smallest things. When I have added constructive comments to his thread they are either completely ignored, purposefully twisted or half a sentence is highlighted and argued. When he has run out of negative things to say, he jumps on another bandwagon. He used to offer good counter-debate to this topic but sadly that had gone. Is this what the "anti" brigade are reduce to, taking offence at what annoymous Internet aliases post on a football forum? I have added plenty, both positive and critical to this debate - so your accusation is entirely false. However on a thread that is all about someone imagninery being pretend offended by other fake people, I will offer very little in the way of serious comment.
  20. Another day, another bandwagon...
  21. Agreed! Which was the reason for my social funder/community questions on Thurs eve. The answers for which still weren't 100% clear except to say that I think the best solution to ensuring that the community element is a success (which is to the benefit of the club and the deal as a whole) is to have someone on the CiC board who has the community stuff at heart. Preferably a bud too!
  22. When the fan of another club can see this, it surely means it's time to act. Good on ya Dave!
  23. He just needs to see sense and be convinced that Apple Mac is the way to go...!
×
×
  • Create New...