Anyone else heard that Dalman has made a fresh move? Don’t know any details.
Oh for the love of god!
Checked, and source is same source that provided the info on the other forum I’m afraid. Could well be valid though. Dalman and Aussies lodged bids, and perhaps it’s a game of chicken, with season about to start? Perhaps Dalman blinked first. Not sure about Muir and Directors. The loans were supposed to be Roland's to sort, but he wants to pass them to prospective buyers now. I think Dalman and Aussies want them sorted before sale, but maybe it’s Muir blinking? NLA may know more?
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Every time there's an ex-director rumour, one of them (think it's Whitehand) always posts on twitter saying he's bored, nothing's happening, heard fuck all etc, so i'm sure we'll know soon enough.
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Who told you?
lets just say it came from the club
No, let's just say who.
@Chizz we’ve been here before with you trying to dig out @DOUCHER. Bit of a personal vendetta?? I don’t see you demanding others to declare their sources. Becoming a bit boring mate
The only news that should interest us is anything that gives us an indication that Duchatelet has decided to be realistic in terms of the price. Without this, it really doesn't matter if Dalman is having another go at it or anybody else for that matter. It will still fail in the same way!
The trouble is RD isn't of sound mind and hence won't have a realistic price in his head! Perhaps, and it's s dangerous strategy, everyone was to walk away from the current deal he will have to drop his asking price, or fund more losses?
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Who told you?
lets just say it came from the club
No, let's just say who.
@Chizz we’ve been here before with you trying to dig out @DOUCHER. Bit of a personal vendetta?? I don’t see you demanding others to declare their sources. Becoming a bit boring mate
I am not trying to "dig" anyone out. I am interested to find out more about the latest rumours, however.
In this case, an individual has been named and is said to be "talking to the ex directors". It would be very interesting to know where this information comes from. That is, has the information been provided by Muir? Or by one, some or all of the ex directors. Hence I asked who had "told" this information.
Other people claiming to have inside knowledge about various elements of various bids have been pretty open about the provenance of their information, for example @JamesSeed and @PragueAddick hve been very forthcoming and appear to have shared both the information they know and where it has come from. In that way, it helps form a fuller, more helpful picture.
Even you, @Taxi_Lad shared some interesting and informative knowledge and (if I remember right) you shared the name of the person who gave it to you. That added considerably to how well that information was received and found reliable.
If someone says they have been told that Andrew Muir is in discussion with a number of former directors, I think it's reasonable to want to know where that information has come from, ie, has it come from Muir or from the former directors. (In part because, if that's come from Muir, it would be particularly interesting to know whether @JamesSeed is able to expand on it).
I haven't "demanded" to know. If my request appeared somewhat brusque, then that was unintentional. I was hoping to satisfy a curiosity, based on a snippet of information. The opposite is the case, however, since the information has been confirmed as having come from "the club" and there is only one former director now part of "the club", it's curious to say the least. I thank @DOUCHER for sharing that bit.
We're on page 1937. So I won't lay claim to being the only "boring" part of the thread so far. If I am, then I can only say hang on a bit, because it probably won't be long until there are more fish puns to bring brevity. But, if someone starts a rumour and, in the same sentence, claims it might be "another load of old tosh", I think it's worth trying to find out what it is.
Of course, there is another explanation. But I am sure that would be considered a load of old tosh too.
Makes clear below that tweet that they (Whitehand, Chappell, Sumners) are not discussing the loans with anyone and have only read the claim that they are on here.
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Who told you?
lets just say it came from the club
No, let's just say who.
@Chizz we’ve been here before with you trying to dig out @DOUCHER. Bit of a personal vendetta?? I don’t see you demanding others to declare their sources. Becoming a bit boring mate
I am not trying to "dig" anyone out. I am interested to find out more about the latest rumours, however.
In this case, an individual has been named and is said to be "talking to the ex directors". It would be very interesting to know where this information comes from. That is, has the information been provided by Muir? Or by one, some or all of the ex directors. Hence I asked who had "told" this information.
Other people claiming to have inside knowledge about various elements of various bids have been pretty open about the provenance of their information, for example @JamesSeed and @PragueAddick hve been very forthcoming and appear to have shared both the information they know and where it has come from. In that way, it helps form a fuller, more helpful picture.
Even you, @Taxi_Lad shared some interesting and informative knowledge and (if I remember right) you shared the name of the person who gave it to you. That added considerably to how well that information was received and found reliable.
If someone says they have been told that Andrew Muir is in discussion with a number of former directors, I think it's reasonable to want to know where that information has come from, ie, has it come from Muir or from the former directors. (In part because, if that's come from Muir, it would be particularly interesting to know whether @JamesSeed is able to expand on it).
I haven't "demanded" to know. If my request appeared somewhat brusque, then that was unintentional. I was hoping to satisfy a curiosity, based on a snippet of information. The opposite is the case, however, since the information has been confirmed as having come from "the club" and there is only one former director now part of "the club", it's curious to say the least. I thank @DOUCHER for sharing that bit.
We're on page 1937. So I won't lay claim to being the only "boring" part of the thread so far. If I am, then I can only say hang on a bit, because it probably won't be long until there are more fish puns to bring brevity. But, if someone starts a rumour and, in the same sentence, claims it might be "another load of old tosh", I think it's worth trying to find out what it is.
Of course, there is another explanation. But I am sure that would be considered a load of old tosh too.
Jacob Rees-Mogg would be wetting himself if he read that ;-)
PS No info on Muir. If it's correct (and it seems unlikely) I'm not sure why GM is doing the phoning round. I suspect up to now he's refused to yield to Roland's demand that the Aussies sort the loans, after Roland promising to do so himself (allegedly).
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Makes clear below that tweet that they (Whitehand, Chappell, Sumners) are not discussing the loans with anyone and have only read the claim that they are on here.
Makes clear below that tweet that they (Whitehand, Chappell, Sumners) are not discussing the loans with anyone and have only read the claim that they are on here.
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Every time there's an ex-director rumour, one of them (think it's Whitehand) always posts on twitter saying he's bored, nothing's happening, heard fuck all etc, so i'm sure we'll know soon enough.
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
been told that muir is now talking to the ex directors - nla may be able to verify that and if he does i'll believe it - if he doesn't, i'll treat it as another load of old tosh - why on earth didn't he start talking to them a year ago??? absolute nonsense
Because it’s Roland’s debt to sort, not muir’s
i know that but if that is the stumbling block i'm guessing it was a year ago - anyway, the aussies in my opinion are a fabrication with regards to being a serious potential owner
I still think we should move to get RD disqualified as a director of our football club through his clearly demonstrable incompetence in running it, not to mention his on record comments of how little time he has for it.
It would be interesting to know who, at the club, has been lying to @DOUCHER about Muir talking to the ex-directors. And what they might gain by doing so.
What is upsetting is that if we are not taken over, which we won't be unless Duchatelet is persuaded to be realistic, we will almost certainly lose Bowyer - maybe even before the end of the season. If we do crap he will go or be pushed, and if we do well, he will walk. Throwing crisps and pigs on the pitch worked well for publicity but the ones who are going to push this cnut over the edge are probably small in number and willing to really push the boundaries of what is acceptable.
I’m always up for pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable but somewhat out of the loop so plz keep posting any forthcoming action. Box clever mind, the fox hunting analogy is spot on as direct action is needed and the great work that has already been done needs to be ramped up.
Comments
Dalman and Aussies lodged bids, and perhaps it’s a game of chicken, with season about to start? Perhaps Dalman blinked first.
Not sure about Muir and Directors. The loans were supposed to be Roland's to sort, but he wants to pass them to prospective buyers now. I think Dalman and Aussies want them sorted before sale, but maybe it’s Muir blinking? NLA may know more?
Not ITK though so not sure.
Proper Charlton that!
we’ve been here before with you trying to dig out @DOUCHER.
Bit of a personal vendetta?? I don’t see you demanding others to declare their sources. Becoming a bit boring mate
xx
In this case, an individual has been named and is said to be "talking to the ex directors". It would be very interesting to know where this information comes from. That is, has the information been provided by Muir? Or by one, some or all of the ex directors. Hence I asked who had "told" this information.
Other people claiming to have inside knowledge about various elements of various bids have been pretty open about the provenance of their information, for example @JamesSeed and @PragueAddick hve been very forthcoming and appear to have shared both the information they know and where it has come from. In that way, it helps form a fuller, more helpful picture.
Even you, @Taxi_Lad shared some interesting and informative knowledge and (if I remember right) you shared the name of the person who gave it to you. That added considerably to how well that information was received and found reliable.
If someone says they have been told that Andrew Muir is in discussion with a number of former directors, I think it's reasonable to want to know where that information has come from, ie, has it come from Muir or from the former directors. (In part because, if that's come from Muir, it would be particularly interesting to know whether @JamesSeed is able to expand on it).
I haven't "demanded" to know. If my request appeared somewhat brusque, then that was unintentional. I was hoping to satisfy a curiosity, based on a snippet of information. The opposite is the case, however, since the information has been confirmed as having come from "the club" and there is only one former director now part of "the club", it's curious to say the least. I thank @DOUCHER for sharing that bit.
We're on page 1937. So I won't lay claim to being the only "boring" part of the thread so far. If I am, then I can only say hang on a bit, because it probably won't be long until there are more fish puns to bring brevity. But, if someone starts a rumour and, in the same sentence, claims it might be "another load of old tosh", I think it's worth trying to find out what it is.
Of course, there is another explanation. But I am sure that would be considered a load of old tosh too.
And on to the 21st century we go.
Makes clear below that tweet that they (Whitehand, Chappell, Sumners) are not discussing the loans with anyone and have only read the claim that they are on here.
PS No info on Muir. If it's correct (and it seems unlikely) I'm not sure why GM is doing the phoning round. I suspect up to now he's refused to yield to Roland's demand that the Aussies sort the loans, after Roland promising to do so himself (allegedly).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHP6f6MQ_sA
At 2.09 the aussies are a fabrication...
is this not contradictory?