Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 13:13:53 GMT
I'm not sure what you think you are trying to achieve by telling us half of what you seem to know? You really are a bore Bamber - it is not for Jon to give a detailed explanation. The door is open for Mr Higgs to offer up an explanation. If he does not then he risks others giving their version of events. Don't be so daft. Jon wants to be the big 'I am' by breaking the story, it's not for Higgs to respond to anything. This feels to me as if Jon is being used and has swallowed the bait.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,353
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Sept 19, 2015 13:26:30 GMT
You really are a bore Bamber - it is not for Jon to give a detailed explanation. The door is open for Mr Higgs to offer up an explanation. If he does not then he risks others giving their version of events. Don't be so daft. Jon wants to be the big 'I am' by breaking the story, it's not for Higgs to respond to anything. This feels to me as if Jon is being used and has swallowed the bait. As for Jon wanting to be the big I am, you really couldn't be more wrong. I will quit at that as I am sure he needs no one to rationalise his actions. Your other point on being used as bait is valid though , I have had to find that out the hard way. I very much hope this is not the case. It's bloody embarrassing and left me feeling stupid. As I said, I don't get into it now and because I fell for it. If I had to guess though, my money is that this has not come from the same people that I used to engage with.
|
|
|
Post by fanatical on Sept 19, 2015 13:29:07 GMT
You really are a bore Bamber - it is not for Jon to give a detailed explanation. The door is open for Mr Higgs to offer up an explanation. If he does not then he risks others giving their version of events. Don't be so daft. Jon wants to be the big 'I am' by breaking the story, it's not for Higgs to respond to anything. This feels to me as if Jon is being used and has swallowed the bait. So please tell me why you are pursuing Jon like a dog chasing a bone?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 13:34:46 GMT
Don't be so daft. Jon wants to be the big 'I am' by breaking the story, it's not for Higgs to respond to anything. This feels to me as if Jon is being used and has swallowed the bait. So please tell me why you are pursuing Jon like a dog chasing a bone? I'll ask again, what exactly has been gained from leaking half a story?
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 19, 2015 13:37:48 GMT
Don't be so daft. Jon wants to be the big 'I am' by breaking the story, it's not for Higgs to respond to anything. This feels to me as if Jon is being used and has swallowed the bait. So please tell me why you are pursuing Jon like a dog chasing a bone? Bambi attacking the man rather than the ball if you ask me
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Sept 19, 2015 13:38:37 GMT
Do you feel that you are anywhere near catching that bone?
|
|
|
Post by fanatical on Sept 19, 2015 13:41:07 GMT
So please tell me why you are pursuing Jon like a dog chasing a bone? I'll ask again, what exactly has been gained from leaking half a story? So what you really mean is - you are jealous of anyone who knows more than you.
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 19, 2015 13:46:22 GMT
I'll ask again, what exactly has been gained from leaking half a story? So what you really mean is - you are jealous of anyone who knows more than you. Or just bored of tedious intermeddlers who think it's right to publish confidential information and then back peddle?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 14:01:34 GMT
I think Jon's pitched it well and also given the lie to the usual 'confidentiality clauses' nonsense we're served. He's said 'This is happening', without speaking for or about other parties.
It's possible for people to be in the picture without knowing every detail of who said what or the financials to the nearest tenner. That's the line the club misses but Jon seems to have got right
One time hush-hush might have been justified was in the early days of the Sainsbury's / UWE deal, but then there wasn't the same disenchantment and lack of faith in possible progress - just comments that all had gone quiet on the trumpeted redevelopment. Even then, had there been a more inclusive view towards fans, they could have said 'we're exploring a radical alternative to sell the land in Horfield and relocate, and discussions are on-going with potential parties at both ends'. If nothing had come of it, then 'we were unable to make both agreements tally' or some such.
We've got fans' Directors who won't tell us meetings have happened, let alone what was discussed or why decisions were reached. There needn't be any mention of 'x said' or anything else which would be more a matter of discourtesy than commercial confidentiality.
Making people think they're in the loop rather than a threat to national security is pretty basic PR and generally considered to be 'a good thing' commercially.
If, given the info available, people want to reserve judgement, fair enough but that's far better than being shut in the basement with the lights off.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 19, 2015 14:12:55 GMT
So please tell me why you are pursuing Jon like a dog chasing a bone? I'll ask again, what exactly has been gained from leaking half a story? He's brought it to our attention and also put pressure on NH to possibly make some kind of announcement/acknowledgement, plus it may derail Plan B? The other alternative is that JTS kept quiet allowing NH to ensure Plan B came to fruition. Would any of us want really want Plan B led by NH if Plan A led by new investors/owners was still a possibility?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 14:15:57 GMT
I'll ask again, what exactly has been gained from leaking half a story? He's brought it to our attention and also put pressure on NH to possibly make some kind of announcement/acknowledgement, plus it may derail Plan B? The other alternative is that JTS kept quiet allowing NH to ensure Plan B came to fruition. Would any of us want really want Plan B led by NH if Plan A led by new investors/owners was still a possibility? Hard to see how anything written here could affect the outcome of a proposed takeover / investment?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 19, 2015 14:34:27 GMT
James McNarama/B Post has tweeted the club are denying they've had an approach!!
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 19, 2015 14:41:51 GMT
James McNarama/B Post has tweeted the club are denying they've had an approach!! not true, I think. Tweet is 'Spoke to someone at Rovers: "No truth in rumours that a takeover of the club is imminent." is what I was told.'
Alistair Durden tweeted months ago that they had had approaches, so no news really
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 14:46:36 GMT
He's brought it to our attention and also put pressure on NH to possibly make some kind of announcement/acknowledgement, plus it may derail Plan B? The other alternative is that JTS kept quiet allowing NH to ensure Plan B came to fruition. Would any of us want really want Plan B led by NH if Plan A led by new investors/owners was still a possibility? Hard to see how anything written here could affect the outcome of a proposed takeover / investment? But it might add context to why Colin Sexstone's been brought in, and why they're maintaining what seems to be a legally futile leave to appeal the Sainsbury's judgement, and whatever weird twist comes next. It might not change any outcomes, but might save a few pages of speculation in other threads.
|
|
brizzle
Lindsay Parsons
No Buy . . . No Sell!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,293
|
Post by brizzle on Sept 19, 2015 15:02:33 GMT
I find it odd that we are now all privy to half a story (no disrespect intended to JTS by the way), but the local rag don't appear to have cottoned on to it at all. Alistair Durden tweeting doesn't add up to too much in real terms. I would have expected a story like this to be splashed over the back page, if not the front.
But then again . . .
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 15:07:31 GMT
Hard to see how anything written here could affect the outcome of a proposed takeover / investment? But it might add context to why Colin Sexstone's been brought in, and why they're maintaining what seems to be a legally futile leave to appeal the Sainsbury's judgement, and whatever weird twist comes next. It might not change any outcomes, but might save a few pages of speculation in other threads. If there really was a hostile takeover attempt (I think that's what's being suggested here?) Higgs wouldn't rely on a show of hands, he would use his shareholding to protect his position, wouldn't he? I think that the Sainsbury's case is just about dead in the water, and Nick knows it, but he's taking a punt and is willing to spend a comparatively small amount of money on the appeal because the possible return is huge compared to the risk, maybe?
|
|
|
Post by lulworthgas on Sept 19, 2015 15:20:15 GMT
If these are serious investors with serious cash what's stopping them from telling nick that they will by the club for a quid, and then start the UWE build. Higgs gets to keep the mem and pursue his golden goose through the courts whilst he allows rovers to use the mem rent free until UWE is ready. If Higgs loses his appeal, he can still get his cash back plus more from selling the mem to developers.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2015 15:23:46 GMT
If these are serious investors with serious cash what's stopping them from telling nick that they will by the club for a quid, and then start the UWE build. Higgs gets to keep the mem and pursue his golden goose through the courts whilst he allows rovers to use the mem rent free until UWE is ready. If Higgs loses his appeal, he can still get his cash back plus more from selling the mem to developers. My understanding was that the PP for UWE is on the site itself rather than being the property of Nick or BRFC, so, with UWE's permission, the bulldozers could roll on Monday morning. Maybe someone can confirm if that's correct?
|
|
Peter Parker
Global Moderator
Richard Walker
You have been sentenced to DELETION!
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,920
|
Post by Peter Parker on Sept 19, 2015 15:40:21 GMT
If these are serious investors with serious cash what's stopping them from telling nick that they will by the club for a quid, and then start the UWE build. Higgs gets to keep the mem and pursue his golden goose through the courts whilst he allows rovers to use the mem rent free until UWE is ready. If Higgs loses his appeal, he can still get his cash back plus more from selling the mem to developers. Sounds good,although I imagine that selling the mem.for whatever would be wanted to off set some of the cost of building UWE
|
|
|
Post by michaelb on Sept 19, 2015 15:44:31 GMT
If these are serious investors with serious cash what's stopping them from telling nick that they will by the club for a quid, and then start the UWE build. Higgs gets to keep the mem and pursue his golden goose through the courts whilst he allows rovers to use the mem rent free until UWE is ready. If Higgs loses his appeal, he can still get his cash back plus more from selling the mem to developers. My understanding was that the PP for UWE is on the site itself rather than being the property of Nick or BRFC, so, with UWE's permission, the bulldozers could roll on Monday morning. Maybe someone can confirm if that's correct? But there could be a contract between the two parties (Nick/BRFC and UWE) which until it is no longer extant no one can build there , maybe?
|
|