Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 8:48:43 GMT
Do any of these Consortium people have IT Skills?
|
|
|
Post by bttrsblue on Sept 22, 2015 8:53:38 GMT
It's not a case of not liking his rumour, it's something he has just made up to try and score points off JTS. It's sad pathetic attention seeking nonsense. It adds nothing to this forum whatsoever but could be useful to a psychologist. This is completely uncalled for. The same could be said about JTS. Anyone could make up anything. Why is one person more trustworthy than an other? Reputation maybe? I dont pay enough attention to who posts what on here to comment, however i know who JTS is and is a little more than just a keyboard warrior, so i guess carries a bit more sway on people. Either way - if we hear nothing in the next week - the forum will have to decide who to lynch first! haha
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 10:11:48 GMT
My rumour is bigger than yours! haha I think people don't like your version of things LJG, so don't want to believe you, whereas JTS's rumour is quite a positive change (seemingly) if true. Who knows! In fairness anyone who is part of the 'consortium' (if it exists) could be claimed to have a link to the dark side - a simple fact that Lansdown is a very successful man in the financial world. It's not a case of not liking his rumour, it's something he has just made up to try and score points off JTS. It's sad pathetic attention seeking nonsense. It adds nothing to this forum whatsoever but could be useful to a psychologist. until time passes and we see what does or doesnt develop whos to say jts/ljg is on the money ?
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Sept 22, 2015 10:13:42 GMT
Problem as I see it is whilst JTS maybe 100% genuine how does he know if his source from the Boardroom is not just feeding him nonsense? Although the fact NH has come out and denied the storey suggests there might be something to the rumour? Even GoD is tweeting about "Plan B" now!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 10:17:55 GMT
The way I see it is Jon The Stripe has digested what he's been told and told us as much as he feels he can because he thinks its relevant and useful, and Lord Justice Gashead has been spun a load of bollocks and got so excited he's in the know he's passed it on without considering the content. Even if both are completely wrong, one strikes me as a better class of rumour. Just my opinion, of course
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 22, 2015 10:21:40 GMT
The way I see it is Jon The Stripe has digested what he's been told and told us as much as he feels he can because he thinks its relevant and useful, and Lord Justice Gashead has been spun a load of bollocks and got so excited he's in the know he's passed it on without considering the content. Even if both are completely wrong, one strikes me as a better class of rumour. Just my opinion, of course Seems like you're not applying the same considerations to both posters. Your post basically amounts to "I trust JTS and not LJG because ... I do". You have no idea what I have and haven't taken time to consider and digest. You have no idea what JTS has or hasn't taken time to consider and digest.
|
|
|
Post by bluebeard on Sept 22, 2015 10:24:16 GMT
Maybe both rumours are true? A consortium has the money but there are indirect links to our neighbours so NH is concerned we will be used as a feeder club. Or maybe not. The worst case scenario now, is that the story peters out without any confirmation or denial. I hate anti climaxes.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 22, 2015 10:26:29 GMT
a better class of rumour. something we should all aim for in life, I think
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Sept 22, 2015 10:28:10 GMT
It's not a case of not liking his rumour, it's something he has just made up to try and score points off JTS. It's sad pathetic attention seeking nonsense. It adds nothing to this forum whatsoever but could be useful to a psychologist. until time passes and we see what does or doesnt develop whos to say jts/ljg is on the money ? And that is just about the truth of it. As I see it in 8 days, 12 pages and however many posts I am not sure this thread has advanced our knowledge of anything. We know there is a rumour and a counter rumour. We know some people believe one more than the other. But what do we actually know? In summary - diddlysquat. The idea that there is a mythical consortium out there who may wish to invest in the club is not really news. NH was publicly courting such things only recently. But to me it is clear that until the court case is finally resolved there is not going to be any announcement from the club. Be that right or wrong in your eyes I believe it is the way it is. That may take some months to resolve depending on when the case comes to court. Is there really any point in picking over what may or may not be happening, falling out with each other (however good the intentions of the poster) and creating more heat than light. United we stand, divided we fall. Old and cheesy maybe but I think very true. Can we not put this to bed and, however frustrating it may be, accept that we will have to keep on waiting for news?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 10:36:56 GMT
The way I see it is Jon The Stripe has digested what he's been told and told us as much as he feels he can because he thinks its relevant and useful, and Lord Justice Gashead has been spun a load of bollocks and got so excited he's in the know he's passed it on without considering the content. Even if both are completely wrong, one strikes me as a better class of rumour. Just my opinion, of course Seems like you're not applying the same considerations to both posters. Your post basically amounts to "I trust JTS and not LJG because ... I do". You have no idea what I have and haven't taken time to consider and digest. You have no idea what JTS has or hasn't taken time to consider and digest. I know. But if you digested your Lansdown rumour and still decided it was true and worth sharing, I'm happy with my assumptions.
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 22, 2015 10:41:50 GMT
Seems like you're not applying the same considerations to both posters. Your post basically amounts to "I trust JTS and not LJG because ... I do". You have no idea what I have and haven't taken time to consider and digest. You have no idea what JTS has or hasn't taken time to consider and digest. I know. But if you digested your Lansdown rumour and still decided it was true and worth sharing, I'm happy with my assumptions. Just to be clear I've never named Lansdown. Have to be careful about these things.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 10:51:24 GMT
But to me it is clear that until the court case is finally resolved there is not going to be any announcement from the club. Be that right or wrong in your eyes I believe it is the way it is. That may take some months to resolve depending on when the case comes to court. I think this is where we are. It's going to be hard to agree a price to buy/sell at whilst the Sainsbury's situation is still in flux. For what it's worth, I think Jon's rumour is probably accurate, but still don't see what was gained from leaking it. It gave us soomething to gossip about, but hard to see how it will create trust and help negotiations with Nick and the people considering investing. If the intention was to try to put pressure on Higgs, just look at the Sainsbury's situation, he isn't someone who just shrugs his shoulders and gives up.
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Sept 22, 2015 11:06:10 GMT
I know. But if you digested your Lansdown rumour and still decided it was true and worth sharing, I'm happy with my assumptions. Just to be clear I've never named Lansdown. Have to be careful about these things. I put it to you, my Lord, that in using the phrase 'it's a possibility the main backer of the consortium could be he who must live in Guernsey' you were seeking to imply, and for readers of this forum to infer, that the main backer might be thought of as Mr Lansdown, thereby not only implicating Mr Lansdown in the proposal but implicating him as 'the main backer'
if the above is not true, might you inform of us of any other purpose for the phraseology used? For myself, I am struggling to think of any other purpose
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 11:32:57 GMT
I think this says it all. You want to be "in the know" and you don't want anyone else to be. The fact I have information seems to be getting to you. I think its the other way around and you are proving it to be the case. Starters, you moan about people who are or claim to be in the know. You hate the fact that they have info but can only share some and not all so you rather nothing be shared at all. Then you 'apparently' have a 'source' of your own and copy those in the know by giving some detail and not all, trying to prove a point regarding your original argument. Its this or you are pretty hypocritical with the fact that one minute you moan about the lack of info being shared by those in the know and rather nothing at all is shared but then the next minute you have your own so called source giving some but not all info out. Funny that.
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Sept 22, 2015 11:32:32 GMT
Seems like you're not applying the same considerations to both posters. Your post basically amounts to "I trust JTS and not LJG because ... I do". You have no idea what I have and haven't taken time to consider and digest. You have no idea what JTS has or hasn't taken time to consider and digest. I know. But if you digested your Lansdown rumour and still decided it was true and worth sharing, I'm happy with my assumptions. There is no alternative rumour it's made up s**t by an attention seeking saddo but it's working because he's getting plenty of attention. Look at the language in the original post he made on this made up rumour and subsequent responses. it's a piss take throwing back language that other posters who mainly do have something useful to pass on have used Like I said earlier I can't believe people are biting and giving him the attention he craves.
|
|
|
Post by Feeling The Blues on Sept 22, 2015 11:33:07 GMT
Seems like you're not applying the same considerations to both posters. Your post basically amounts to "I trust JTS and not LJG because ... I do". You have no idea what I have and haven't taken time to consider and digest. You have no idea what JTS has or hasn't taken time to consider and digest. I know. But if you digested your Lansdown rumour and still decided it was true and worth sharing, I'm happy with my assumptions. There is no alternative rumour it's made up s**t by an attention seeking saddo but it's working because he's getting plenty of attention. Look at the language in the original post he made on this made up rumour and subsequent responses. it's a piss take throwing back language that other posters who mainly do have something useful to pass on have used Like I said earlier I can't believe people are biting and giving him the attention he craves.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2015 11:34:20 GMT
My rumour is bigger than yours! haha I think people don't like your version of things LJG, so don't want to believe you, whereas JTS's rumour is quite a positive change (seemingly) if true. Who knows! In fairness anyone who is part of the 'consortium' (if it exists) could be claimed to have a link to the dark side - a simple fact that Lansdown is a very successful man in the financial world. It's not a case of not liking his rumour, it's something he has just made up to try and score points off JTS. It's sad pathetic attention seeking nonsense. It adds nothing to this forum whatsoever but could be useful to a psychologist. Exactly.
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 22, 2015 11:34:46 GMT
Just to be clear I've never named Lansdown. Have to be careful about these things. I put it to you, my Lord, that in using the phrase 'it's a possibility the main backer of the consortium could be he who must live in Guernsey' you were seeking to imply, and for readers of this forum to infer, that the main backer might be thought of as Mr Lansdown, thereby not only implicating Mr Lansdown in the proposal but implicating him as 'the main backer'
if the above is not true, might you inform of us of any other purpose for the phraseology used? For myself, I am struggling to think of any other purpose
It's possible. Google is your friend.
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 22, 2015 11:37:55 GMT
I think this says it all. You want to be "in the know" and you don't want anyone else to be. The fact I have information seems to be getting to you. I think its the other way around and you are proving it to be the case. Starters, you moan about people who are or claim to be in the know. You hate the fact that they have info but can only share some and not all so you rather nothing be shared at all. Then you 'apparently' have a 'source' of your own and copy those in the know by giving some detail and not all, trying to prove a point regarding your original argument. Its this or you are pretty hypocritical with the fact that one minute you moan about the lack of info being shared by those in the know and rather nothing at all is shared but then the next minute you have your own so called source giving some but not all info out. Funny that. What info has anyone else been shown to have that I don't?
|
|
LJG
Peter Beadle
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 969
|
Post by LJG on Sept 22, 2015 11:39:31 GMT
I know. But if you digested your Lansdown rumour and still decided it was true and worth sharing, I'm happy with my assumptions. There is no alternative rumour it's made up s*** by an attention seeking saddo but it's working because he's getting plenty of attention. Look at the language in the original post he made on this made up rumour and subsequent responses. it's a piss take throwing back language that other posters who mainly do have something useful to pass on have used Like I said earlier I can't believe people are biting and giving him the attention he craves. This is rude and unnecessary. I'll ask you the same question. What "useful to pass on" has anyone else been shown to have that I haven't?
|
|