Fox in a Box Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 Whose going first....... Foxes trust up to the plate please
Geo V Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 I`m turning coward on this one and burying my head in the sand until some real news is announced on Sky Sports! The reason for doing this is because I`m getting constantly wound-up with these statements from the Trust. I am seriously starting to wonder what there agenda and problem is and coming onto this thread (no offence to the posters BTW) just leaves me deflated. It shouldnt be long now and the Trust can then fudge off
Daggers Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 I'd have said that is potentially libellous. Considering the announcements made from the MM camp in the media about "larger debts than first...", I doubt it.
Swedging Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 It's not intirely true thats for certain, while they've out and out lied about it I'd say they've kept our true finacial situation hidden from us up until recently. I don't even think that's true. When the financial results were published, there was plenty of discussion on here about the several million pound shortfall that could potentially be expected this year. I wouldn't expect the club to come out and say that - but it was certainly evident in the accounts and therefore not hidden.
Ric Flair Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 I`m turning coward on this one and burying my head in the sand until some real news is announced on Sky Sports! The reason for doing this is because I`m getting constantly wound-up with these statements from the Trust. I am seriously starting to wonder what there agenda and problem is and coming onto this thread (no offence to the posters BTW) just leaves me deflated. It shouldnt be long now and the Trust can then fudge off I think i'm going to try and take this approach, it's very hard though.
Swedging Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 Considering the announcements made from the MM camp in the media about "larger debts than first...", I doubt it. That was a carefully worded statement about his expectations, though. Not saying that the board had lied, misled or hidden debt.
luffbra Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 It's not intirely true thats for certain, while they've out and out lied about it I'd say they've kept our true finacial situation hidden from us up until recently. I'm not clear what the situation, but I (as a fan) have been under the impression that we're a well run club managing debts sensibly. Admittedly it was only the board that gave this impression, and I believed them - probably down to their apparent altruism in saving the club originally. Mandaric's due diligence knocked that in the water. Whether or not Mandaric succeeds (and I reckon the silence points to the fact that he will) this board and all associated with it (FT included) HAVE to go ...
Louise Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 There only so much you can edit and nit pick, obviously there lies some facts. Even though the papers are known to fabricate, but in this case I think some truths have been told!!! What exactly is wrong with what he's said? "We don't think it benefits any party to quantify the bid, particularly as it changes." - True, if they give a figure it could change and then people would complain - especially the likes of MM, the board etc as it'd probably be against takeover rules. "The risk of inflated transfer fees and wage demands is a real concern" - Again true, if you say 'we have £3m to spend in the summer, first we want to buy youth-team player Joe Bloggs from Arsenal', Arsenal are going to ask for £3m, just look at the inflated prices Chelsea have had to pay for players because clubs know that they can afford it. "Even now, we still have fans coming up to us believing £25m cash will be arriving next month because they have read the figure so frequently." - Self explanatory really, everyone knows the Merc's numbers are a load of bull, and although in the short term saying that £25m is the bid might be good for MM, in the long term people are going to be saying 'how come we've only gotten players on loan', 'how come we're in the Prem but we can't spend any money to stay up because MM is paying off the stadium debt, I thought he owned it' etc. "When the consortium took over the club (following administration), all the Mercury coverage talked of a £5m or £6m takeover bid and ignored the stadium finance. It is inconsistent reporting to do so now as you could argue the consortium bid then was close to £25m too." Again self explanatory, the Merc talk bull. "We believe the board will recommend it too. I presume no-one has a problem with that statement. However with (former director) James Johnson having resigned, the remaining board members personally control only 33 per cent of the shareholding. - Factual We are aware of some shareholders who will certainly support it. However, we believe there are several differing reasons why some shareholders won't, and know this to be the case from various conversations we have had. again, nothing wrong with that. I would point out we have stated a neutral position to any shareholder we have talked to, saying we still awaited answers to a number of questions before we could declare our support or otherwise." As the Trust have been saying throughout this despite what their detractors say, they're waiting for the final bid, questions to be answered and to hear what their members think. "track record shows questionable judgement on managers". True, and what we've all been saying on here since the rumours started. He criticised Mandaric for "selling his bid to fans via the Mercury rather than focusing on shareholders who make the final decision, and added: "This will cost him votes". Exactly what they've been saying on here for ages, shareholders don't like MM's use of the media, he's made them and the the job they've done of saving the club seem insignificant, and made fans want them out. Bason also said the initial "indicative" bid lacked sufficient detail and he was concerned that the "final bid document "will leave too many questions still unanswered". Surely that's a concern for everyone, if MM can just cut his losses and leave us in the mire, or if no guarantees have been made that he won't dump the academy, charge £1000 per ST, sell of the training ground, give the stadium to the Tigers (or other more realistic problems ). Also the fact that Bason was apparently concerned should tell you that he wants the MM bid stand a good chance with the shareholders. Ideally we would like to retain them all, some or even a token single share. As Mandaric speaks of his affinity to fans we feel he should allow a democratic City fans organisation to retain a shareholding as a symbol of his relationship with the fans. We view this as an emotional, not financial issue. The club could be handed over to a non-City fan for the first time. A symbolic retention of a shareholding with the Trust for the long term leaves a thread of City fan ownership, even if it is a minimal percentage. The existence of the advisory board was mentioned in the initial indicative offer. We spoke to Mandaric's representative, discussed our present level of involvement, and we were subsequently told we would have a position on the advisory board if the takeover was successful. It will be important for Mandaric to ensure he is aware of likely local reaction to various potential decisions he could make and we can obviously offer guidance in this area" - As the Trust may continue even after MM is in, the idea of keeping a share and being on the advisory board is a good one IMO, whether you like the Trust or not there should be some LCFC related people and supporters near MM (I'm not saying they represent the whole fanbase, but having an organisation which can contact a sample of fans for opinions is important). People expressed at the very start of this deal a worry about the club going out of LCFC supporters hands. (that was a bit longer than expected )
Fox in a Box Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 http://foxestrust.co.uk/site/index.php?opt...2&Itemid=26 January 2007 11th - Foxes Trust Board Meeting Interesting........
Daggers Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 Anyone up for a sing song? Can you hear the Board/Trust/MM sing? No-oh! No-oh! It's all gone quiet, all gone quiet, all gone quiet over there.....aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh! Silence is golden, but my eyes still see...
Thracian Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 That's right Even if the Mercury took those comments another way they have not chosen words carefully. Making comments about Milan and his integrity is stupid. This is the real world - imagine if we were being taken over by Simon Jordan ... the media frenzy would be different. The Mercury's enthusiasm for the deal has been irresponsible, but it serves as a counteract to the pessimism and lack of ambition that the current board and FT seem to have... I do think, reading these comments, that it is a pity the FT are restrained from being able to respond fully and frankly. Whatever their shortcomings I'd believe what they say far easier than I would anything from Bill Anderson. I used to read his player ratings and that was enough, thanks! Sadly, not being able to respond fully and frankly is one of the FT's insurmountable problems. But I instinctively dislike anyone being verbally bashed around while they have their lips taped. As for the Mercury, from what I've seen they have done little to get "inside" this deal and to keep people informed of precisely what is going on and why. They have neither answered, nor tried to answer, the serious questions that some of us are concerned about. They have, from what I can see, simply covered their own arses to make sure they're on the right side of the man in charge when he takes his seat. They seem to have openly supported the deal instead of doing their job which is to ask questions and to find things out which the rest of us don't know. Don't get me wrong. I'd love the Mandaric deal to work. Even the anticipation has a certain excitement. But the less I hear (from anyone) about what's really going on the more sceptical I feel.
amitoo Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 i think from all us being more then excited with the news of MM taking over a long 2 months ago, the FT i believe have not really back the deal of MM coming which is turning this in to MM Vs Foxes Trust and because of FT its turned us on to them, i don't know what they playing at do they want us to proceed and do well?? its plain and simple the FT cares about its self and only its self
Daggers Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 http://foxestrust.co.uk/site/index.php?opt...2&Itemid=26 January 2007 11th - Foxes Trust Board Meeting Interesting........ No. They have one every month
Fox in a Box Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 No. They have one every month No the timing of this and us slating them....
breadandcheese Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 i think from all us being more then excited with the news of MM taking over a long 2 months ago, the FT i believe have not really back the deal of MM coming which is turning this in to MM Vs Foxes Trust and because of FT its turned us on to them, i don't know what they playing at do they want us to proceed and do well?? its plain and simple the FT cares about its self and only its self Seriously, you are asking if the FT want us to proceed and do well? Of course they do, but for the whole time their position has been, we make no judgement on this bid until we have seen it, which is fair. It's just plain stupid to bandwagon or accept anything without knowing what it is you are supporting. This only comes across as being anti-MM because expectations are running wild (with a little help from the Mercury) and so the FT have tried to act as some form of b*stardised voice of reason, trying to calm expectations, whereas some would rather let hope run the finances of the club.
Unit Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 To the foxes trust: You are NOT representing the views of the fans, you are representing the views of yourselves, the views of most fans seem to be "fook off FT"
Manwell Pablo Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 I don't even think that's true. When the financial results were published, there was plenty of discussion on here about the several million pound shortfall that could potentially be expected this year. I wouldn't expect the club to come out and say that - but it was certainly evident in the accounts and therefore not hidden. Yes that was awhile ago though and I forget questioning where the extra money was coming from. ok not hidden, not made public, I'd say they have done their best to make sure the average fans doesn't know the implications of our financial situation.
Babylon Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 What exactly is wrong with what he's said? Nothing. If I had the time and inclination I would spell it out to people, problem is I don't think some would even get it they are so blinded with hate.
Dr The Singh Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 What exactly is wrong with what he's said? "We don't think it benefits any party to quantify the bid, particularly as it changes." - True, if they give a figure it could change and then people would complain - especially the likes of MM, the board etc as it'd probably be against takeover rules. "The risk of inflated transfer fees and wage demands is a real concern" - Again true, if you say 'we have £3m to spend in the summer, first we want to buy youth-team player Joe Bloggs from Arsenal', Arsenal are going to ask for £3m, just look at the inflated prices Chelsea have had to pay for players because clubs know that they can afford it. "Even now, we still have fans coming up to us believing £25m cash will be arriving next month because they have read the figure so frequently." - Self explanatory really, everyone knows the Merc's numbers are a load of bull, and although in the short term saying that £25m is the bid might be good for MM, in the long term people are going to be saying 'how come we've only gotten players on loan', 'how come we're in the Prem but we can't spend any money to stay up because MM is paying off the stadium debt, I thought he owned it' etc. "When the consortium took over the club (following administration), all the Mercury coverage talked of a £5m or £6m takeover bid and ignored the stadium finance. It is inconsistent reporting to do so now as you could argue the consortium bid then was close to £25m too." Again self explanatory, the Merc talk bull. "We believe the board will recommend it too. I presume no-one has a problem with that statement. However with (former director) James Johnson having resigned, the remaining board members personally control only 33 per cent of the shareholding. - Factual We are aware of some shareholders who will certainly support it. However, we believe there are several differing reasons why some shareholders won't, and know this to be the case from various conversations we have had. again, nothing wrong with that. I would point out we have stated a neutral position to any shareholder we have talked to, saying we still awaited answers to a number of questions before we could declare our support or otherwise." As the Trust have been saying throughout this despite what their detractors say, they're waiting for the final bid, questions to be answered and to hear what their members think. "track record shows questionable judgement on managers". True, and what we've all been saying on here since the rumours started. He criticised Mandaric for "selling his bid to fans via the Mercury rather than focusing on shareholders who make the final decision, and added: "This will cost him votes". Exactly what they've been saying on here for ages, shareholders don't like MM's use of the media, he's made them and the the job they've done of saving the club seem insignificant, and made fans want them out. Bason also said the initial "indicative" bid lacked sufficient detail and he was concerned that the "final bid document "will leave too many questions still unanswered". Surely that's a concern for everyone, if MM can just cut his losses and leave us in the mire, or if no guarantees have been made that he won't dump the academy, charge £1000 per ST, sell of the training ground, give the stadium to the Tigers (or other more realistic problems ). Also the fact that Bason was apparently concerned should tell you that he wants the MM bid stand a good chance with the shareholders. Ideally we would like to retain them all, some or even a token single share. As Mandaric speaks of his affinity to fans we feel he should allow a democratic City fans organisation to retain a shareholding as a symbol of his relationship with the fans. We view this as an emotional, not financial issue. The club could be handed over to a non-City fan for the first time. A symbolic retention of a shareholding with the Trust for the long term leaves a thread of City fan ownership, even if it is a minimal percentage. The existence of the advisory board was mentioned in the initial indicative offer. We spoke to Mandaric's representative, discussed our present level of involvement, and we were subsequently told we would have a position on the advisory board if the takeover was successful. It will be important for Mandaric to ensure he is aware of likely local reaction to various potential decisions he could make and we can obviously offer guidance in this area" - As the Trust may continue even after MM is in, the idea of keeping a share and being on the advisory board is a good one IMO, whether you like the Trust or not there should be some LCFC related people and supporters near MM (I'm not saying they represent the whole fanbase, but having an organisation which can contact a sample of fans for opinions is important). People expressed at the very start of this deal a worry about the club going out of LCFC supporters hands. (that was a bit longer than expected ) It's not what all about what they have said, it's all about timing, as stated earlier. Most of the points were well known at the beginning of this sage eg inflated wages, bids insufficient detail, selling out to mercury instead of the true voice of the fans FT, his management choices etc, why blab now, pleae correct me if i'm wrong but I never saw a statement from the FT calculating Mandaric in depth before!! Also all they have done is calculated the negatives, common sense would also state that in a balanced perspective that they weigh up the advantages aswell, which they have not done!! I don't believe Mandaric to be without judgement but as others have said, they have been in the shadows , and sterile for so long, all of a sudden there position is under threat and wham bam, they are actually raising a voice!!!
Babylon Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 Yes that was awhile ago though and I forget questioning where the extra money was coming from. ok not hidden, not made public, I'd say they have done their best to make sure the average fans doesn't know the implications of our financial situation. How much do you want them to spell it out? Last season we made a tiny profit. Last year we had parachute payments this year we don't. Last year we sold players this year we didn't. All of this has been said times. Even the trust have said 20 times that players would need to be sold if extra finance didn't come in. Doesn't take someone with a mathematics degree to work out we were going to lose big money this year. Those who didn't know this are either too stupid or too ignorant.
Manwell Pablo Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 Nothing. If I had the time and inclination I would spell it out to people, problem is I don't think some would even get it they are so blinded with hate. It's the inflated transfere and wages thing and the manager thing that gets me, they never say anything positive about the man, there always putting doubt in your mind, they're just as bad as the Merc, no one or no thing is perfect, but it's pretty fair to say anything is better the Plan B, as they haven't come up with it yet. We call all see how badly were struggling to for money, if something doesn't change eventully we will be back in admin in league one.
Babylon Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 It's not what all about what they have said, it's all about timing, as stated earlier. Most of the points were well known at the beginning of this sage eg inflated wages, bids insufficient detail, selling out to mercury instead of the true voice of the fans FT, his management choices etc, why blab now, pleae correct me if i'm wrong but I never saw a statement from the FT calculating Mandaric in depth before!! Also all they have done is calculated the negatives, common sense would also state that in a balanced perspective that they weigh up the advantages aswell, which they have not done!! I don't believe Mandaric to be without judgement but as others have said, they have been in the shadows , and sterile for so long, all of a sudden there position is under threat and wham bam, they are actually raising a voice!!! Because the Mercury sports team have gone to war with the trust. They didn't like the fact the trust pointed out that they were talking absolute garbage half the time. It states in the article that what the trust said was to answer questions the Mercury asked them. The trust didn't just come out with the statement for the sake of it.
Swedging Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 Also all they have done is calculated the negatives, common sense would also state that in a balanced perspective that they weigh up the advantages aswell, which they have not done!! It looks more like the Mockery have been selective with their editing. I would guess that the FT said something like, "Mandaric did a great job with Portsmouth, left them in a much better situation, well-respected by Portsmouth fans et. etc. But you have to say he has had questionable judgement with managers." And the Mockery just picked up the last bit.
Jon the Hat Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 It's the inflated transfere and wages thing and the manager thing that gets me, they never say anything positive about the man, there always putting doubt in your mind, they're just as bad as the Merc, no one or no thing is perfect, but it's pretty fair to say anything is better the Plan B, as they haven't come up with it yet. We call all see how badly were struggling to for money, if something doesn't change eventully we will be back in admin in league one. There has been plenty of positive spin, they are trying to add some balance.
Manwell Pablo Posted 12 January 2007 Posted 12 January 2007 How much do you want them to spell it out? Last season we made a tiny profit. Last year we had parachute payments this year we don't. Last year we sold players this year we didn't. All of this has been said times. Even the trust have said 20 times that players would need to be sold if extra finance didn't come in. Doesn't take someone with a mathematics degree to work out we were going to lose big money this year. Those who didn't know this are either too stupid or too ignorant. Well yes theres all that, but then theres Birch telling everyone we're solvent on Radio Leicester every Monday evening. Can't blame people for getting confused.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.