Backlash?

[davieG]

Agreed i'm sure I would hate to see my beloved LCFC go out of business, but I have to say I am anti the current board and also the trust

The board because they to me through the 20 odd years of my support have done jack all for the club in terms of investment and the situation however much some may want to tart it up is a shambles down to mis management

The trust started off life with good intentions but to mee seems to have firstly turned into a board's voice as those in the hierachy of the trust wish to keep in favour, but at the moment I hear disgraceful statement on the RL from you guys, about groundshares which neither set of fans wants Milan or no Milan!

Bring on AFC LCFC if these problems / cancers on our club are ridden

All they did was ask their members whether they'd be for or against a groundshare - WTF wrong with that?

Really some people ought not to believe RL & the Mercury's interpretation of events because they aren't all knowing.

PS I voted against a groundshare in both the FT's polls which had a majority for the groundshare a couple of years ago and a majority against early on in the MM bid. So the FT position on that is that they against it on behalf of their members.

[Kilworthfox]

All they did was ask their members whether they'd be for or against a groundshare - WTF wrong with that?

Really some people ought not to believe RL & the Mercury's interpretation of events because they aren't all knowing.

PS I voted against a groundshare in both the FT's polls which had a majority for the groundshare a couple of years ago and a majority against early on in the MM bid. So the FT position on that is that they against it on behalf of their members.

So why did Ian Bason come out with the if you want a groundshare now's your last chance statement a few months ago on RL?

[davieG]

So why did Ian Bason come out with the if you want a groundshare now's your last chance statement a few months ago on RL?

Because he didn't, I can't remember the exact question or answer but he was explaining that they wanted to know what their member's view was on a groundshare because a previous poll ( 2 years earlier) had shown a majority for it. Hence the reason for running another poll when the takeover talks started which at the time was mooted to consist of 3 bids one of which may have include a groundshare. The FT being a democratic body needed to find out the state of play.

[Kilworthfox]

So why did you vote against the groundshare?

Why do you think organisations like RL and the Mercury even the board give the Foxes trust the time of day when they only represent a small % of all LCFC fans?

[He's not bald]

So why did you vote against the groundshare?

Why do you think organisations like RL and the Mercury even the board give the Foxes trust the time of day when they only represent a small % of all LCFC fans?

Exactly..I don't understand it either...they certainly don't represent my views or the views of any City fans I know..and I know a few!

[Kilworthfox]

Exactly..I don't understand it either...they certainly don't represent my views or the views of any City fans I know..and I know a few!

Stop talking sense I keep agreeing

[tewkesbury-fox]

you pay peanuts you get monkeys, simple as that. it's easy to say that other people should put their hands in their pockets, but as none of us are in that position to do that who are we to say?

spot on there pal

[He's not bald]

Stop talking sense I keep agreeing

Just say it as I see it Kilworth..just like you...too many people on here with their head's in the clouds (and other places I could mention!)

[tewkesbury-fox]

Cant' answer that until the MM final bid document is in our possession

You lot have been wittering on about this bloody final document for weeks,like its some sort of badge of honour,quite frankly im sick of hearing it,what you going to do when you receive this bit of paper it wave it in the air like chamberlein did.

[Guest]

Cant' answer that until the MM final bid document is in our possession

So what are the alternatives to MM then? That's the implication from the statement above. I'll tell you. There isn't one.

[davieG]

So why did you vote against the groundshare?

Why do you think organisations like RL and the Mercury even the board give the Foxes trust the time of day when they only represent a small % of all LCFC fans?

I voted against the groundshare on priniciple because I'd rather have the potential to own the ground outright even if it meant waiting 20 years and spending the next few years in the Championship than to never ever having the chance again of owning it outright.

Because they represent more than just one individual, why does any business listen to what it's customers want. With the FT the club can get a view of approx. a 1000 fans, when you consider that most opinion poles in this country are usually just 1000 people to represent the whole country I would say by comparison that's a pretty fair representation.

As for them not representing your views, people say that as if they are some alien body with views already established. The views of the FT are the views of 1000 fans just like me.

Therefore at the moment they are:

Against a groundshare, are you and others saying that every none FT LCFC supporter is for the groundshare? If no then the view of their members must coincide with some.

They are neither for or against MM because they've yet to see the final bid document - and are therefore not in a position to either recommend to or ballot their members to find out what the majority view is. What is so difficult to understand about that. It's democracy in action FFS.

[Guest]

There are rumours that the bid document was circulated some time ago. Rumours, I say.

[davieG]

There are rumours that the bid document was circulated some time ago. Rumours, I say.

I suspect from the info we've gleaned that there have been several versions, or at the very least several versions of various aspects of it. What appears to be missing is the full and final legal bid document which I again presume will be in a from and content acceptable to the required majority of shareholders.

[Kilworthfox]

I voted against the groundshare on priniciple because I'd rather have the potential to own the ground outright even if it meant waiting 20 years and spending the next few years in the Championship than to never ever having the chance again of owning it outright.

Because they represent more than just one individual, why does any business listen to what it's customers want. With the FT the club can get a view of approx. a 1000 fans, when you consider that most opinion poles in this country are usually just 1000 people to represent the whole country I would say by comparison that's a pretty fair representation.

As for them not representing your views, people say that as if they are some alien body with views already established. The views of the FT are the views of 1000 fans just like me.

Therefore at the moment they are:

Against a groundshare, are you and others saying that every none FT LCFC supporter is for the groundshare? If no then the view of their members must coincide with some.

They are neither for or against MM because they've yet to see the final bid document - and are therefore not in a position to either recommend to or ballot their members to find out what the majority view is. What is so difficult to understand about that. It's democracy in action FFS.

Ok fair points, 1000 members you say! If you say so..... therefore 1 in 20 at the matches is an ft member.

about this bid document on what grounds would any FT member say no to Milan?

It seems to me and every fan i have spoken with that there is 1 option on the table/available and that is Milans. So the choice is MM or possible relegation almost certain administration as i have heard with my own ears the chairman say Lcfc needs all the cash it can get, which is shown by our lack of activity this month

[davieG]

Ok fair points, 1000 members you say! If you say so..... therefore 1 in 20 at the matches is an ft member.

about this bid document on what grounds would any FT member say no to Milan?

It seems to me and every fan i have spoken with that there is 1 option on the table/available and that is Milans. So the choice is MM or possible relegation almost certain administration as i have heard with my own ears the chairman say Lcfc needs all the cash it can get, which is shown by our lack of activity this month

Well as I haven't seen the document in any way shape or form I don't know, but as a FT member I would hope that theyy are checking on the fitness of MM to own the club and what his purchase entails with regards to how money is being raised to take the club forward.

Many clubs have been taken over with promises only to find that the buyer has just put the club, not themselves into major debt. I'm not saying MM will do that niether are the FT but they are duty bound to make sure that the shares which were purchased from the contributions of many many fans are not given up lightly. They need to balance the short, medium and long term future of the club with the ownership of a single individual who no one will have any control over once they own the club.

Even then they represent just a small minority of the shares and are not in a postion to prevent the takeover going ahead although they could influence others, but considering most people that are anti-FT also think they are useless with no influence I'm not sure how that works out.

As for if it fails it will mean almost certain administration, well I think that is just based on rumour and gossip, there are no facts in the public domain to back that up.

I know the shareholders have come in for criticism for not putting additional funds into the club but I just can't imagine that these same people would, after getting the club out of adminsitration last time would let it go back. Just my perception, but hey what do I know I'm just an ordinary fan trying to take an objective view based on the very, very few facts that we actually know.

[Kilworthfox]

Well as I haven't seen the document in any way shape or form I don't know, but as a FT member I would hope that theyy are checking on the fitness of MM to own the club and what his purchase entails with regards to how money is being raised to take the club forward.

Many clubs have been taken over with promises only to find that the buyer has just put the club, not themselves into major debt. I'm not saying MM will do that niether are the FT but they are duty bound to make sure that the shares which were purchased from the contributions of many many fans are not given up lightly. They need to balance the short, medium and long term future of the club with the ownership of a single individual who no one will have any control over once they own the club.

Even then they represent just a small minority of the shares and are not in a postion to prevent the takeover going ahead although they could influence others, but considering most people that are anti-FT also think they are useless with no influence I'm not sure how that works out.

As for if it fails it will mean almost certain administration, well I think that is just based on rumour and gossip, there are no facts in the public domain to back that up.

I know the shareholders have come in for criticism for not putting additional funds into the club but I just can't imagine that these same people would, after getting the club out of adminsitration last time would let it go back. Just my perception, but hey what do I know I'm just an ordinary fan trying to take an objective view based on the very, very few facts that we actually know.

Thanks Davie I know it can be difficult and that every fan has their own view of what and how things should happen but I personally believe that the MM takeover With seing the document or without seing it would be better than the situation we are in now.

Also we have Portsmouth as a template if you will for how this guy has done in These diviosions. In short Anyone who had a say in this matter would be mad to back against it IMO

[Foxes_Trust]

Agreed i'm sure I would hate to see my beloved LCFC go out of business, but I have to say I am anti the current board and also the trust

The board because they to me through the 20 odd years of my support have done jack all for the club in terms of investment and the situation however much some may want to tart it up is a shambles down to mis management

The trust started off life with good intentions but to mee seems to have firstly turned into a board's voice as those in the hierachy of the trust wish to keep in favour, but at the moment I hear disgraceful statement on the RL from you guys, about groundshares which neither set of fans wants Milan or no Milan!

Bring on AFC LCFC if these problems / cancers on our club are ridden

The board has changed several times over those 20 years, of the current board only Greg Clarke was around pre-administration, in 20 years you are including Martin George, John Elsom & Tom Smeaton as chairman. In those 20 years we had greatest success in the League Cup & got to Europe, so it wasn't all bad.

The Trust often acts as a funnel of information, so we let fans know what the club's approach to something is & in the same way feed the fans viewpoints back to the club.

The issue of groundsharing was raised only as a question to Trust members to gather their current thinking in case it featured in any of the proposals to take the club forward. We weren't promoting it, just ensuring we knew our members viewpoints, remembering 2 years ago the majority of Trust members were in favour, it is fairly evenly split now

[Foxes_Trust]

You lot have been wittering on about this bloody final document for weeks,like its some sort of badge of honour,quite frankly im sick of hearing it,what you going to do when you receive this bit of paper it wave it in the air like chamberlein did.

- Read it

- See if some questions we asked back in November have finally been answered or not

- Decide based upon the contents of the proposal & the consequences of not going ahead whether we back it or not

- Tell the club

- Tell our members

- Announce to the media via a press release

Our understanding is that we will need to make a decision within 24/48 hours of receiving the document, hence no time available to consult the members (which we would have preferred to do).

[Foxes_Trust]

There are rumours that the bid document was circulated some time ago. Rumours, I say.

The indicative bid document, which contained a pitiful amount of information, was circulated to all shareholders prior to the EGM.

There have been various drafts since (with the details significantly changed from the initial document), but until the final document is circulated no-one can be certain what the final bid will contain.

[Fez of Mahrez]

The indicative bid document, which contained a pitiful amount of information, was circulated to all shareholders prior to the EGM.

There have been various drafts since (with the details significantly changed from the initial document), but until the final document is circulated no-one can be certain what the final bid will contain.

So if the final bid document hasn't even been circulated yet, I take it we can forget about the takeover being completed by the time the window closes?

I may be in the minority here but I'd certainly want a decent amount of time to consider a response to a final bid document on the takeover of my football club if I had the huge responsibility of some sort of say in the matter.

[lookwhaticando]

Judging by the reaction at the Walkers' to the return of Peter Taylor, and probably Dennis Wise in the near future, I'd say the scale of any revolt would be closer to back-splash than backlash.

[He's not bald]

Ok fair points, 1000 members you say! If you say so..... therefore 1 in 20 at the matches is an ft member.

about this bid document on what grounds would any FT member say no to Milan?

It seems to me and every fan i have spoken with that there is 1 option on the table/available and that is Milans. So the choice is MM or possible relegation almost certain administration as i have heard with my own ears the chairman say Lcfc needs all the cash it can get, which is shown by our lack of activity this month

Whoa there a minute..he is saying the FT have a 1000 members....fair point...but they all agree????..I don't think so...whoever is the mouthpiece is saying they do...that's all

[He's not bald]

Whoa there a minute..he is saying the FT have a 1000 members....fair point...but they all agree????..I don't think so...whoever is the mouthpiece is saying they do...that's all

Bottom line we are in the shit,the board has given it their best shot but there's certainly a chance we will end up back admin only this time (if we stay in existence) we will be in a lower division with a 10 point penalty,no money and the worst joke in football since "big ron manager"

[davieG]

Whoa there a minute..he is saying the FT have a 1000 members....fair point...but they all agree????..I don't think so...whoever is the mouthpiece is saying they do...that's all

Don't be childish of course they don't all agree, you take any group of people in any avenue of life and there will be disagreements about certain points, the FT 'represents' the 'majority view of it's members.

Do you think all LCFC fans agree on everything? Of course they don't.

With the MM deal it's not even a case of agreeing or not there's nothing to agree on at this point because the formal offer has not been made.

[Manwell Pablo]

- Read it

- See if some questions we asked back in November have finally been answered or not

- Decide based upon the contents of the proposal & the consequences of not going ahead whether we back it or not

- Tell the club

- Tell our members

- Announce to the media via a press release

Our understanding is that we will need to make a decision within 24/48 hours of receiving the document, hence no time available to consult the members (which we would have preferred to do).

Try and word it well for once.