[dim view]

Sammy Spireite, on 10 November 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

I believe we are awaiting a decision from the club as to how/when the details of the evening would be publicised (the audio of the event was recorded by NJ).

Just to confirm, as I don't think its a secret, the 'hired goons' on match days that stand behind DA/CT, who were also in attendance last night, are paid for by and there to protect Les Ashmore.

I can only assume they stand at the back of the stands so they get a view of the immediate area around him, without restricting anyone's view.

A lot was said last night, apologies were made and some commitments made on both sides.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating, as they say.

morning.
What Les told me was that they were there 'because of me'. I drew the conclusion that somebody thought he might initiate an argument, which he nearly did. For the benefit of non attenders, he was making the point that in his opinion somebody was monopolising the event. I had a nice chat with him afterwards where I surprisingly had to fill him in on CT's dealings with the Shady Sheik, as he was unaware.

[Heart of a Niven]

Surely, with this New World Order you've created over night, it shouldn't be a problem being told what was discussed at the meeting, bearing in mind that one of the main issues is transparency.
Sammy Spireite's comment that there were 'commitments made on both sides' suggests that there's been an agreement that board members will, at the very least, end their hounding of CT but I wait for clarification on what was actually meant (and as you say the proof of the pudding is in the eating). It does however appear that the fall-out from the meeting will create the atmosphere the Gang Of Three are desperate to generate - divide and conquer, where the fan base is left with the Orwellian problem of 'all animals are equal' etc.
It is vital that those present tell people what happened last night and let them form their own conclusions, not wait until their new masters say 'jump'.
On a side note, I wouldn't have a clue what Les Ashmore looks like, nor do I have a problem with him expressing his views on here, as I'm sure anyone else on this board would agree, so forgive me a little laugh.

[Stoptalkingbol]

I hope the hired help have to purchase a match day ticket also?

[Johnnyspireite7]

So I guessed right then, what a prat he really is!

[dim view]

Heart of a Niven, on 10 November 2016 - 09:56 AM, said:

Surely, with this New World Order you've created over night, it shouldn't be a problem being told what was discussed at the meeting, bearing in mind that one of the main issues is transparency.
Sammy Spireite's comment that there were 'commitments made on both sides' suggests that there's been an agreement that board members will, at the very least, end their hounding of CT but I wait for clarification on what was actually meant (and as you say the proof of the pudding is in the eating). It does however appear that the fall-out from the meeting will create the atmosphere the Gang Of Three are desperate to generate - divide and conquer, where the fan base is left with the Orwellian problem of 'all animals are equal' etc.
It is vital that those present tell people what happened last night and let them form their own conclusions, not wait until their new masters say 'jump'.
On a side note, I wouldn't have a clue what Les Ashmore looks like, nor do I have a problem with him expressing his views on here, as I'm sure anyone else on this board would agree, so forgive me a little laugh.

I think a. that it was a late finish and b. that attenders are possibly waiting to see whether the official summary is accurate or has been sanitised/biased before posting.

I would say at least half the meeting was about CT's fitness for office, so fair play to them for allowing it. That's my only positive observation.

[metallilad]

what name does Mr Ashmore go under then? Can I ask that question?

[CFC91]

What a ****** bell that kid is whoever he is.

He's not Barrack Obama ffs

[brianclose]

CFC91, on 10 November 2016 - 10:47 AM, said:

What a ****** bell that kid is whoever he is.

He's not Barrack Obama ffs

He's no kid. Probably the wrong side of 70!

[essexspireman]

who hired the heavies, Les Ashmore or the club?

This post has been edited by essexspireman: 10 November 2016 - 10:54 AM

[CFC91]

What's his username on here the little wet wipe? As if ya do that

[For your eyes only]

The idea of a need for security is beyond ridiculous.
Pretentious and massive over reaction to say the least.
There's only one goon there.

[Bluekent]

Hired security? That guy really does think a lot of himself and his deluded opinions. How up your own àrse can you be.

[The Black Triangle]

dim view, on 10 November 2016 - 10:23 AM, said:

I think a. that it was a late finish and b. that attenders are possibly waiting to see whether the official summary is accurate or has been sanitised/biased before posting.

I would say at least half the meeting was about CT's fitness for office, so fair play to them for allowing it. That's my only positive observation.

Was Turner there? And what was his reaction to having his incompetencies highlighted?

[dim view]

The Gimp, on 10 November 2016 - 12:36 PM, said:

Was Turner there? And what was his reaction to having his incompetencies highlighted?

He was. Our message was obvious but he had the air of a man who knew there was no one at the meeting who could affect his position. He listened, waffled, blustered, made some ridiculous excuses (such as LS's value as a youth coach outweighs his deficiencies), and some outrageous suggestions (such as that some fans present could help him do due diligence in future).

I'm very pessimistic. There is a simple way out of this which is that DA moves him to Director of Football and spends £80k on a proper CEO. In my opinion that would pay for itself within 12 months. This option is nowt to DA yet he won't do it.

There is nobody at CFC running the finances or the departments. The Directors are not performing their duties as custodians of our football club and I told them that. I heard a very slight whimper of a whisper about takeover talks but I'm not holding my breath.

[Tonycfc]

dim view, on 10 November 2016 - 01:09 PM, said:

He was. Our message was obvious but he had the air of a man who knew there was no one at the meeting who could affect his position. He listened, waffled, blustered, made some ridiculous excuses (such as LS's value as a youth coach outweighs his deficiencies), and some outrageous suggestions (such as that some fans present could help him do due diligence in future).

I'm very pessimistic. There is a simple way out of this which is that DA moves him to Director of Football and spends £80k on a proper CEO. In my opinion that would pay for itself within 12 months. This option is nowt to DA yet he won't do it.

There is nobody at CFC running the finances or the departments. The Directors are not performing their duties as custodians of our football club and I told them that. I heard a very slight whimper of a whisper about takeover talks but I'm not holding my breath.

So merging all this together, is Les taking over the club ( I have no idea who this Les geezer is)

[Westbars Spireite]

Maybe Les Ashmore is Derbyshire's answer to Pablo Escobar and is a big hitter away from talking knackers about Town?

ps, How much do they cost? Fancy having a cup myself.

[Blue95]

Any news on the infamous, alleged, 5%?

[hilly81]

dim view, on 10 November 2016 - 01:09 PM, said:

He was. Our message was obvious but he had the air of a man who knew there was no one at the meeting who could affect his position. He listened, waffled, blustered, made some ridiculous excuses (such as LS's value as a youth coach outweighs his deficiencies), and some outrageous suggestions (such as that some fans present could help him do due diligence in future).

I'm very pessimistic. There is a simple way out of this which is that DA moves him to Director of Football and spends £80k on a proper CEO. In my opinion that would pay for itself within 12 months. This option is nowt to DA yet he won't do it.

There is nobody at CFC running the finances or the departments. The Directors are not performing their duties as custodians of our football club and I told them that. I heard a very slight whimper of a whisper about takeover talks but I'm not holding my breath.

Someone needs to get on the blower to Red Bull.

[dim view]

Blue95, on 10 November 2016 - 01:21 PM, said:

Any news on the infamous, alleged, 5%?

Yep. CT receives a percentage of profit on player sales. PC did as well but that perk stopped for subsequent managers. CT has not yet been paid, so we now have the farcical situation of the guy overseeing CFC's financial performance being a major creditor in the accounts.

I don't want to say much more until more attendees get involved or the official account comes out. For total disclosure Nick Johnson should make the whole recording public. What a fine podcast that would be.

[RikShaw]

dim view, on 10 November 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

Yep. CT receives a percentage of profit on player sales. PC did as well but that perk stopped for subsequent managers. CT has not yet been paid, so we now have the farcical situation of the guy overseeing CFC's financial performance being a major creditor in the accounts.

I don't want to say much more until more attendees get involved or the official account comes out. For total disclosure Nick Johnson should make the whole recording public. What a fine podcast that would be.

Is this not also a conflict of interest, where our CEO is effectively incentivised to sell our best players, therefore limiting the club's ability to complete? Surely, he should be incentivised on progressing the club forward in terms of league finishing position and debt reduction/financial performance? Oh, hang on a sec, conflict of interest, he's now a major creditor!
What a farce!