[moondog]

Phil V 72, on 28 July 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

It feels a little like a gentle show of strength from MA, just a reminder that he wants to be front and centre.

Ironic if we'd kept Jack on the deal would have gone through.

Very poor judgment to assume MA would accept working under of DOF, when he was clearly his own man, for example walking out at Leicester after four games because of interference from above.


https://www.bbc.co.u...rammes/p0309smy

As for Brearley, the word to me from AC last Sunday was he's "probably not involved now, didn't have any money"

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

moondog, on 28 July 2018 - 07:35 AM, said:

As for Brearley, the word to me from AC last Sunday was he's "probably not involved now, didn't have any money"

'Probably'? From the Owner's right hand man?

[moondog]

MDCCCLXVI, on 28 July 2018 - 07:48 AM, said:

'Probably'? From the Owner's right hand man?

Yes

[60s 70s Spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 28 July 2018 - 07:48 AM, said:

'Probably'? From the Owner's right hand man?

Presumably, in horse racing parlance ‘from the same stable’?

[metallilad]

Phil V 72, on 28 July 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

It feels a little like a gentle show of strength from MA, just a reminder that he wants to be front and centre.

He'll most probably be thinking that if he's the one charged with bringing the good times and supporters back then he should be the one who puts out the "good news".
Ashley should just sit back, let MA get on with it cos in a short time of him being here he has started to build bridges. Something Carson could never do.

[moondog]

Looker-on, on 23 July 2018 - 10:18 AM, said:

Brealey and Kenworthy have a connection going back to Kenworthy's last apparent involvement in football, at Grantham around 1998, when Reg was involved in that club.

Just found out through the end piece of this article, that Kenworthy works (or at least did at the time May 2017) in the Gambling industry for SIS. They work in Partnership with Gaming and Greyhound organisations, so every possibility he's well known to DA.

https://www.chad.co....-town-1-8539512

https://www.sis.tv/about/#exec-team

[dim view]

moondog, on 28 July 2018 - 07:35 AM, said:

Ironic if we'd kept Jack on the deal would have gone through.

Very poor judgment to assume MA would accept working under of DOF, when he was clearly his own man, for example walking out at Leicester after four games because of interference from above.


https://www.bbc.co.u...rammes/p0309smy

As for Brearley, the word to me from AC last Sunday was he's "probably not involved now, didn't have any money"

I doubt it. Keeping Jack on translates to him saving our league position, expanding his legend status, and demanding no D of F.
This is the second time Carson has got under MA's nose, the first being his implication that MA had not been accurate about contract details. It don't bode well.

This post has been edited by dim view: 28 July 2018 - 10:20 AM

[DIFH]

dim view, on 28 July 2018 - 10:17 AM, said:

I doubt it. Keeping Jack on translates to him saving our league position, expanding his legend status, and demanding no D of F.
This is the second time Carson has got under MA's nose, the first being his implication that MA had not been accurate about contract details. It don't bode well.

As much as we loath AC common sense (I know) has now come home as regards spending. A manager will always request funds for additional players. MA said he wanted a squad of about 16 and I think Sinnott not moving is why MA was told no.

[frearsghost]

I think we've escaped a very worrying scenario.

Those planning to takeover must have been aware of the sense of optimism Martin Allen has generated since his arrival. He's been like a breath of fresh air. Yet, despite this, they wanted to appoint a Director of Football to whom MA would have been answerable. So, even before they set foot in the ground, they made a wrong decision that flew in the face of common sense and would have destroyed the positiveness. You don't have to be sage to recognise that something was not right.

Yet I get the impression, that if the buyers had had the money, the deal would have gone through and the positivism dismantled and raised to the ground. It's not an easy life being a Town fan.

[Blue5]

moondog, on 28 July 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

Just found out through the end piece of this article, that Kenworthy works (or at least did at the time May 2017) in the Gambling industry for SIS. They work in Partnership with Gaming and Greyhound organisations, so every possibility he's well known to DA.

https://www.chad.co....-town-1-8539512

https://www.sis.tv/about/#exec-team

Good find.

Who referred to this lot as being the consortium of convenience?

I hear someone already lined up for an associate director's role was due to be appointed regardless of who the major shareholder was going to be. Have you heard similar?

[Looker-on]

Blue5, on 28 July 2018 - 01:19 PM, said:

Good find.

Who referred to this lot as being the consortium of convenience?

I hear someone already lined up for an associate director's role was due to be appointed regardless of who the major shareholder was going to be. Have you heard similar?

If you're posting an application for the Academy Manager role, you might find he already has, perhaps.

[RichThomps1]

Looker-on, on 28 July 2018 - 01:46 PM, said:

If you're posting an application for the Academy Manager role, you might find he already has, perhaps.

God help them if he gets it

[moondog]

Blue5, on 28 July 2018 - 01:19 PM, said:

Good find.

Who referred to this lot as being the consortium of convenience?

I hear someone already lined up for an associate director's role was due to be appointed regardless of who the major shareholder was going to be. Have you heard similar?

I take it you mean Steve Coe, see post #247 it was up to the new consortium if they wanted to carry on the plan to appoint him to a role, think that was over and above that of Associate Director though.

However as indicated by Looker On, it appears it has happened as applications for the new academy manager were to be addressed to Steve or Nigel Smith although I now see that's been changed to just Nigel

[Spire-Power]

Is this another Carson screw up?

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

RichThomps1, on 28 July 2018 - 05:10 PM, said:

God help them if he gets it

If?

[dim view]

Blue5, on 28 July 2018 - 01:19 PM, said:

Good find.

Who referred to this lot as being the consortium of convenience?

I hear someone already lined up for an associate director's role was due to be appointed regardless of who the major shareholder was going to be. Have you heard similar?

The key question here is .....'who is batting for CFC in any negotiations?'

Warner just wants his money back.
Croot hasn't got any so, it is alleged, is reduced to ringing round debenture holders to ask them whether they would accept a reduced return on their investment to get a sale through.
Neither, either now or in the future, are interested in due diligence.

They should both resign. They contribute nothing in respect of doing their best for CFC. I ask you, 'how could Mike Warner have aproved the latest shambles?'

[moondog]

dim view, on 28 July 2018 - 08:37 PM, said:

The key question here is .....'who is batting for CFC in any negotiations?'

Warner just wants his money back.
Croot hasn't got any so, it is alleged, is reduced to ringing round debenture holders to ask them whether they would accept a reduced return on their investment to get a sale through.
Neither, either now or in the future, are interested in due diligence.

They should both resign. They contribute nothing in respect of doing their best for CFC. I ask you, 'how could Mike Warner have aproved the latest shambles?'

They didn't have a say to approve or not.

If you recall AC went on record back in January to say only he and DA were dealing with the takeover bid,

[isleaiw1]

moondog, on 28 July 2018 - 10:06 PM, said:

They didn't have a say to approve or not.

If you recall AC went on record back in January to say only he and DA were dealing with the takeover bid,

And maybe that’s the issue. If you are on board you are collectively responsible. You can’t just say “ok, no worries, I won’t ask questions” as if it goes wrong you could be jointly liable as a director...

[moondog]

isleaiw1, on 28 July 2018 - 10:08 PM, said:

And maybe that’s the issue. If you are on board you are collectively responsible. You can’t just say “ok, no worries, I won’t ask questions” as if it goes wrong you could be jointly liable as a director...

I agree, two wrongs here

1. That they aren't involved
2. They accept that

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

moondog, on 28 July 2018 - 06:08 PM, said:

I take it you mean Steve Coe, see post #247 it was up to the new consortium if they wanted to carry on the plan to appoint him to a role, think that was over and above that of Associate Director though.

However as indicated by Looker On, it appears it has happened as applications for the new academy manager were to be addressed to Steve or Nigel Smith although I now see that's been changed to just Nigel

Hmmm...

http://www.thecfss.c...8&hl=itsc&st=20