Bluedell 5,356 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 I like him because he only has one blue chair in his boardroom for him to sit on... Cannae afford matching chairs. Is that really the guy we want at out club? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j1mgg 0 Posted October 25, 2013 Author Share Posted October 25, 2013 Nothing new in this, Tony Blair swept to victory in 1997 despite offering nothing, mostly on the grounds that he wasn't John Major; David Cameron equally promised nothing other than not to be Gordon Brown. Not being the present lot is enough for me, to be honest, although the fact that I have heard of him and he's not another parachuted in 'who?' certainly helps as well. But he's not on any pedestal - just the better option. That's is a very good point. I just see a man that has said he won't invest any money and won't be having any part innday to day running of the club, which kind if takes away the wealth and business acumen theories. I could see if it was Dave king as he is someone that is willing to play apart in the rebuilding. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 That's is a very good point. I just see a man that has said he won't invest any money and won't be having any part innday to day running of the club, which kind if takes away the wealth and business acumen theories. I could see if it was Dave king as he is someone that is willing to play apart in the rebuilding. So the fact that he's not willing to invest £xxm with probably no prospect of a return shows that he is a poor business man??? He didn't make his millions by ploughing money into ventures where no gain was to be had. Right now, it is his business acumen that is the driving force behind the requisitioner's battle.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j1mgg 0 Posted October 25, 2013 Author Share Posted October 25, 2013 So the fact that he's not willing to invest £xxm with probably no prospect of a return shows that he is a poor business man??? He didn't make his millions by ploughing money into ventures where no gain was to be had. Right now, it is his business acumen that is the driving force behind the requisitioner's battle.... No, as I said he has said he won't be investing any money AND not getting involved in the running of the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crucible 0 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 So the fact that he's not willing to invest £xxm with probably no prospect of a return shows that he is a poor business man??? He didn't make his millions by ploughing money into ventures where no gain was to be had. Right now, it is his business acumen that is the driving force behind the requisitioner's battle.... I see no evidence that he is the driving force, his investors are alleged to be unhappy at his time spent on us, he has stated his reluctance for any meaningful involvement in the running of the club and he is certainly no sugar daddy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,290 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 No, as I said he has said he won't be investing any money AND not getting involved in the running of the club. That is what strikes me as odd. Likewise, he also appeared on the scene in person only after the CVA failed. That as well as his promise of non-involvement due to his other business ties will raise question marks. Hardly anyone is happy with what goes on right now, but "potential" investors being lured to the club via a McColl link are still just that, potential investors. If someone ask me whether I would like that more than say an Easdale partnership with King and Longmuir as (temporary) CEO, I'd take the latter option. (That said, I haven't read the minutes of last nights talks.) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,059 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 No, as I said he has said he won't be investing any money AND not getting involved in the running of the club. So no personal gain involved, no blazer required, there's two boxes in the plus column ticked already surely? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 I see no evidence that he is the driving force, his investors are alleged to be unhappy at his time spent on us, he has stated his reluctance for any meaningful involvement in the running of the club and he is certainly no sugar daddy. Driving force was maybe the wrong term.....but he was approached by other shareholders to "spearhead the uprising". He & P Murray are the ones actively leading the revolt. The shareholders approached him for a reason. Based on previous comments from McColl I agree 100% that if he took control (unlikely), he certainly would not be a sugar daddy. I believe he would do what CG & M Murray originally stated (& failed to do) - get the club running soundly and within its means as a solid business entity. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j1mgg 0 Posted October 25, 2013 Author Share Posted October 25, 2013 I thought the shareholders approached PM 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DUDE 0 Posted October 25, 2013 Share Posted October 25, 2013 Cannae afford matching chairs. Is that really the guy we want at out club? Maybe he wants to stand out 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.