the gunslinger 3,366 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 If we don't fund club (whatever board or owner) the club enters administration. That's what the UoF are advocating here. That's all well and good IF such a process can be guaranteed to deliver a long term change in its fortunes but that's far from certain so it's a very high risk strategy. Perhaps the only strategy but high risk and unlikely to be popular. it's only a removal of funding till things change. the installation of 4 or 5 truly independent directors would end it immediately i expect. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Is that not the responsibility of those who will no doubt be against any call for a boycott? The status quo is certainly not the answer. Well, it's the responsibility of both. As it stands we have a bit of a stand off which explains the average crowds. At some point, someone has to lead and inspire. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 any boycotters will have to be clear about their aims. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Well, it's the responsibility of both. As it stands we have a bit of a stand off which explains the average crowds. At some point, someone has to lead and inspire. This particular 'battle' won't be won by 'knights' in 'open warfare'. It may in fact have already been lost to a degree that sees the club without a 'leg'. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,150 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 This particular 'battle' won't be won by 'knights' in 'open warfare'. It may in fact have already been lost to a degree that sees the club without a 'leg'. Sure we all have our part to play but we also need something (or someone) to buy into. Look at Hearts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 I could just about get my head around the merit of not giving a lump sum up front as long as people went game by game and at least the SOS have always advocated that. If they call for a full boycott though they're enemies of the club as far as i'm concerned. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sairdyy 0 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Boycott is, sadly the only option, imho. High risk? yes. but no more high risk than what is happening at the moment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Boycott is, sadly the only option, imho. High risk? yes. but no more high risk than what is happening at the moment. That sound very much like the SNP's argument for a Yes vote. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 I could just about get my head around the merit of not giving a lump sum up front as long as people went game by game and at least the SOS have always advocated that. If they call for a full boycott though they're enemies of the club as far as i'm concerned. those who payed up front have given a license to ****ery imho. now we have little choice but to boycott because of those 22k 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted September 11, 2014 Share Posted September 11, 2014 Sure we all have our part to play but we also need something (or someone) to buy into. Look at Hearts. this would of course help massively 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.