|
|
Post by bluebeard on Nov 19, 2015 21:19:53 GMT
A question that needs to be addressed is: What is the best case scenario for Rovers after the appeal? I would think that there is no way that the outcome of the appeal,if successful, will give Mr Higgs any where near what Slimeburys originally offered,but we can hope... Best case scenario: the difference between £30m and current open market value plus costs. And the judge will order gasincider to name his source. |
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 19, 2015 21:32:34 GMT
I have so much hope and faith that people I have never met are being told the truth by other people I know nothing about who are claiming to offer something that I cannot logically support because I don't know what they're offering or if they or the offer exist at all.
I must be the sort of person who invites the Mormons in for a cup of tea and a chat.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldgas on Nov 19, 2015 21:45:20 GMT
It seems to me that a thread dealing with a possible transfer target has morphed into a clone of "A new beginning"? which now stands at a forum record? of some 205 pages.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 19, 2015 21:57:41 GMT
In my opinion Matt Tubbs as a proven goalscorer at L1 and L2 level would be a great asset to the club.
|
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 19, 2015 22:22:20 GMT
A question that needs to be addressed is: What is the best case scenario for Rovers after the appeal? I would think that there is no way that the outcome of the appeal,if successful, will give Mr Higgs any where near what Slimeburys originally offered,but we can hope... Best case scenario: the difference between £30m and current open market value plus costs. And the judge will order gasincider to name his source. He named it himself - a public tweet on twitter. But obviously he can't say by who or what it said because that public tweet available for the entire internet to see is confidential information. And by the way that public tweet contained a confidential document that made him 100% sure there is a consortium takeover bid. His words not mine. |
|
|
|
Post by pirateman on Nov 19, 2015 22:38:20 GMT
I borrowed money from an organisation called 'The Consortium' once. Wonder if it's them.
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 8:24:16 GMT
Best case scenario: the difference between £30m and current open market value plus costs. And the judge will order gasincider to name his source. He named it himself - a public tweet on twitter. But obviously he can't say by who or what it said because that public tweet available for the entire internet to see is confidential information. And by the way that public tweet contained a confidential document that made him 100% sure there is a consortium takeover bid. His words not mine. Why keep banging the same drum? JTS also tweeted about an alleged consortium so it's not just from one forum poster. They both clearly believe it's genuine and aren't going to change that view. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 8:57:05 GMT
He named it himself - a public tweet on twitter. But obviously he can't say by who or what it said because that public tweet available for the entire internet to see is confidential information. And by the way that public tweet contained a confidential document that made him 100% sure there is a consortium takeover bid. His words not mine. Why keep banging the same drum? JTS also tweeted about an alleged consortium so it's not just from one forum poster. They both clearly believe it's genuine and aren't going to change that view. How is it you're so easily confused by what I say? JTS tweeted about it, yes. So what? That's completely irrelevant to the point I'm making. GasinCider claims to have been passed confidential information which he can't repeat by someone he can't name. He also claims that the method of passing that information was to tweet it from a public twitter account. Just answer me these two questions: - Why does GasinCider think this person would wish to remain anonymous despite have published this information publicly on twitter? - How can GasinCider think the information he claims he saw on twitter was confidential when he saw it on what he admits is a public twitter account? |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 9:13:21 GMT
Don't think any of us really care TBH, what is clear is somebody is feeding this info to him for some reason, whether it's genuine or malicious may become clearer at next week's SCAGM....then it again it might not!
|
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 10:04:52 GMT
Don't think any of us really care TBH, what is clear is somebody is feeding this info to him for some reason, whether it's genuine or malicious may become clearer at next week's SCAGM....then it again it might not! Well that's the point isn't it? It's not clear that anyone has "fed him" anything is it? That's the least clear thing on this entire thread. GasinCider claims to have seen something on twitter that he refuses to repost and refuses to name the twitter account. Why would he do that unless he's deliberately on a wind-up? The simplest thing in the world would be for him to say, "yeah it's on X's twitter, here look". I don't get how you're not calling him to account on what he says but you want to call others to account on that same basis? |
|
|
|
Post by Henbury Gas on Nov 20, 2015 10:10:42 GMT
I find it quite interesting that people concentrate on 'The Consortium' when Nick Higg's plan "B" drops under the crossbar so to speak "!
We know just as much about Nicks plan as 'The Consortium' plans which is feck all (apart from the changes over at UWE)
Lets hope he can pass on some info at next week's AGM about it !
|
|
|
|
Post by Gashead73 on Nov 20, 2015 11:05:29 GMT
Lets face it, when has the current BoD been open with the paying supporters?
|
|
|
|
Post by oldgas on Nov 20, 2015 11:12:42 GMT
Stand by for the SCAGM to either
A) Be cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances or
B) The chairman or other officials from the club being unable to attend at the last minute due to unforeseen circumstances.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 20, 2015 11:19:23 GMT
Stand by for the SCAGM to either A) Be cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances or B) The chairman or other officials from the club being unable to attend at the last minute due to unforeseen circumstances. You terrible old cynic you.  It's a great opportunity for Nick to put it all to bed. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 11:26:12 GMT
Don't think any of us really care TBH, what is clear is somebody is feeding this info to him for some reason, whether it's genuine or malicious may become clearer at next week's SCAGM....then it again it might not! Well that's the point isn't it? It's not clear that anyone has "fed him" anything is it? That's the least clear thing on this entire thread. GasinCider claims to have seen something on twitter that he refuses to repost and refuses to name the twitter account. Why would he do that unless he's deliberately on a wind-up? The simplest thing in the world would be for him to say, "yeah it's on X's twitter, here look". I don't get how you're not calling him to account on what he says but you want to call others to account on that same basis? I did about 200 pages back! To be fair to Gasincider there does seem so truth in the previous suggestions by him that Ged McCrory was interested in mounting a takeover, as such, I don't want to just dismiss the rumour, particularly as NH has never really denied it plus CS has joined the BoD for some reason. Although the rumour could all be a smoke screen to cover up Plan B, a reduced capacity UWE only, at best, part owned by Rovers once the Mem beens sold to pay off the loans/debts. |
|
|
|
Post by baggins on Nov 20, 2015 11:27:18 GMT
Stand by for the SCAGM to either A) Be cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances or B) The chairman or other officials from the club being unable to attend at the last minute due to unforeseen circumstances. You terrible old cynic you. It's a great opportunity for Nick to put it all to bed. Or not. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2015 11:34:36 GMT
Stand by for the SCAGM to either A) Be cancelled due to unforeseen circumstances or B) The chairman or other officials from the club being unable to attend at the last minute due to unforeseen circumstances. You terrible old cynic you. It's a great opportunity for Nick to put it all to bed. Being put to bed by Nick! Pass me the mind bleach please. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 12:12:17 GMT
Well that's the point isn't it? It's not clear that anyone has "fed him" anything is it? That's the least clear thing on this entire thread. GasinCider claims to have seen something on twitter that he refuses to repost and refuses to name the twitter account. Why would he do that unless he's deliberately on a wind-up? The simplest thing in the world would be for him to say, "yeah it's on X's twitter, here look". I don't get how you're not calling him to account on what he says but you want to call others to account on that same basis? I did about 200 pages back! To be fair to Gasincider there does seem so truth in the previous suggestions by him that Ged McCrory was interested in mounting a takeover, as such, I don't want to just dismiss the rumour, particularly as NH has never really denied it plus CS has joined the BoD for some reason. Although the rumour could all be a smoke screen to cover up Plan B, a reduced capacity UWE only, at best, part owned by Rovers once the Mem beens sold to pay off the loans/debts. What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Nick Higgs and the Board have to address a rumour promulgated by someone who won't even say where they allegedly saw the information on twitter. If you want to find out where GasinCider got his twitter info from you can easily find out for yourself. Go to twitter and type in the search box "Bristol Rovers Consortium" and look at the results - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Takeover" (if you want to be really thorough try "Take over" as two words too). - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Investor" - guess what you get? Nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff Do the same for "Bristol Rovers Investment", "Bristol Rovers £40m", "Bristol Rovers £40,000,000" "Bristol Rovers 40 million" "Bristol Rovers forty million". You can even go all out and just do "Bristol Rovers" and trawl all the way back through August and September. Can you see where I'm going with this? GasinCider's twitter source is a figment of his imagination. |
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 20, 2015 12:22:02 GMT
I did about 200 pages back! To be fair to Gasincider there does seem so truth in the previous suggestions by him that Ged McCrory was interested in mounting a takeover, as such, I don't want to just dismiss the rumour, particularly as NH has never really denied it plus CS has joined the BoD for some reason. Although the rumour could all be a smoke screen to cover up Plan B, a reduced capacity UWE only, at best, part owned by Rovers once the Mem beens sold to pay off the loans/debts. What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Nick Higgs and the Board have to address a rumour promulgated by someone who won't even say where they allegedly saw the information on twitter. If you want to find out where GasinCider got his twitter info from you can easily find out for yourself. Go to twitter and type in the search box "Bristol Rovers Consortium" and look at the results - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Takeover" (if you want to be really thorough try "Take over" as two words too). - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Investor" - guess what you get? Nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff Do the same for "Bristol Rovers Investment", "Bristol Rovers £40m", "Bristol Rovers £40,000,000" "Bristol Rovers 40 million" "Bristol Rovers forty million". You can even go all out and just do "Bristol Rovers" and trawl all the way back through August and September. Can you see where I'm going with this? GasinCider's twitter source is a figment of his imagination. The board only need to fully deny it if it's damaging the club or if asked at the AGM surely? Other than that there is no need I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by dinsdale on Nov 20, 2015 12:25:08 GMT
I feel this is the week lads :-)
|
|
