bigdavewatson Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 That are sanctioning the deals regarding transfers?? Mute point to a certain extent, but SFC is (allegedly) not in administration, and Fry has himself said that he has no legal control over SFC as they are just one of the assets of SLH (when he gave a press release around the -10). This would seem to indicate that the directors are still in control and making the decisions around transfers. If they are still a going concern and solvent (due to transfer income) can SFC itself be wound up? Genuine question.
gonzo Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 But which directors? I thought they all disappeared when SLH plc was put into administration?
Pancake Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 But which directors? I thought they all disappeared when SLH plc was put into administration? Do keep up! Dvae Jones and Ken Tointon (him of famous hot daughters fame)
saintstr1 Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 To Many Questions around at the moment and most without any ANSWERS !!!!!
South City Si Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Come on! It doesn't need to be Fry to necesarily be asset stripping does it??? McG - Wanted to go back to Notts last couple of seasons, anmd some good amount of money for him. KD - On a free from today and WHU offered him a contract, Prem or L1?? Surman - A Saints fan but again has opportunity to play in Prem with Wolves, and again a decent price by the looks of it.# Sad to see them go but looks as just as much as football decisions as asset stripping.
Barry the Badger Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Fry has himself said that he has no legal control over SFC as they are just one of the assets of SLH (when he gave a press release around the -10). I kind of thought he was just saying that to try and aid the "appeal" but really we all knew he was controlling sfc.
trousers Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 That are sanctioning the deals regarding transfers?? Mute point to a certain extent, but SFC is (allegedly) not in administration, and Fry has himself said that he has no legal control over SFC as they are just one of the assets of SLH (when he gave a press release around the -10). This would seem to indicate that the directors are still in control and making the decisions around transfers. If they are still a going concern and solvent (due to transfer income) can SFC itself be wound up? Genuine question. I've been asking the same question ad-nauseum for 3 months and no one has had the answer.
bigdavewatson Posted 30 June, 2009 Author Posted 30 June, 2009 Come on! It doesn't need to be Fry to necesarily be asset stripping does it??? McG - Wanted to go back to Notts last couple of seasons, anmd some good amount of money for him. KD - On a free from today and WHU offered him a contract, Prem or L1?? Surman - A Saints fan but again has opportunity to play in Prem with Wolves, and again a decent price by the looks of it.# Sad to see them go but looks as just as much as football decisions as asset stripping. You miss my point, I agree on the football related decisions regarding these players - good sense in my opinion and anyone would be off if a half decent offer came in for them. I am just wondering WHO is actually making the decisions based on the fact that the football club should be running it's own affairs at the moment, yet everyone seems to be slating Fry that's all.
Doctoroncall Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 I've been asking the same question ad-nauseum for 3 months and no one has had the answer. did someone say something? ;-)
Weston Super Saint Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 We are in the hands of the Devil! Has Lowe come back
70's Mike Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 for those old enough to remember might as well ask "is it Bill or is it Ben"
Channon's Sideburns Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 Well..I would imagine that ol' Dave Jones and his many years of working for RL knows when to sell assets...I'm STILL not happy with him remaining in situ. Something smells fishy....
VectisSaint Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 for those old enough to remember might as well ask "is it Bill or is it Ben" It was the Little Weed. Surely it is obvious that the SFC Board are sanctioning these transfers, I believe this is Tointon and Jones, maybe there are others on the Board but I'm not sure. Pinnacle have no input officially because they are no longer in exclusivity (nor are anyone else)
South City Si Posted 30 June, 2009 Posted 30 June, 2009 You miss my point, I agree on the football related decisions regarding these players - good sense in my opinion and anyone would be off if a half decent offer came in for them. I am just wondering WHO is actually making the decisions based on the fact that the football club should be running it's own affairs at the moment, yet everyone seems to be slating Fry that's all. Sorry, I assumed you were implying that Fry was making these decisions, there is a seperate football board, although there is only 2 of them - 1 being Dave Jones - and this is what I was saying it would be them two, as to me there is no hint of pure business sense. I thought you were hinting at sonme sort of asset stripping conspiracy! :-)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now