Beer Engine Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 I think he thought he was telling the truth. That could well be it - but, if so, it doesn't inspire much faith in his business acumen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beer Engine Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 Oh do have a word with yourself. Are you a Skate ? Are you in league with Gingeletiss? Everytime anyone engages their brain, Gingeletiss accuses them of not being a "fan" and now you, it seems, favour the standard "you must be a Skate" riposte for those with whose views you don't agree .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted 2 July, 2009 Share Posted 2 July, 2009 What's the difference between Marc Jackson and Michael Jackson? Marc Jackson will always be found in Neverland. well, that gets us back on topic at least... apparently gary glitter has offered to adopt jacksons children, to fill the hole left by michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 I think we should put a ban on the word "Pinnacle" from now on. We could lump it in TSW broom cupboard, along with words such as "Lowe" and "Wilde" and throw in some users to keep them company - "Sundance Nineteen Canteen" and "Bungle", esq. Sorted! Not sure how big the cupboard is but could we throw in McMenemy, Osman and Crouch and I trust MLT can be salvaged? No room for your gob though Gordon but someone has to be left to entertain the forum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 I heard Lowe is coming back and bringing in Branfoot as his manager. Careful Tokyo !.. have you any idea what you do to peoples sanity when you say things like that - even in humour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clapham Saint Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Apologies if there's a thread already, couldn't see one... http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4471722.Fialka__reconsiders__withdrawal_of_Pinnacle_bid/ He says that the consortium wanted to back down from being front runners for the good of the club... to allow a better placed consortium an opportunity. (Or words to that effect) Doesn't really make any sense to me. The exclusivity period is over. If another consortium is better placed then there is nothing to stop the administrator selling to them anyway, there is absolutely no need (or point) for them to that they are withdrawing as "front runners". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thorpie the sinner Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 He says that the consortium wanted to back down from being front runners for the good of the club... to allow a better placed consortium an opportunity. (Or words to that effect) Doesn't really make any sense to me. The exclusivity period is over. If another consortium is better placed then there is nothing to stop the administrator selling to them anyway, there is absolutely no need (or point) for them to that they are withdrawing as "front runners". Maybe they recounted their piggy bank!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Fry has told Solent he has had no contact with Pinnacle and as far as he is aware they are not back in the running, but is making rapid progress with another party who he refused to id. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_mears Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 All they have to do is sign a piece of paper (allegedly) all this waffle to the media is just yet more unprofessional behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Here's my take on Pinnacle. The FL have called their bluff by publicly stating that no further sanctions are being considered, and the only outstanding issue is clarification on funding. Pinnacle have had to declare themselves back in to save face because of this. However, they feel sure in themselves that one of the other groups will complete. Therefore, nobody will ever be able to say for certain that the funding wasn't there. However, if the other groups do pull out and there's only Pinnacle left, we will see for sure. I hope it doesn't come to this, as I honestly don't think they've got the backing to pull this off. All IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 All they have to do is sign a piece of paper (allegedly) all this waffle to the media is just yet more unprofessional behaviour. Agreed, Pinnacle are seemingly doing more to damage the future of this club than anything that has occured over the past 10 years or more in my opinion. If they have not contacted Fry then why the media storm? IMO it seems to me a case of corporate sabotage or the work of simple dreamers but probably the later as the former would need shrewd heads. Even if Pinnacle were successful my guess is they would pack the board with past failures, inexperienced legends and jokers masquerading as businessman and Dave Jones wondering WTF had hit him. Personally, Fry needs to kill this off before Pinnacle damage this process further by 'outbidding' a more professional consortium and then backing out again or god forbod actually being successful. I for one do not want a season listening to Le Tissier and Lynam explain to the fans how they understand our frustration without the faintest idea of how to put it right except to tell us how busy they allegedly are or going to be in the 24 hours, days, weeks. (months and years I don't think will be necessary in this case) I am at my desk on my knees hands firmly pressed together over the good book 'In That Number' willing Fry to sign the deal with anyone but Pinnacle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Here's my take on Pinnacle. The FL have called their bluff by publicly stating that no further sanctions are being considered, and the only outstanding issue is clarification on funding. Pinnacle have had to declare themselves back in to save face because of this. However, they feel sure in themselves that one of the other groups will complete. Therefore, nobody will ever be able to say for certain that the funding wasn't there. However, if the other groups do pull out and there's only Pinnacle left, we will see for sure. I hope it doesn't come to this, as I honestly don't think they've got the backing to pull this off. All IMHO. Interesting theory Gonzo but if you're right then you have to question their motives as they could undermine the current consortium close to completing a deal by creating uncertainty and pressure on their bid. Surely, if Pinnacle thought about this and their declaration is solely to save face as you suggest would they have not been better off waiting until the club's future has been secured with a genuine bid instead of trying to make themselves look good? IMO Pinnacle's actions simply don't stack up as anything other than those of a bunch of amatuers. It's a bit like opening a big night club in the wrong end of town and putting a couple of under-nourished Michael Jackson lookalikes in charge of door security. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 I am at my desk on my knees hands firmly pressed together over the good book 'In That Number' willing Fry to sign the deal with anyone but Pinnacle. Tut Tut, Nineteen. This statement rather smacks of the "anything but Lowe" stance taken when most of us were fooled by the prospect of Wilde ousting him and we all know what you would have thought of that. Do I take it that you would be happy with Jackson's lot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Tut Tut, Nineteen. This statement rather smacks of the "anything but Lowe" stance taken when most of us were fooled by the prospect of Wilde ousting him and we all know what you would have thought of that. Do I take it that you would be happy with Jackson's lot? I know Wes- my master taught me well. Happy may be the wrong word but certainly not as disappointed as I would be if Pinnacle won the day. One thing I don't think I will ever master though like the ture greats of the self-fulfilling prophecy, is taking it to a level that I would boycott the club, no matter how many times someone tells us they understand our frustration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Interesting theory Gonzo but if you're right then you have to question their motives as they could undermine the current consortium close to completing a deal by creating uncertainty and pressure on their bid. Surely, if Pinnacle thought about this and their declaration is solely to save face as you suggest would they have not been better off waiting until the club's future has been secured with a genuine bid instead of trying to make themselves look good? IMO Pinnacle's actions simply don't stack up as anything other than those of a bunch of amatuers. It's a bit like opening a big night club in the wrong end of town and putting a couple of under-nourished Michael Jackson lookalikes in charge of door security. That's the problem. They're so amatuerish and unprofessional that I think saving face is all they're interested in. They've already shown how little regard they have for the club, its staff and its supporters by not only wasting a vital 21 days exclusivity, and roping in our biggest modern-day hero under false pretenses. Funny how Pinnacle are shouting out that they're still in the race, yet Matt Le Tissier appears to be distancing himself from it this time. Matt was the one who publicly said they were out - if he was still on board, surely he would have been the one to come out and say "Er, well actually......." Apologies to any who still support Pinnacle (and hopefully there's not many left) but I was sucked in with their little game before. But I'm not buying it now. Let's face it, they've still got their contracts in their hand. If they were serious, especially after the FL's public statement, they would have done the deal by now. If the funds are there, what's stopping them contacting Mark Fry and signing on the line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 That's the problem. They're so amatuerish and unprofessional that I think saving face is all they're interested in. They've already shown how little regard they have for the club, its staff and its supporters by not only wasting a vital 21 days exclusivity, and roping in our biggest modern-day hero under false pretenses. Funny how Pinnacle are shouting out that they're still in the race, yet Matt Le Tissier appears to be distancing himself from it this time. Matt was the one who publicly said they were out - if he was still on board, surely he would have been the one to come out and say "Er, well actually......." Apologies to any who still support Pinnacle (and hopefully there's not many left) but I was sucked in with their little game before. But I'm not buying it now. Let's face it, they've still got their contracts in their hand. If they were serious, especially after the FL's public statement, they would have done the deal by now. If the funds are there, what's stopping them contacting Mark Fry and signing on the line? Can't disagree with any of that and that just leaves the unanswered question. Pinnacle back on the scene, idle press speculation or story fed to them by Pinnacle and if so what is their motive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 I know Wes- my master taught me well. Happy may be the wrong word but certainly not as disappointed as I would be if Pinnacle won the day. One thing I don't think I will ever master though like the ture greats of the self-fulfilling prophecy, is taking it to a level that I would boycott the club, no matter how many times someone tells us they understand our frustration. So although you state your preference for anybody except Pinnacle, your opinion holds no substance as you would go to matches regardless of who is running the club. I on the other hand, along with many others, maintained a stance on a matter of principle to boycott the club towards the end of last season until Lowe had been removed, but have promised as a matter of honour to buy a ST now that he is no longer connected to us, regardless of who takes us over. Whatever transpires, I am prepared to give the new owners a chance to prove themselves, provided that Lowe, Wilde or Askham are nowhere to be seen. I tire of trotting out the analogy that any business which does not give value or service to its customers is unlikely to improve unless it pays heed to their wishes, gives value for the product and respects them. It is debateable as to who is the better fan; the one who makes an effort to get the club to sit up and listen by threatening to withdraw financial input when it is not being run properly, or the one who will continue to put his money in the pot regardless of how much it costs, how poor the team is, or how much he is disrespected by the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 According to the Echo article, they've had contact from Lynam, and have included an actual quote from him. So on that basis, I doubt it's idle press speculation. Anyway, I've got my fingers and toes crossed that one of the other groups completes, so Pinnacle being 'in the race' never becomes an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 So although you state your preference for anybody except Pinnacle, your opinion holds no substance as you would go to matches regardless of who is running the club. I on the other hand, along with many others, maintained a stance on a matter of principle to boycott the club towards the end of last season until Lowe had been removed, but have promised as a matter of honour to buy a ST now that he is no longer connected to us, regardless of who takes us over. Whatever transpires, I am prepared to give the new owners a chance to prove themselves, provided that Lowe, Wilde or Askham are nowhere to be seen. I tire of trotting out the analogy that any business which does not give value or service to its customers is unlikely to improve unless it pays heed to their wishes, gives value for the product and respects them. It is debateable as to who is the better fan; the one who makes an effort to get the club to sit up and listen by threatening to withdraw financial input when it is not being run properly, or the one who will continue to put his money in the pot regardless of how much it costs, how poor the team is, or how much he is disrespected by the club. Difference is Wes I support my club through thick and thin and view it as I would a member of family. There are a time for principles and honour and all that good stuff but supporting your football club is not the time and only bumptious, pompous and the intransigent would follow your logic. I suggest it's why you never tire of telling us despite your protestations to the contrary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 According to the Echo article, they've had contact from Lynam, and have included an actual quote from him. So on that basis, I doubt it's idle press speculation. Anyway, I've got my fingers and toes crossed that one of the other groups completes, so Pinnacle being 'in the race' never becomes an issue. Agreed, the proverbial three legged nag in the Derby. At the races but not in the race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Difference is Wes I support my club through thick and thin and view it as I would a member of family. There are a time for principles and honour and all that good stuff but supporting your football club is not the time and only bumptious, pompous and the intransigent would follow your logic. I suggest it's why you never tire of telling us despite your protestations to the contrary. Ah! So the club is like a member of your family, but you are prepared to say that you would rather have anybody take us over rather than Pinnacle. So much for the thick and thin, eh? Whilst you are fond of the family analogy, tell me what you would do if one of your children was stealing, taking drugs, or worse dealing them? Do you report it to the Police in an attempt to bring about a short sharp shock that might snap them out of it, or do you just let them carry on until they are either locked away (stealing or dealing drugs) or dead? (taking drugs) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 If the 'mystery group' have not paid for exclusivity then Fry is free to talk to whomever he wants. Of course, he's not paid by percentage is he, is it a daily rate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gonzo Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 There will not be any further exclusivity period, so it's simply whoever hands over a signed contract, and the cash, first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Ah! So the club is like a member of your family, but you are prepared to say that you would rather have anybody take us over rather than Pinnacle. So much for the thick and thin, eh? Whilst you are fond of the family analogy, tell me what you would do if one of your children was stealing, taking drugs, or worse dealing them? Do you report it to the Police in an attempt to bring about a short sharp shock that might snap them out of it, or do you just let them carry on until they are either locked away (stealing or dealing drugs) or dead? (taking drugs) Thick and thin Wes. Pinnacle would be the thin of the edge IMO but I would still support them and buy a ST and I'm sorry your stubborness can't appreciate that fact or teh fact that you and others like you contributed to the downfall of this club buy withdrawing your support. What else..ah yes if I caught my kids committing any crime I would either deal with it myself by shaming them. I.e shop lifting I would go back to the shop and get them to own up and leave them to the whim of the owners . Drug dealing then I would report them to the police and then support them throught their trial and visit them in prison obviously taking on board the risk of being disowned by them. Of course I sincerely hope they have been well educated in and outside of the home and know what is acceptable in order to lead a happy and contented life but should they make a mistake I will be there to help them through whatever the consequences of their actions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 3 July, 2009 Share Posted 3 July, 2009 Thick and thin Wes. Pinnacle would be the thin of the edge IMO but I would still support them and buy a ST and I'm sorry your stubborness can't appreciate that fact or teh fact that you and others like you contributed to the downfall of this club buy withdrawing your support. What else..ah yes if I caught my kids committing any crime I would either deal with it myself by shaming them. I.e shop lifting I would go back to the shop and get them to own up and leave them to the whim of the owners . Drug dealing then I would report them to the police and then support them throught their trial and visit them in prison obviously taking on board the risk of being disowned by them. Of course I sincerely hope they have been well educated in and outside of the home and know what is acceptable in order to lead a happy and contented life but should they make a mistake I will be there to help them through whatever the consequences of their actions. Regarding the family matters, your response echoes the one I would have made. Now, regarding the club, which I also consider like you to be like a member of my family, that is where we differ. You see, like the analogy of the drug taking son, Lowe and his board were harming my beloved club and the only weapon that I had in my armoury to rid the club of him was the boycott. Had sufficient numbers publicised a boycott and acted on it in unison, Lowe and that board could have been dispatched at Christmas and replaced with others who might have had a reasonable chance of keeping us afloat and still in this division. Instead, many just drifted away, disillusioned, but silent as individuals instead of vocal as a group, so the extent of their protest was not so obvious. In any event, reduced numbers eventually meant that the financial viability of the club suffered to the extent of administration and succeeded in ridding us of all of the charlatans who had driven the club downwards. Provided that we are taken over by somebody with decent money to invest in us to make progress back up to where we were, IMO it will have been worth it. When we are back in the Premiership, you might gain some historical perspective and change your mind too. Sometimes the Machiavellian strategy justifies the means, as hopefully it will with us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 4 July, 2009 Share Posted 4 July, 2009 Regarding the family matters, your response echoes the one I would have made. Now, regarding the club, which I also consider like you to be like a member of my family, that is where we differ. You see, like the analogy of the drug taking son, Lowe and his board were harming my beloved club and the only weapon that I had in my armoury to rid the club of him was the boycott. Had sufficient numbers publicised a boycott and acted on it in unison, Lowe and that board could have been dispatched at Christmas and replaced with others who might have had a reasonable chance of keeping us afloat and still in this division. Instead, many just drifted away, disillusioned, but silent as individuals instead of vocal as a group, so the extent of their protest was not so obvious. In any event, reduced numbers eventually meant that the financial viability of the club suffered to the extent of administration and succeeded in ridding us of all of the charlatans who had driven the club downwards. Provided that we are taken over by somebody with decent money to invest in us to make progress back up to where we were, IMO it will have been worth it. When we are back in the Premiership, you might gain some historical perspective and change your mind too. Sometimes the Machiavellian strategy justifies the means, as hopefully it will with us. You could have reported Lowe to the police and supported him through the consequences of his actions. IMO the new owners will get us back to the Championship within 2 seasons but its not evident to me that we will have the cash available to return to the Premiership and stay there as quickly as we would like to hope. After all this agony though, I will accept the financial stabilty and the ability to compete and consolidate in the Championship in return for the likes of, but not exclusive to, Crouch, Lowe, Cowen, Wilde, McMenemy and even MLT to be expelled for good from holding any position at the club then the startegy may have been worth it (not forgetting the skin crawling embarrassment of the banshee Osman). Time will tell and I hope we won't be doing a Millwall in the immediate seasons to come and celebrating the selling of 4,000 season tickets as if it was a significant achievement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tamesaint Posted 4 July, 2009 Share Posted 4 July, 2009 You could have reported Lowe to the police and supported him through the consequences of his actions. IMO the new owners will get us back to the Championship within 2 seasons but its not evident to me that we will have the cash available to return to the Premiership and stay there as quickly as we would like to hope. After all this agony though, I will accept the financial stabilty and the ability to compete and consolidate in the Championship in return for the likes of, but not exclusive to, Crouch, Lowe, Cowen, Wilde, McMenemy and even MLT to be expelled for good from holding any position at the club then the startegy may have been worth it (not forgetting the skin crawling embarrassment of the banshee Osman). Time will tell and I hope we won't be doing a Millwall in the immediate seasons to come and celebrating the selling of 4,000 season tickets as if it was a significant achievement. MLT expelled for good from holding any position at the club !! LOL LOL You really ought to be on the stage , you are so funny!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 4 July, 2009 Share Posted 4 July, 2009 MLT expelled for good from holding any position at the club !! LOL LOL You really ought to be on the stage , you are so funny!!! So Tame you condone Matt's actions as chairman elect for Pinnacle. His alleged approach to due diligence over Fialka would have made even Mary Corbett and friends blush IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 4 July, 2009 Share Posted 4 July, 2009 So Tame you condone Matt's actions as chairman elect for Pinnacle. His alleged approach to due diligence over Fialka would have made even Mary Corbett and friends blush IMO. I doubt MLT knows what due diligence is Sundance. Not an aspertion on him, just fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 4 July, 2009 Share Posted 4 July, 2009 I doubt MLT knows what due diligence is Sundance. Not an aspertion on him, just fact. And you want to appoint him as chairman? With his attention to detail how many Ali Dia's could we accommodate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRichmond Posted 5 July, 2009 Share Posted 5 July, 2009 Pinnacle - Begbies Traynor - Fry ........... How good are begbies Traynor ??? I know it's easy to look back, but, IMHO, the whole Pinnacle "Bid" was and is a Joke When they wheeled out Fialka, it was not rocket science to see that if hr had more than £6.50 in a TSB Account, he'd be lucky Yet Fry had said that "he" had proof of Funds, etc etc ..... yet when push came to shove, none were available. Now, all through this, if it was plain as the nose on yout face that Pinnacle were a waste of space, WHY did it take a "Professional" like Fry, of a Big Company like BT, such a long time to try to source "others" ????? It just does NOT make sense....... Has Mr Fry a hidden Agenda that none of us know about I personally do not think that we will be taken over by the Swiss .... having a completly NEW Owner with NO previous ties whatsoever with SFC, would be too good to be true Gillico seems to me like a "set up", engineered months ago, so it would not surprise me in the least if they are unveiled on Monday Which brings me back to Fry ..... exactly what has been his behind the scenes role in all this ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 5 July, 2009 Share Posted 5 July, 2009 Pinnacle - Begbies Traynor - Fry ........... How good are begbies Traynor ??? I know it's easy to look back, but, IMHO, the whole Pinnacle "Bid" was and is a Joke When they wheeled out Fialka, it was not rocket science to see that if hr had more than £6.50 in a TSB Account, he'd be lucky Yet Fry had said that "he" had proof of Funds, etc etc ..... yet when push came to shove, none were available. Now, all through this, if it was plain as the nose on yout face that Pinnacle were a waste of space, WHY did it take a "Professional" like Fry, of a Big Company like BT, such a long time to try to source "others" ????? It just does NOT make sense....... Has Mr Fry a hidden Agenda that none of us know about I personally do not think that we will be taken over by the Swiss .... having a completly NEW Owner with NO previous ties whatsoever with SFC, would be too good to be true Gillico seems to me like a "set up", engineered months ago, so it would not surprise me in the least if they are unveiled on Monday Which brings me back to Fry ..... exactly what has been his behind the scenes role in all this ???? You have mental problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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