Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga


Fitzhugh Fella

Recommended Posts

As if we didn't know it from the decision-making, their directors box looks short on professionalism.

 

Is McInnes following the trail that TCWTB blazed?

Once a figurehead and harmless character, now a figure of fun and ridicule who shames the rest of the fanbase.

You can dress him up but you can't take him out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As if we didn't know it from the decision-making, their directors box looks short on professionalism.

 

Is McInnes following the trail that TCWTB blazed?

Once a figurehead and harmless character, now a figure of fun and ridicule who shames the rest of the fanbase.

You can dress him up but you can't take him out.

 

You can actually take him somewhere twice.

 

The second time though is to make him apologise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As if we didn't know it from the decision-making, their directors box looks short on professionalism.

 

Is McInnes following the trail that TCWTB blazed?

Once a figurehead and harmless character, now a figure of fun and ridicule who shames the rest of the fanbase.

You can dress him up but you can't take him out.

 

He is a poor mans Eddie Mitchell.

 

On the back of :mcinnes: windmilling around in the picture above, I confidently predict a drunken brawl with opposition directors and executives within two seasons.

 

Or before the trust fall to 26%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As if we didn't know it from the decision-making, their directors box looks short on professionalism.

 

Is McInnes following the trail that TCWTB blazed?

Once a figurehead and harmless character, now a figure of fun and ridicule who shames the rest of the fanbase.

You can dress him up but you can't take him out.

 

Those are their Directors?

Jeeze.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend at work is a Pompey fan, and at there home game the other week, champagne Ian was up in the directors boss, singing, trying to get everyone else to sing in the directors box, leaning over the edge, arms swinging around, swearing etc.

 

Classy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend at work is a Pompey fan, and at there home game the other week, champagne Ian was up in the directors boss, singing, trying to get everyone else to sing in the directors box, leaning over the edge, arms swinging around, swearing etc.

 

Classy

 

#tinpotlessportsmouth :mcinnes:

Edited by Waterside.saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend at work is a Pompey fan, and at there home game the other week, champagne Ian was up in the directors boss, singing, trying to get everyone else to sing in the directors box, leaning over the edge, arms swinging around, swearing etc.

 

Classy

 

Where was Fred Dineage when he was needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are the Skates now officially a registered charity?

 

On the news this morning they mentioned that some 20 Skates' fans are doing a 300 mile bike ride to Bury (the Skates' last away game of the season) to raise money for Charity.

 

While laudable half will be going to the charity of that 4yr old that died recently the other half to buy Community Shares in Portsmouth Football Club!! Is this actually allowed?

 

Mind you the news is so exciting that it hasn't even made the News or the PFC websites!

 

And if you ever get to hear the sound bite from the organiser, sheesh..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One doesn't like to tap into an open goal but when it's presented it's difficult to resist....

 

Indeed there is a very worthy charitable cause for a young child who died....

Is this cycling event really raising funds using that worthy cause as a selling point BUT diverting half of the public's 'charity' donations to pay player wages and to keep the boardroom drinks flowing?

Really?

 

If true it wouldn't be a new low as stealing cash from dying kids will take some beating, but dressing up begging to sort a cashflow shortfall in a poorly-funded business, as a charitable act, is a pretty good contender.

 

Some people still need to understand that there is no share, there is no glorious ownership, fan-control is a fantasy myth spun to help the cartoon soap opera plot to hobble along in a manner that is pleasing to the eye of the hard-of-thinking.

There are just donations, and these are used to pay the likes of Kitson and Connolly, to buy cases of Aldi Fizz, and to pay off Barker and Whittingham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Money is being given to Naomi House and also the hospital in Southampton that treated Jack so I think you'll find that your area will benefit from this also.

 

Wow .... a blast from the past .... ;)

 

The thing is though, both charities would benefit even more if 50% wasn't being siphoned off to pay towards debts owed by the club. :(

 

Those charities will sadly suffer, because few people will be prepared to donate money to the bottomless cesspit that is PFC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm back, well sort of :D

 

The ride actually started off to raise funds to purchase further shares, once the news of Jack was spread the organisers decided to raise money for this in order to help the lad complete his bucket list and split the proceeds 50/50.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geography ain't the problem.

There is no issue at all with the 50% that is going to charity, whether it's in portsmouth, Southampton, Sutton Scotney or wherever - tis a worthy cause and a fine effort by all.

 

It's the £8,000 being diverted into club coffers under the banner of charity that might make people recall the days of big bouncing cheques on the pitch and theft from kids in wheelchairs.

 

The politest way to put it would be that they may have been poorly-advised.

 

Raise funds for Jack.

Then raise funds for the club - but don't kid the public that both gigs are charitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Money is being given to Naomi House and also the hospital in Southampton that treated Jack so I think you'll find that your area will benefit from this also.

 

Hey! Nice to see you're still around and lurking.

 

I don't think that it matters which charity it goes to, it's the bit that's going to the club while under the guise of raising cash for charity. Somewhat disingenuous don't you think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey! Nice to see you're still around and lurking.

 

I don't think that it matters which charity it goes to, it's the bit that's going to the club while under the guise of raising cash for charity. Somewhat disingenuous don't you think?

 

yep, still lurking :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So where do you draw the line then? If 50/50 is OK what about 10% to fulfill the dying wishes of terminally ill children, and 90% to subsidise Ian's champagne bill. Is that OK too?

 

Initially 20%, though that payment will be withheld for a few years, before being diluted down again into a 2% package, which will then be offered through a repayment schedule paid over around five years. Whilst all this is happening, owners, company directors, managers and even administrators appointed by the court will publically and explicitly state that all charities and small businesses have been paid in full, though the reality will remain that they havent seen a single penny!

 

In fact, it may be worth taking out a charge to protect yourself, due to allegations of a very murky history you see. Speak to a man called Chinny about a charge, he specialises in the fixed and floating variety.

 

(Good luck to the skate cyclists however.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get a 'kin grip ladies. The skates originally planned to do the ride for community shares. Fair enough. They then hear about the poor kid & decide to give 50% of anything they raise to the lads charity. Personally I think that is great so pull your head out of your arses and stop acting like c**ts.

 

Stop taking yourself so seriously, you wet c*nt.

 

This is nutjob territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Get a 'kin grip ladies. The skates originally planned to do the ride for community shares. Fair enough. They then hear about the poor kid & decide to give 50% of anything they raise to the lads charity. Personally I think that is great so pull your head out of your arses and stop acting like c**ts.

 

Only because they knew they'd get more money if they tugged the heartstrings a little...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only because they knew they'd get more money if they tugged the heartstrings a little...

 

Bo**oxs. They did it so they could help a dying child but some of you c**ts are so tied up in your blind hatred that you cannot even bring yourselves you recognise that they are capable are trying to do something good & decent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bo**oxs. They did it so they could help a dying child but some of you c**ts are so tied up in your blind hatred that you cannot even bring yourselves you recognise that they are capable are trying to do something good & decent.

 

if they're so ****ing magnanimous why not give the whole ****ing lot to charity?

 

How much had they raised before they decided to add the charity?

 

And if you'd read my original post I was lauding the charitable side of the ride and questioning the 50% for "shares"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if they're so ****ing magnanimous why not give the whole ****ing lot to charity?

 

How much had they raised before they decided to add the charity?

 

Because the ride was originally planned as a fund raiser for the club & they had raised around £8k when they heard about the kid. They then decided to go 50:50 with the charity.

 

They didn't have to, they could have done sweet FA and just continued to fund raise for the club, but they chose to & good luck to them for doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the ride was originally planned as a fund raiser for the club & they had raised around £8k when they heard about the kid. They then decided to go 50:50 with the charity.

 

They didn't have to, they could have done sweet FA and just continued to fund raise for the club, but they chose to & good luck to them for doing so.

 

 

Well said. And great to see poopeylass back .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the ride was originally planned as a fund raiser for the club & they had raised around £8k when they heard about the kid. They then decided to go 50:50 with the charity.

 

They didn't have to, they could have done sweet FA and just continued to fund raise for the club, but they chose to & good luck to them for doing so.

I wonder if they plug the money going to the hospital ahead of the football club to neutrals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the ride was originally planned as a fund raiser for the club & they had raised around £8k when they heard about the kid. They then decided to go 50:50 with the charity.

 

They didn't have to, they could have done sweet FA and just continued to fund raise for the club, but they chose to & good luck to them for doing so.

 

I'm sorry, I don't believe they raised £8k before they decided to add the lad to their list of charities. As OldNick says

 

I wonder if they plug the money going to the hospital ahead of the football club to neutrals

 

so they get more money, I bet the 50% for community "shares" is hardly mentioned when they go around with their hat in hand..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are so many sticks Chez, but let me have one last whack as it is a sturdy one...

 

As you so kindly remind us Mr View, I and many others here are nothing but effing losers and c**ts, and indeed we are all blinded by hatred - but that said, I still think that dressing up donations to pay player wages as a 100% charity event is out of order.

 

You may see decency in the football club getting out the charity begging bowl to quietly pay the wagebill, but do you know what, I think I still disagree!

And while irrational abuse is a fine attempt at talking anyone round and a shrewd tactic that should be deployed far more in high-brow debate on Question Time, I'm not entirely convinced that your eloquent and beautifully-crafted argument has swayed me on this occasion.

But I thank you for adding a new dimension to the discussion.

 

 

 

The event is clearly promoted and labelled as a charity bike ride.

But half of the money is going straight into a local business.

 

You support that approach to club finance - but surely you can see why a bunch of blindly-hating effing loser nutjob c**nts might not?...

If the Saints Foundation started diverting charity funds into club coffers I would be horrified.

If Liverpool started taking a cut from the Justice campaign they would rightly be condemned.

This is not about Nutjobbery, it's just ethics and morals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I don't believe they raised £8k before they decided to add the lad to their list of charities. As OldNick says

 

 

 

so they get more money, I bet the 50% for community "shares" is hardly mentioned when they go around with their hat in hand..

 

You sad f**k. Check out their ride website, all the details are there.

 

Everyone connected to the skates knows about the ride and a 50:50 split, when the split was & for what reason but a bunch of increasingly bitter no marks think it's some sort of conspiracy.

 

We mock the crap that the skates write on their messageboards but this thread is turning into a stream of small minded, bitter rants; the same sort that you condemn them for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Keep going nut jobs, in case a few are inclined to let the dirty cheating skate baskets off the hook just because we now have the very much higher moral ground and league position, goodness, there is a danger of feeling sorry creeping in for them!

 

Go get your father's gun….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are so many sticks Chez, but let me have one last whack as it is a sturdy one...

 

As you so kindly remind us Mr View, I and many others here are nothing but effing losers and c**ts, and indeed we are all blinded by hatred - but that said, I still think that dressing up donations to pay player wages as a 100% charity event is out of order.

 

You may see decency in the football club getting out the charity begging bowl to quietly pay the wagebill, but do you know what, I think I still disagree!

And while irrational abuse is a fine attempt at talking anyone round and a shrewd tactic that should be deployed far more in high-brow debate on Question Time, I'm not entirely convinced that your eloquent and beautifully-crafted argument has swayed me on this occasion.

But I thank you for adding a new dimension to the discussion.

 

 

 

The event is clearly promoted and labelled as a charity bike ride.

But half of the money is going straight into a local business.

 

You support that approach to club finance - but surely you can see why a bunch of blindly-hating effing loser nutjob c**nts might not?...

If the Saints Foundation started diverting charity funds into club coffers I would be horrified.

If Liverpool started taking a cut from the Justice campaign they would rightly be condemned.

This is not about Nutjobbery, it's just ethics and morals.

 

Oh for the love of god. No funds are being "diverted", it's clearly an event to aid the club with that clear as day, up front. And you do realise giving to any cause is an entirely voluntary act, don't you?

 

At absolute worst you can say these people are misguided, and the freaks on this thread can ha - ha- ha-aint- Pompey-funny all day long. Fill yer boots.

 

But spare us the sanctimonious "ethics and morals" routine. Comparing it to Liverpool stealing from a Hillsborough fund? Seriously, get over yourself.

Edited by CB Fry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are better sticks to beat the Skates with than this TBF

 

Pompeys12thMan - #ride2bury & #fightforjack

Our bike ride was originally planned to raise money to buy community shares in PCFC as part of the final push for shares before the share issue ended at the end of April. However we were made aware of a young lad called Jack Robinson and decided we wanted to help this young boy too.

Jack and his identical twin brother Liam were born on the 7th June 2009. On 24th January 2014 Jack was diagnosed with a brain tumour. They operated on the tumour, but could not fully remove it.

Unfortunately after a brave fight Jack passed away just after midnight on April 1st. In Jacks memory, 50% of the total we raise will be split 3 ways between Naomi House and the ward at Southampton General hospital that both helped care for Jack as well as a donation to Brain Tumour research.

The other 50% will be used to buy community shares in PCFC to be held by Pompeys12thMan alongside the 20 that have already been purchased which was always the original aim of the 300 mile/3 day cycle challenge.

We originally set ourselves what we considered to be a modest target of £10,000. With 3 weeks still to go the ride, we smashed that so set ourselves a new target of £20,000. With your help and support we can achieve this fantastic amount.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main point of contention originally was that it was being called a charity bike ride, when not all of it was for charity, but I really do think that under the circumstances, we're scraping the barrel a bit here if we're trying to criticise them for this.

 

It started out as a fundraiser for the club, and then became a (partial) charity bike ride.

 

There are times to pick 'em up on stuff, but this isn't one of them IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...