EastleighSoulBoy Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 I dont actually mind who takes over Saints. I dont actually know any of the characters involved all I want is Saints to be successful and financially ok I don't think your first and last statements actually reconcile with each other. If you don't mind who takes over then it leaves the door fully open for any chancer, fly by night or whatever with a few million to come in and totally **** your club. We are not fully ****ed yet but, by jingo, we will be should certain characters and their nefarious acquaintances gain a foothold at SMS. Start minding man because if you don't then there will not be an SFC to be successful and financially ok. I know. as fans, we can do little but raise our voices in protest at the slim chance some joker is going to try and run SFC.
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 The problem is that most (not all) of the ITK's aren't very bright and get so carried away with feeling important that they are a dream for people like Jacko to exploit. All they need (and want) is a slow drip feeding of ******** and they've suceeded in their objectives. I must admit i don't like the "i know something you don't know" nature of the ITK's. They plant a seed and then announce "i will not be posting anymore on this thread" for example. What is that all about? Talk about smug, yet the majority on here hang on their every word, cult ITK status is achieved, and Jacko and his ilk get what they wanted. And the sad thing is these ITK's are so consumed with feeling all important they don't even realise they've been played like a fiddle. Well pointed out!
northam soul Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 Just for the record i am well aware of the lls st david episode from a couple of years ago but just who is St David. There seems to be a lot of cult status given to him for somebody i took as a complete ****. Secondly a lot of people on here apparrently trust Weston who claimed that the bid in was nothing to do with MJ so it begs the question as to why people get hung up on all this supposed ITK stuff, and perhaps Weston would like to clarify why he said what he said.
OldNick Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 Just for the record i am well aware of the lls st david episode from a couple of years ago but just who is St David. There seems to be a lot of cult status given to him for somebody i took as a complete ****. Secondly a lot of people on here apparrently trust Weston who claimed that the bid in was nothing to do with MJ so it begs the question as to why people get hung up on all this supposed ITK stuff, and perhaps Weston would like to clarify why he said what he said.It surprises me Weston said that MJ was not involved at all. Where did he put that!!!
Mole Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 It surprises me Weston said that MJ was not involved at all. Where did he put that!!! On the original Jacko thread Don't panic. I know who is dealing with this. I took him out to dinner on Tuesday. Marc Jackson was no where in sight. That is all I am prepared to say.
hypochondriac Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 On the original Jacko thread TBF he didn't actually say that MJ had no involvement with a bid, just that the guy he went to dinner with said nothing about MJ. We don't actually know HOW involved MJ is either. He's probably got a much biggr role in this in his mind.
benjii Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 I had dinner with someone the other day who has never heard of MJ. Don't thank me for this insightful contribution.
Mole Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 TBF he didn't actually say that MJ had no involvement with a bid, just that the guy he went to dinner with said nothing about MJ. We don't actually know HOW involved MJ is either. He's probably got a much biggr role in this in his mind. It was posted on the thread about Jacko following numerous posts saying how **** having Jacko making a bid was. It was clearly a rebutal of NickG's opening post. Or are you are implying that Weston chose his words carefully to deceive whilst telling the truth?
hypochondriac Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 It was posted on the thread about Jacko following numerous posts saying how **** having Jacko making a bid was. It was clearly a rebutal of NickG's opening post. Or are you are implying that Weston chose his words carefully to deceive whilst telling the truth? Seemed to me he was saying there was no MJ involved to the best of his knowledge in the initial bid. We don't know how involved MJ is with his bid and we don't even know if they were he initial bid who Weston had dinner with. It is possible that Weston was correct and NickG
Amesbury Saint Posted 9 May, 2009 Posted 9 May, 2009 I don't think your first and last statements actually reconcile with each other. If you don't mind who takes over then it leaves the door fully open for any chancer, fly by night or whatever with a few million to come in and totally **** your club. We are not fully ****ed yet but, by jingo, we will be should certain characters and their nefarious acquaintances gain a foothold at SMS. Start minding man because if you don't then there will not be an SFC to be successful and financially ok. I know. as fans, we can do little but raise our voices in protest at the slim chance some joker is going to try and run SFC. perhaps I should qualify the statement by put the third point first and say I dont mind who takes us over as long as deilver a successful and financially ok Saints.
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