Takeover?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yeah but our situation was different, we couldn't afford to pay the rent for Anfield so we moved to Goodison
 
davek said:
Well BT, I've been searching for a definition of democracy that supports your view of it: IE 'democracy is the act of four shareholders owning three quarters of all shares in a company that defeats a motion to give one man, one vote on an issue'. No go.

Democracy in business terms has never been defined as one person one vote. You vote on the basis of how many votes you own. Its like saying that I put in £1m, you put in £1, but you get exactly the same vote as me. It may not be fair, but we're not living in communist russia, but capitalist Britain, and that is the basis of business democracy. So, touche, no go.

You are right in principle about the club using their powers as they see fit. Fair enough. But let them dispense with all that People's Club bollix because it simply cant stretch to cover their embarrassment when push comes to shove on major issues like this. But they wont. The likes of Elstone will use a mechanism like the above to hide behind in order to get the board's way and then expect to flog People's Club mouse mats. They're taking the piss, and I suspect you know it too.

You really do hate the current custodians don't you?


<sigh>

Let's not even get into the dirty tricks stuff that's arisen in this campaign. The club and their partners have been shovelling [Poor language removed] from the word go. If that's all you have against the people fighting to keep the club within the city I'd call it a early night.
Click to expand...

You guys are really gonna freak when the conservatives get in and start to change the boundaries to accommodate less MP's. What if that 500 yards is moved into Liverpool boundary? No more "the cities all ours" from them across the part. Your argument cut from under you.

Only reason I've mentioned dirty tricks as your trying to make out that these are decent honorable people with no agenda. they've got it in bucketfuls which is why I have absolutely no sympathy with them.


 

wasn't one of the differences between Houlding & the majority of the Board who voted to relocate to Goodison that Houlding wanted voting power based on share-holding whereas the others wanted to stick to the one member one vote model?

& that move was driven more by matters of principle than issues of cost.

for many of us the problem with the Kirkby proposal is less to do with it being in Kirkby & more to do with it being a really poor proposal for the future well-being of the club.

nothing will embarrass or undermine the club more than dying in a less than half-full stadium.
 
DENNIS STEVENS said:
wasn't one of the differences between Houlding & the majority of the Board who voted to relocate to Goodison that Houlding wanted voting power based on share-holding whereas the others wanted to stick to the one member one vote model?

& that move was driven more by matters of principle than issues of cost.

for many of us the problem with the Kirkby proposal is less to do with it being in Kirkby & more to do with it being a really poor proposal for the future well-being of the club.

nothing will embarrass or undermine the club more than dying in a less than half-full stadium.
Click to expand...
So, what your saying is that we're small time?
 
If Billy 'Voldermort' Kenwright was as machiavelian as has been alleged, then surely he would have enticed a buyer only to know they would fail the 'right and proper' owners test the league now insists on.
What would a new owner be buying into now? To what extent is the club 'in hock' to Tesco if at all, and what agreements are in place that cannot be gone back on.
 
BlackToffee said:
You guys are really gonna freak when the conservatives get in and start to change the boundaries to accommodate less MP's. What if that 500 yards is moved into Liverpool boundary? No more "the cities all ours" from them across the part. Your argument cut from under you.
Only reason I've mentioned dirty tricks as your trying to make out that these are decent honorable people with no agenda. they've got it in bucketfuls which is why I have absolutely no sympathy with them.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course the only bad thing about the Kirkby proposal is that its not in Liverpool.






















For crying out loud.
 

leave it guys

were not going

were not going to get took over

im not going to look at this thread again(y)
 
Azzbot said:
Arrrrgh can we close this thread and stick it with the Kirkby one please?
Click to expand...
If I promise not to ver of subject again, can we keep the thread open please. Its more than a stale Kirkby thread, its a fresh investment thread. :lol::lol::lol: honest guv
 
BlackToffee said:
So, what your saying is that we're small time?
Click to expand...

your choice of words, BT. I'd say the current Board seem to lack ambition for the club, based on the Kirkby proposal - or maybe they're just over-optimistic as to the club's likely future should the proposal become reality.
 
BlackToffee said:
You guys are really gonna freak when the conservatives get in and start to change the boundaries to accommodate less MP's. What if that 500 yards is moved into Liverpool boundary? No more "the cities all ours" from them across the part. Your argument cut from under you.

Only reason I've mentioned dirty tricks as your trying to make out that these are decent honorable people with no agenda. they've got it in bucketfuls which is why I have absolutely no sympathy with them.
Click to expand...

Mate, they could move Kirkby into the city, and it would still be wrong for the club. We need a good inner-city district for the club, not a concrete pile on the edge of nowhere.

You're in London, so imagine how Spurs fans would feel if suddenly they were gonna be shipped out to Enfield or wherever?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top