Forum Replies Created
-
I would imagine a future new owner would have to buy them out and would have to honour this scheme.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Agree with those points Westyorksiron. I’m more interested in engaging with posts like that in the future that raise sensible points rather than these stupid witch hunts regarding particular posters and attempting to find out posters real names and quietening doubters
We’ve had the ‘burning torches’ and now it’s ‘witch hunts’ by folks who aren’t ‘sensible,’ Deerey. Just recently you professed to be ‘confused’ as to whether I believe in free speech. I know … from you and other posters..that there are some bad ‘uns on Twitter and Facebook. But, at the risk of triggering outrage, you are coming across a bit ‘puritanical’ at present. A good few on here ..NI, IA , Ironfromafar and others..have accepted concerns but find the relentless negativity of a few posters clearly with an agenda tiresome to the pint of nauseating.
Have another look at my reply to Westyorks. Is my first point about DH and dealing with emerging debt invalid?
Is my concluding point about possible scenarios without DH not worthy of consideration?
Let’s not berate others for doing what any of us ..including you .. can slip into.I can understand the curiosity about those who have taken an interest in the club; I am interested myself. I can understand how this can be tiring. However, some of the questioning of IB has been a bit like a ‘witch hunt’ and I don’t think it is vital. Ultimately, the person with a position of power is Hilton, not IB. I am not saying people have no right to question IB, and I suspect DM isn’t either, but people are allowed to disagree with what they see as a misguided effort. I see no free speech issue here.
2 users thanked author for this post.
People got libeled as Paedos and had death threats for spreading such rumours, hope Dave’s followers don’t see this, can you imagine their dilemma ?
Not just the vile ‘mates of Dave’. Those who spent the last few weeks and months playing the ‘top fan’ berating anyone as not being true fans for having concerns, saying they’re all just rumours, telling them to go and support Grimsby and that they are undermining Hilton.
It’s good that Hilton has answered such concerns, and he should stick to his word, and has no excuses for not meeting it now. It has alleviated some of my worry, and there is some truth in what JI and others has said, in we don’t know what else we can do. One thing is not to turn on fans for raising concerns. Likewise, less of the aggro, as seen between Pat and SNOT lately.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Most of the ‘rumours’ discussed on here look to be based on fact- including the 2,500 cap that was dismissed as rubbish in the Facebook group. I’ll look forward to reading the apology later.
Perhaps David only thinks these have truth because he’s been drinking at the Malt Shovel. :-)
2 users thanked author for this post.
Well done Matt in getting us an update which should address worries. I hope he can achieve his goals, but I think a 2025 start for the stadium is incredibly ambitious.
It’s good to hear that the supporter cap sounds like it is being resolved, and this gives more assurances than being forever told it’s a rumour when it clearly wasn’t and previously confirmed by Hilton. Also, good to hear that wage payment issues are currently miscommunication (I am aware it wasn’t previously, though that was said to be due to payment method issues) and I hope the CCJs work themselves out.
This is the benefit of openness, and from questions in a neutral setting. It creates more trust, alleviates worry and we can hold Hilton to his word. The ground issues still have me worried, but the answers above address some of the worries in a way that dismissals don’t.
4 users thanked author for this post.
There are so many red flags around the club at the moment that I would rather focus on this. Yet situations confirmed by Hilton, governmental authority (CCJs) and worries over ground issues are dismissed as mad rumours. I don’t think Hilton would confirm a supporter cap if it was a rumour, nor would legal proceedings go through on rumours; you’re not getting a CCJ because someone spreads a rumour about owed costs.
Do some of those who oppose Hilton have agendas against him? Very likely. However, I don’t see how that nullifies worries, including those which have been raised by them. It would be like focussing on the journalist’s background and ignoring any issues raised about the government, while supporting the government and saying we should be thankful for them. The agenda or background of the journalist does nothing to show the government’s alleged greatness or contradict claims raised by the journalist.
Lest it needed be said, I don’t want us to be in a bad position, but I think we have very worrying signs that we are, and not all because of Swann’s legacy. I’d be overjoyed to be proven wrong, but until the ground issues, CCJs, wage/redundancy payment and supporter cap issues get sorted or properly explained without any room for doubt, I cannot let go of such worries. Rubbishing them and pleeing to ignore them does not remove worries. Some people speak as if these issues wouldn’t exist if people didn’t come on to mention them. That would just make it more likely for us to be blissfully unaware. I’d rather know than not know and potentially be confused and distraught later on.
As for rumours, when is that state of the art training pitch being unveiled?
2 users thanked author for this post.
