SOS Minutes with Purslow meeting

[Tossed and blown]

Purslow's comments have effectively turned the sale of the club into a buyer's market. The yanks have two realistic options: sell or refinance. The third is repossession by RBS. Put yourselves in the yanks' position - would you now trust Purslow to negotiate the best deal for you now he's effectively shown your hand. The good news is that the whole club will be available for a more sensible fee, the bad news is we can expect all sorts of games and brinkmanship as the deadline closes.

 

I think you're right about the protests but for me the focus should be to dissuade any potential lenders from offering the yanks any further facility.

[zigackly]

I haven't said this explicitly on this thread but I laud SOS for all their recent activity.

 

I wasn't entirely convinced previously, but after the last few weeks/months I will definitely be taking up membership.

[Chinandeler Bong]

That's all very touching but it's not even close to being a tragedy. It's just modern football and we can either make the best of it or sink under the weight of our history.

 

You're doing a good job of keeping them on their toes but I don't think undermining Purslow does you any favours, even if you're mistrusting of his motives. The only thing he's there to do is lessen the debt and keep a steady ship, as it's obvious the yanks are fucked and incapable of showing any sort of leadership. If he fails then you can judge him.

 

They are not judging him yer bell, they are holding the clubs owners to account. And doing a fine job of it. What are you doing ?

[Tossed and blown]

I haven't said this explicitly on this thread but I laud SOS for all their recent activity.

 

I wasn't entirely convinced previously, but after the last few weeks/months I will definitely be taking up membership.

 

I joined because it was the only possible vehicle to reasonably oppose the owners, and at worst I was chucking a tenner away. I didn't think everything they did was right, and I doubt I'll agree with everything in the future, but the last few weeks I think there's been a real focus to the efforts.

 

The more people that join up the better as it strengthens the union's mandate; if you applaud what's been done on this thread or any of the other ones lately then get a pinky chucked in.

[Guest ShoePiss]

I haven't said this explicitly on this thread but I laud SOS for all their recent activity.

 

I wasn't entirely convinced previously, but after the last few weeks/months I will definitely be taking up membership.

 

Seconded, I'll be joining up too.

[Guest ShoePiss]

Oh and to the people who have just joined the site or recently started posting in this thread, you are assuming that Purslow has misspoken and didn't realise that his words would be published. Given his credentials alone that's a huge assumption, add to that he knew exactly what the format of the minutes were it's ridiculous to say that he's been blindsided, backstabbed, hung out to dry or whatever other negative name you want to describe SOS's actions as.

 

I still believe that he knew exactly what he was saying and knew full well that SOS would have to publish the correct set of minutes rather than his owner friendly version. We'll see if this is the case in time no doubt.

[Dr Arthur De Sabre]

Speculation, no evidence.

 

Fuck me Ironside's in the house

[Anubis]

Am I missing something or is this as simple as SOS releasing hugely significant information which was stated on the record, in the prior knowledge that they would publish and be damned, after a subsequent attempt to backtrack by the person imparting it?

 

If SOS had not acted in exactly the way they have then they would not be fit to represent the fans.

 

You're not missing it. I think PeeG and Graham have shown a lot of restraint and patience.

[Arl arse]

Am I missing something or is this as simple as SOS releasing hugely significant information which was stated on the record, in the prior knowledge that they would publish and be damned, after a subsequent attempt to backtrack by the person imparting it?

 

If SOS had not acted in exactly the way they have then they would not be fit to represent the fans.

 

Exactly right, sos are not the bad guys here. Infact they are the only ones to come out of this with any dignity. The amount of shit they take across the forums, yet they always reply in a respectful & educational manner.

 

Their actions recently have certainly turned my view of them around 180 degrees & as soon as I get paid I'm signing up for a membership.

[Sangria]

You're not missing it. I think PeeG and Graham have shown a lot of restraint and patience.

 

Beyond the call of duty. They are indeed showing great restraint but I suppose the expect it with some of the mongs about.

 

Some I guess would find argument in an empty house.

[Dirk]

The moment SoS accepted Purslow's minutes would be the moment SoS ceased functioning as a union. Purslow left them with no option but to publish the actual minutes.

[PeeG]

Am I missing something or is this as simple as SOS releasing hugely significant information which was stated on the record, in the prior knowledge that they would publish and be damned, after a subsequent attempt to backtrack by the person imparting it?

 

If SOS had not acted in exactly the way they have then they would not be fit to represent their members.

 

Changed it for you. Agree with that.

[coop]

Was better as it was.

[Kennys_spell]

Everyone present in the meeting knew that it was all on the record from the beginning. So if he said it, it goes in. He could have came back and said to take that line out because I may get into trouble with it, but he didn't. He did a complete re-hash of it.

 

PeeG - I had my little say on this yesterday and accept the reasons you gave for taking the actions you did during that meeting.

 

Getting past that - wouldn't it now be sensible to get in touch with Purslow, explain (again) why you did what you did and suggest that there was this "Off the record" meeting that Purslow seemed so desperate to talk about.

 

As Dougie (I think) said, the club have done nothing but betray us since the Yanks took over, perhaps this off the record meeting would provide the Union with some ammunition of their own for future, should it be needed.

[Kennys_spell]

That's all very touching but it's not even close to being a tragedy. It's just modern football and we can either make the best of it or sink under the weight of our history.

 

You're doing a good job of keeping them on their toes but I don't think undermining Purslow does you any favours, even if you're mistrusting of his motives. The only thing he's there to do is lessen the debt and keep a steady ship, as it's obvious the yanks are fucked and incapable of showing any sort of leadership. If he fails then you can judge him.

 

Sorry pal but thats just about the most naive thing I've seen posted on this board.

 

Essentially what you're saying is 'do nothing and he might succeed, then we can carry on doing nothing. Or do nothing and watch the MOST SUCCESSFUL CLUB IN ENGLISH FOOTBALL HISTORY fail (and who knows what that could lead to).

 

Stupid isn't a strong enough word to use to describe that approach.

[PeeG]

PeeG - I had my little say on this yesterday and accept the reasons you gave for taking the actions you did during that meeting.

 

Getting past that - wouldn't it now be sensible to get in touch with Purslow, explain (again) why you did what you did and suggest that there was this "Off the record" meeting that Purslow seemed so desperate to talk about.

 

As Dougie (I think) said, the club have done nothing but betray us since the Yanks took over, perhaps this off the record meeting would provide the Union with some ammunition of their own for future, should it be needed.

 

I wouldn't be up for doing it off the record unless the members wanted it.

[razor]

I echo most of the words / sentiment here regarding the positive response to the actions of SoS. We can all pontificate, some people are DOING.

 

I am concerned it could be the end of dialogue with the club. But I see that SoS could not compromise so wholesale as to render the group a poodle.

 

Purslow's actions are odd. Naive / slick / arrogant, I am not sure as obviously I wasn't present.

 

Did he let his guard down a la Hicks? For the people who find it difficult to accept that such an experienced operator could let his guard down so obviously, I would have thought that few would believe that a billionaire owner / businessman's son would write what he did to a concerned supporter!

[redrosetints]

I think that would have some value if, as you can see, his version was not so different to the more accurate version as recollected by 12 people and one of them taking notes.

 

How can he be allowed to add stuff in as a record of what was said, when he didn't say it?

 

As the previous poster said, this is an example of how naive you are. He could have turned up and given you the stadard party line, you'd then be critical as he'd been evasive. He gives you a full and frank overview of how he feels and the state teh club is in and you then accuse him of being dishonest, he's damned if he does or doesnt with you. Do you really think he can make those comments, on the record and not expect some sanctions form the owners ? Wether you not continue bickering about Purslow, Kenny, the manager, players etc. Its got to be 100% focussed on getting G&T out.

 

The only saving grace is that Purslow is unoubtedly more savvy than you and therefore clearly made his comments with the intention of them being aired, safe in teh knowledge that he cant be fired and in doing what he has, he's told both potential investors and the owners exactly how it is. You were played, but for a greater good. Deal with it, accept it and move on, G&T are the bad guys here, not Purslow.

[Kopite Pete]

Can someone please explain why the Yanks cant cover the £100m if they have both just sold assets in the states, also regards the banks taking over and selling key players Im sure the Yanks will do try to do this first to keep hold of the club.

[J B]

Massive kudos, once again, to SOS for all this, and particularly to the two lads who have bothered to come on here for many hours afterwards and respond to all the points made, answering both understandable and genuine concerns and also the usual bullshit from people who just want to criticise.

 

I think publishing the minutes like this must have been a tough judgement call for yous to make and was certainly pretty risky - can anyone honestly say now that they'd be pleased if the club announced today that Purslow was leaving with immediate effect? However you've got to admire the honesty of the way SoS have acted, their commtiment in getting the truth out to us and their refusal to play PR games with Christian.

 

Overall my guess is he probably didn't want this to come out as bluntly as it has, and so I can understand the concerns of some fans who fear this might have done more harm than good.

 

But overall, as someone has already said - if G&H were fully calling the shots, if they were 100% Purslow's bosses and could hire and fire him at will, he simply wouldn't talk like this about them to a bunch of fans taking notes, regardless of whether he thought he could agree the minutes or not. You just wouldn't do it.

 

He was quite prerpared to take that risk to try and show the fans he's on our side. I think that's very good news for us as it suggests G&H are no longer in full control.

 

Basically for me this is the most cautiously positive I've felt in a long time. We're obviously moving into the unknown as ever but at least things do appear to be moving. It's a shame the Share Liverpool people didn't get their act together more quickly or it could have been us investring this £100m.

 

Finally, can I just add that when all this horrible, horrible mess is just a distant memory many years down the line, the emergence of SoS because of it will be one of the best things that ever happened to this club. Sometimes it take great adversity to get people organised and stop themselves being shat on, which frankly had been happening to us for many years before G&H arrived on the scene.

[Graham Smith]

As the previous poster said, this is an example of how naive you are. He could have turned up and given you the stadard party line, you'd then be critical as he'd been evasive. He gives you a full and frank overview of how he feels and the state teh club is in and you then accuse him of being dishonest, he's damned if he does or doesnt with you. Do you really think he can make those comments, on the record and not expect some sanctions form the owners ? Wether you not continue bickering about Purslow, Kenny, the manager, players etc. Its got to be 100% focussed on getting G&T out.

 

The only saving grace is that Purslow is unoubtedly more savvy than you and therefore clearly made his comments with the intention of them being aired, safe in teh knowledge that he cant be fired and in doing what he has, he's told both potential investors and the owners exactly how it is. You were played, but for a greater good. Deal with it, accept it and move on, G&T are the bad guys here, not Purslow.

 

I think you're overstating our sense of outrage. There really isn't any - if it looks like there is from my posts then I apologise.

 

The point you highlighted was really us addressing the issue about his clumsy attempt to rewrite the minute. That's all.

 

What he said gave new, confirmed information to the fans and as time goes on and there are no ramifications from this for him we'll see where the true power currently lies.

 

This must all be good for the Club and fans.

[redrosetints]

Anyone else want to become a member now then?

 

Join The Union – Spirit Of Shankly – Liverpool Supporters' Union

 

I'm inviting proceedings - go on Chris, sue us.

 

I second that.

 

Will I be joiing a union whose MO is so outdated, naive and juvenile that they cant even see the wood for the trees ? no thank you very much.

 

A top exec has been more candid with you than you could ever have imagined and instead of recognising this and embracing him, you are now out to shoot him down ?

 

In making these comments, doesnt it make him on 'our' side, ie that he wants rid of G&T too ? In which case why put his positon in possible danger ?

 

Or do you think it was all lies and just bullshit ?

 

Its absoutley astonishing the lack of savvy you have.

 

What next a witch hunt for King Kenny, cos he's trying to help the club out ? Oh sorry, yeah, thats already started .....

[Kennys_spell]

This thing about not speaking off the record goes back to one of the earlier meetings when it was agreed that SOS could speak to the owners or anyone else of a similar nature (Parry, Moores, DIC and so on) but only if it was all fully minuted. To me it all boiled down to a lack of trust from the people in the room towards the people running the meeting.

 

Some people at the meeting suggested it was stupid not to try and talk to the owners, people who'd been involved in trade union disputes in the past, they said dialogue was essential. Others said nobody should be chatting to the owners at all, full stop. That vote was a compromise.

 

So although I could understand the reasons behind it, it was a good while ago now and a lot's changed since then. If the committee is trusted by the members, the members should be able to trust the committee to talk to people like Purslow, to potential new investors, and for the meetings to have elements of "off the record" to them.

 

What if a potential new investor wanted to chat to SOS and other supporters about how he planned to do things before he made his final decision? He's not exactly going to want all of that chat minuted ready for other clubs or other bidders to use in their favour is he?

 

What if Purslow could show SOS some evidence that he had a new bidder ready to sign on August 1st, the date being that because some clause in some loan would have expired by then? He can't do that if SOS insist everything goes on record.

 

Whether it's the SOS committee or other people entrusted in some way by different supporters there is always a chance that speaking off the record is not a bad thing.

 

If the members don't trust the committee why did they vote them in?

 

Exactly right in my opinioin. I really and honestly cannot see what harm it would have done to have listened to this "Off the record" detail he so obviously was desperate to impart.

 

I'm not having a go at them, it's a decision they made early in the process.

 

If I was to offer any constructive criticism it would be that perhaps they should now revisit that decision.

[Graham Smith]

Will I be joiing a union whose MO is so outdated, naive and juvenile that they cant even see the wood for the trees ? no thank you very much.

 

A top exec has been more candid with you than you could ever have imagined and instead of recognising this and embracing him, you are now out to shoot him down ?

 

In making these comments, doesnt it make him on 'our' side, ie that he wants rid of G&T too ? In which case why put his positon in possible danger ?

 

Or do you think it was all lies and just bullshit ?

 

Its absoutley astonishing the lack of savvy you have.

 

What next a witch hunt for King Kenny, cos he's trying to help the club out ? Oh sorry, yeah, thats already started .....

 

At the end of the day we'll presumably get crucified by our members at the AGM in three weeks for how we have handled this. The membership that has grown by over 100 in the last day and a half.

 

If he was so canny don't you think there was a better way to "use" us if that's what you think he was doing?

 

Or even if he just wanted to share information then as a "top exec" talking to 12 "ordinary" people should he not of said "Listen lads, this is how this meeting is going to work, and this is how it is going to be reported afterwards" - presumably that's what "top execs" do?

 

Not leave the whole thing unregulated, unstructured and lose control of the message?

 

He choose this route effectively and there's little chance of him being walked off the job and no way you can characterise what we have done or our responses on sites as a witch hunt.

 

However, his denials of what he said diminish him in my eyes as he knows what he said and how he said it and that's why he won't take it any further because what we published was the truth.

[HJohal]

The most important step is what should SoS do next - there is no point in reflecting upon the past as it cannot now be changed.

 

The immediate aim must be to remove the owners - whether that be completely or initially of a controlling stake. Purlsow has explicitly told SoS that the owners must sell a controlling stake in the club to avoid default by July, whatever his motives or actions thereafter that information has been fed into the public domain.

 

SoS now has to decide if the comments made by Purlsow are genunine or more spin to buy time - as a SoS member I would give Purslow the benefit of the doubt and try to negotiate early access to Investors in exchange for a freeze in any SoS organised protests until April - by then according to Purlsow investment should be on board. This would illustrate that SoS value and wish to continue the relationship with Purslow and are willing to back him IF he delivers upon his intentions and in return Purslow can take something back to the owners and take the heat out of the situation.

 

I think it should be appreciated we are in last chance saloon and Purslow is our best bet in getting out of this without complete anarchy - we should give him our support within reason to try and make this happen - I dread to think what the alternatives may be.