SOS Minutes with Purslow meeting

[redrosetints]

Why should I trust Purslow when it's obvious from this episode that he is either incompetent or playing dishonest games with people?

 

You want people to discard a mechanism for holding the club to account which is clearly working, because you are ready to plight your troth to some faceless suit?

 

Not. A. Chance.

 

In the real world, its those faceless suits who will save us. Im not against SoS, indeed their is a need for an action group, however, you have no idea of Purslows intentions and it seems to me the SoS members are all too keen to simply slag this man off. Sos seem to think they call the shots, but Im afriad for me, the club needs an onside CEO in Purslow more than the club needs some amatuer old school bovver boot boys who have no idea of the protocol or methods of delivering what we all (sos, Purslow, fans etc) want.

 

 

For example 'the fans should be glad Im here to save the club' is that a verbatum quote or the interpretation of an SOS member who obviously didnt like what, or how Purslow was saying something.

 

Fact is I am GLAD he is there, as the alternative is for Hicks and Gillet junior to be making the decisions on our future, who would you rather have ?

[Whelan]

Right, so Purslow who advised Morgan preceding his attempt to take control over the club by undervaluing it, is now trying to sell the club or a small part of the club, or a large part, on behalf of a bank or two Americans!

 

Just so that I am clear with this, why do we have to keep him onside?

[zigackly]

In the real world, its those faceless suits who will save us.

 

Or destroy us.

 

So I'm glad you're here to telepathically divine which one it is.

[redrosetints]

Its both. There is a role to play for both parties there. It wasn't known before these minutes were released that this £100m was a requirement by the banks. The figure was widely spread, but not known that it was a requirement. This gives the investors the chance to make Hicks and Gillett realise that their valuation is unrealistic as Purslow stated. By putting more and more pressure on Hicks and Gillett as well we hope that this will speed up the process. Even when you just take into account what has happened in the last month with these minutes, Bolton after game protest and Hicks Jr's resignation, it shows there we can play an important role in this.

 

Im sorry what did SoS do to get Hicks Jnr to resign ?

 

I think Tommy J did that all by himself. Again you call Purslow full of himself yet you are wildly exagerating your own importance.

 

Again Im not quesitoning your motives, you want the best for the club. Im asking why you dont think its possible that you and Purlsow have a shared goal, do you believe him when he says the clubs in a mess and he wants G&H out ? why you appear keen to write off and criticise someone who has met you in good faith, spoken with great honesty about his view on the clubs situation and asked you to follow protocol and adhere to the previous agreement you made on the minutes.

[redrosetints]

Or destroy us.

 

So I'm glad you're here to telepathically divine which one it is.

 

No thats true, I accept that, but what is absoltuley dead set clear is that SoS will not be finding a 100m investor nor stumping up the cash themselves.

 

So its a 50/50 with Purslow (though if noone doubts what he said about his support for us, then clearly its greater than that) with SoS its 0.

 

If SoS get Moores to stump up 50m, Morgan to sell Wolves and stump up another 50m, I will take back what I said, otherwise, i poin my hopes on teh faceless suit and hope, he does us proud.

[zigackly]

You know what though, I would rather we did not find that £100M investor.

 

Then RBS can repossess us and sell us on, leaving the yanks out of the loop and out of pocket. That would be the best outcome in my opinion all round.

 

It will also leave whoever buys us with more money to invest.

 

I think you've been at the Purslow water.

[Kennys_spell]

What you forget is that, Hicks and Gillett aren't Purslow's boss

 

Do you have any proof of that?

[redrosetints]

You know what though, I would rather we did not find that £100M investor.

 

Then RBS can repossess us and sell us on, leaving the yanks out of the loop and out of pocket. That would be the best outcome in my opinion all round.

 

It will also leave whoever buys us with more money to invest.

 

I think you've been at the Purslow water.

 

By having released whats been released that s a very real lieklyhood. The info thats come out is only going to put off interest until the summer, ploy by Purslow ? Who knows.

 

A potential investor now has a choice between paying 100m now, for 34 or 51% and alot less itn he summer. Great if that helps us, but what if we go into administration and sell off, ont he cheap, our best players ?

 

You may be right, but again Im not against SOS having the meeting or Purslows defence, he wil make mistakes. Im simply amazed at teh comments against Purslow, which are so naive, when the stakes were playing for are so high.

 

Somewher down the line you have to put your trust in someone or you'll just spend your whole life paranoid.

[Tyler Durden]

No thats true, I accept that, but what is absoltuley dead set clear is that SoS will not be finding a 100m investor nor stumping up the cash themselves.

 

So its a 50/50 with Purslow (though if noone doubts what he said about his support for us, then clearly its greater than that) with SoS its 0.

 

If SoS get Moores to stump up 50m, Morgan to sell Wolves and stump up another 50m, I will take back what I said, otherwise, i poin my hopes on teh faceless suit and hope, he does us proud.

 

Ive got an idea then mate, seens your so 'savvy' and SOS are so 'naive' why dont you put yourself forward to get on the board?

Or would that consitute you actually contributing rather then picking holes?

[Tyler Durden]

By having released whats been released that s a very real lieklyhood. The info thats come out is only going to put off interest until the summer, ploy by Purslow ? Who knows.

 

A potential investor now has a choice between paying 100m now, for 34 or 51% and alot less itn he summer. Great if that helps us, but what if we go into administration and sell off, ont he cheap, our best players ?

 

You may be right, but again Im not against SOS having the meeting or Purslows defence, he wil make mistakes. Im simply amazed at teh comments against Purslow, which are so naive, when the stakes were playing for are so high.

 

Somewher down the line you have to put your trust in someone or you'll just spend your whole life paranoid.

 

That will never happen, the Americans have their guarantees against the debt, not all of it is against the club. Also Purslow states RBS would like to carry on with Liverpool, hardly see them doing that if they would be in the process of asset stripping it.

[Busoms]

Fact is I am GLAD he is there, as the alternative is for Hicks and Gillet junior to be making the decisions on our future, who would you rather have ?

 

Nicky Alt, Peter Hooton, or some other working class hero with no clue about running a top football club in this modern high finance, corporate culture.

 

The opposition to the owners raping the club and calls for them to be removed are perfectly acceptable given the situation, but I find some of the stuff, especially about transfers and budgets, to be overly simplistic.

 

The so called 'suits', as some socialist hero elequently put it, have always been involved in the game and their expertise is much needed at this level, even if they don't always get it right.

[zigackly]

By having released whats been released that s a very real lieklyhood. The info thats come out is only going to put off interest until the summer, ploy by Purslow ? Who knows.

 

I hope that is what it is. The alternative is that he's naive or incompetent to say such things on the record to a hostile pressure group and then hope to retract them.

 

A potential investor now has a choice between paying 100m now, for 34 or 51% and alot less itn he summer. Great if that helps us, but what if we go into administration and sell off, ont he cheap, our best players ?

 

That would only happen if there was no potential to ever make any money out of the club, because if you start that process you had better take it all the way to the end until there's nothing left.

 

It's pretty clear that there is a great potential to make money if the stadium is built. I still think we are a great investment at the right price.

 

I also VERY MUCH doubt RBS would want to be the ones associated with destroying the club. They would hock us on the cheap and take the shortfall out of Hicks and Gillett as someone said above.

 

Anyway, time will tell whether Purslow is worthy of trust or not, but it's clear that at the very least here he is willing to use SOS dishonestly.

 

Maybe it's the right thing, but why should they have to like it? There are plenty of other ways he could have skun this particular cat.

[PeeG]

In the real world, its those faceless suits who will save us. Im not against SoS, indeed their is a need for an action group, however, you have no idea of Purslows intentions and it seems to me the SoS members are all too keen to simply slag this man off. Sos seem to think they call the shots, but Im afriad for me, the club needs an onside CEO in Purslow more than the club needs some amatuer old school bovver boot boys who have no idea of the protocol or methods of delivering what we all (sos, Purslow, fans etc) want.

 

 

For example 'the fans should be glad Im here to save the club' is that a verbatum quote or the interpretation of an SOS member who obviously didnt like what, or how Purslow was saying something.

 

Fact is I am GLAD he is there, as the alternative is for Hicks and Gillet junior to be making the decisions on our future, who would you rather have ?

 

That was a verbatim quote. We are not slagging him off. Understand the job he has to do. Our points about him possibly denying it are valid. The meeting is a true account and he can try and deny it if he wants to, but it wont work. But I don't think he will be trying to deny it. He is a clever man and he will realise what he has done whether it was intended or not. Also, with his role, there was nothing to doubt his intentions are genuine, but we always have to be cautious and not just sit back and think he is our saviour and let him do what he wants.

[PeeG]

Im sorry what did SoS do to get Hicks Jnr to resign ?

 

I think Tommy J did that all by himself. Again you call Purslow full of himself yet you are wildly exagerating your own importance.

 

Again Im not quesitoning your motives, you want the best for the club. Im asking why you dont think its possible that you and Purlsow have a shared goal, do you believe him when he says the clubs in a mess and he wants G&H out ? why you appear keen to write off and criticise someone who has met you in good faith, spoken with great honesty about his view on the clubs situation and asked you to follow protocol and adhere to the previous agreement you made on the minutes.

 

So the constant pressure on Hicks and Gillett and that making him react to Steve off here's e-mail offensively and then subsequently us getting the story massively in the press throughout the world and calling for his resignation didn't have an effect. He would have just e-mailed a random fan who had no problem with him and tell them to go to hell and then resign on his own accord. I highly doubt that.

 

Once again he was aware of all stages what was going to happen with any minutes.

[Busoms]

That was a verbatim quote. We are not slagging him off. Understand the job he has to do. Our points about him possibly denying it are valid. The meeting is a true account and he can try and deny it if he wants to, but it wont work. But I don't think he will be trying to deny it. He is a clever man and he will realise what he has done whether it was intended or not. Also, with his role, there was nothing to doubt his intentions are genuine, but we always have to be cautious and not just sit back and think he is our saviour and let him do what he wants.

 

Can I just ask what it is your perfect model for the club, taking into accout the money involved in the modern game and the obvious success we crave?

 

Because you do know that we'll probably never get the perfect principled owner and be free from debt ever again, right? Unless the game suddenly loses it's worldwide appeal, which is unlikely.

 

Would you be willing to ignore the spin from any potential billionaire as long as he was loaded and spending like a drunken sailor?

[PeeG]

Can I just ask what it is your perfect model for the club, taking into accout the money involved in the modern game and the obvious success we crave?

 

Because you do know that we'll probably never get the perfect principled owner and be free from debt ever again, right? Unless the game suddenly loses it's worldwide appeal, which is unlikely.

 

Would you be willing to ignore the spin from any potential billionaire as long as he was loaded and spending like a drunken sailor?

 

We can be free from debt. And no owner can be expected to be perfect, but they can be honest. I don't think a sugar daddy is the right way to go. You get other problems then. All you can ask is for honesty, not to ruin the club and not to rip fans off.

 

In my view the perfect model is fan ownership. It would need time and hard work to get to the right level, but it can be done. Take away our interest payments and we have enough for a sensible transfer budget to achieve what we want. Factor in a new stadium or expansion and then your profits go up significantly.

[zigackly]

Being completely free from debt is a bit unrealistic, all businesses have a certain amount of debt. We won't build a stadium without debt.

 

Manageable debt is what it's about. You buy the club in the summer and clear the purchase debt as part of the cost of entry. Then you borrow money for the stadium, which will end up self-funding.

 

When it's built you can either sell at a profit or take dividends, but you can do that and still leave a higher amount of cash available to spend on the team than currently or under the Moores regime.

[coop]

Being completely free from debt is a bit unrealistic, all businesses have a certain amount of debt. We won't build a stadium without debt.

 

Manageable debt is what it's about. You buy the club in the summer and clear the purchase debt as part of the cost of entry. Then you borrow money for the stadium, which will end up self-funding.

 

When it's built you can either sell at a profit or take dividends, but you can do that and still leave a higher amount of cash available to spend on the team than currently or under the Moores regime.

 

Is that not more or less what the current owners are trying to do hence the need for the £100m which more or less clears the purchase debt.

[Busoms]

We can be free from debt. And no owner can be expected to be perfect, but they can be honest. I don't think a sugar daddy is the right way to go. You get other problems then. All you can ask is for honesty, not to ruin the club and not to rip fans off.

 

In my view the perfect model is fan ownership. It would need time and hard work to get to the right level, but it can be done. Take away our interest payments and we have enough for a sensible transfer budget to achieve what we want. Factor in a new stadium or expansion and then your profits go up significantly.

 

I admire your idealism but I don't think fan ownership would work for a top club in this country, especially with a fanbase as divided and volatile as ours.

 

If football carries on as it is the only option which covers all the bases would be a sugar daddy, but even then you're asking a bit much for honesty and less squeezing of the fans. It's a major part of their business plan.

[zigackly]

Yes coop, but they are total cunts.

[PeeG]

I admire your idealism but I don't think fan ownership would work for a top club in this country, especially with a fanbase as divided and volatile as ours.

 

If football carries on as it is the only option which covers all the bases would be a sugar daddy, but even then you're asking a bit much for honesty and less squeezing of the fans. It's a major part of their business plan.

 

We have to try and make it happen though. We can't just sit back and moan about it. All we can do is try our best.

[Redexile]

"It will be to his detriment" ? Jees who is the egotist now ?

 

For all the work you do Graham, Im afrid, you and the people in SoS will not be the ones to save our club, unless you can get access to £100m. FACT. Same at United, same at newcastle, Portsmouth and every other club in debt. It will be men in suits.

 

Now we either get one who is on our side embrace him and encourage him or we push him aside and let god knows who into the fray to do god knows what.

 

You said earlier you were a solicitor, do you prosecute of defend ? When defedning do yo uinsist on honesty all the time ? No, so you know how these things work, you seem to be forgetting this isnt about the little man on the ground feeling improtant, its about the men in suits getting proper and right owners for the club. Was John Houlding a little man of the people ? no he fucked his club off to create a new one, for rent money.

 

Now it's this kind of carping that constantly pisses me off. What are YOU doing about the ownership of our club? I'll guess that it's sweet fuck all and yet you sit behind your keyboard and snipe at people who feel so strongly about this issue that they give up their free time to try and make a difference.

Why don't you get involved and help SOS with policies if you think there's are all wrong.

Oh BTW you really don't think that the press give the SOS web page the once over on a regular basis??????

[Busoms]

I don't think it's as simple as just doing nothing, it depends what we want. If it's just a mid-tableish club with little or no debt, surviving from season to season, then it could work. But our fans are pretty demanding and expect success. Maybe long term it could reap the benefits but I just don't see football imploding to a more even playing field, especially with the WC destined for England.

 

Maybe it's time we started dropping hints to Dubai again. Even with all their money woes I sense they'd be more effective owners than the two vermin.

[Sangria]

Now it's this kind of carping that constantly pisses me off. What are YOU doing about the ownership of our club? I'll guess that it's sweet fuck all and yet you sit behind your keyboard and snipe at people who feel so strongly about this issue that they give up their free time to try and make a difference.

Why don't you get involved and help SOS with policies if you think there's are all wrong.

Oh BTW you really don't think that the press give the SOS web page the once over on a regular basis??????

 

Spot on.

 

The Union is probably the only good thing to come out of this sorry mess. Yes they have made mistakes and will continue to do so but they are a voice for the supporter and that is great.

 

On this occasion they were spot on.

 

The more member they get the stronger a voice they will have and if you are not happy with the things they do and the way they go about it. Join it and try and have your say.

[PeeG]

I don't think it's as simple as just doing nothing, it depends what we want. If it's just a mid-tableish club with little or no debt, surviving from season to season, then it could work. But our fans are pretty demanding and expect success. Maybe long term it could reap the benefits but I just don't see football imploding to a more even playing field, especially with the WC destined for England.

 

Maybe it's time we started dropping hints to Dubai again. Even with all their money woes I sense they'd be more effective owners than the two vermin.

 

You can have success with fan ownership. If anything you become more comercially viable then like Barca. Things are teetering on the edge with ourselves, United, Portsmouth and many more with severe problems. Something has to give.