Jump to content

Graham Smith

Registered
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    807

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Graham Smith

  1. Graham Smith
    Not even close to the most controversial bit of the book. Who the fuck eats porridge for breakfast? :yes:
  2. Graham Smith
    Anyone interested in a good night out - tickets available around the ground on Saturday or PM me.
  3. Graham Smith
    The Spirit of Shankly are pleased to announce that Liverpool FC have agreed to allow the SOS/Partners Credit Union Season Ticket Loan leaflets to be distributed at Anfield this Saturday. Union volunteers will be at numerous points around the ground with information leaflets about the cheap loan scheme. Anyone available to assist with handing out the leaflets is asked to email directaction@spiritofshankly.com The Spirit of Shankly is grateful for the cooperation from Ian Ayre, Ged Poynton and the stewards and staff at LFC.
  4. Graham Smith
    Not to this depth of detail but as many could see the Club was massively disfunctional and in a state of civil war. Ironically it wasn't a two sided fight as you had shifting battles and alliances all along and all over the place - Hicks and Gillett v Benitez; Benitez and Gillett v Hicks; Benitez v Parry; Supporters v Hicks and Gillett; Some supporters v Benitez; Some supporters v other supporters; Purslow v Benitez and suggestions of players having their own agendas. All utter madness.
  5. Graham Smith
    Tomorrow's third instalment has a bit about him speaking to Rafa, plus more unbelievable nonsense from the two American dopes. *Now posted above*
  6. Graham Smith
    Yes, this is fact - we've never said we represent anyone else.
  7. Graham Smith
    You haven't read the thread then. The short answer is none as SOS aren't collecting any money but on the basis that this factual answer won't satisfy your attempt at point scoring I have tried to explain the current position in the fuller answer at Post #100.
  8. Graham Smith
    The aggressive tone of SOS (1) and Graham (2) on this thread is plainly and simply down to the fact that Lebron James got the part of the club they wanted (3). It all comes down to SOS goal of having some investment for the fans, sorry I mean their members (5). If the above has been mentioned before, I apologise but that's why I think Graham and his members are appearing unhappy (6). I have no issue in the owners being questioned, it's understandable. However as Unrighteous said, there is no need for SOS anymore(4), as they do not represent the fans of Liverpool Football Club, they only represent their own committee and members interests and ideas.
  9. Graham Smith
    Six factual errors in such a short post.
  10. Graham Smith
    The answer is none as SOS aren't involved in setting up or collecting any supporter share directly. However, I know what you're trying to get at (and of course the point you wish to score - I think I've now nearly ticked off that almost all the anti-SOS posters have now arrived here) but the point is the goalposts have moved since the takeover hence the strategy change which involves asking the owners their intentions and inviting them, for their, the Club and supporters' benefit to get behind a scheme. You can't buy something that isn't for sale and you can't buy part of something if the seller won't name a price. At the time of our meltdown last year the aim was to have people ready to save the Club, the dynamic is entirely different now. This would be put to bed once and for all if they answered and explained their answer. So the short answer is there are still tens of thousands out there who would put up the sums (and many more thousands who would get behind a Club backed scheme) but understandably until there is a chance or opportunity (or at least a response) no one is going to pay into an account.
  11. Graham Smith
    Great news. Hopefully the Credit Union cheaper loan scheme will be the benchmark they will seek to beat to benefit supporters.
  12. Graham Smith
    Is it?
  13. Graham Smith
    I can't really begin to engage with this rant as it relays so many untruths and reflects the opposite of what is being discussed. SOS is NOT seeking a role or ownership of part of the Club. Quite happy for you to point where we say anything even close to this when all the avaialble evidence shows the complete and utter opposite. And in actual fact it is asking the Club to do what you've ranted about - a scheme launched and managed by the Club.
  14. Graham Smith
    I'll have any money you want that supporter investment, club led, would generate far money for investment in our Club than he ever will. If we're all about maximising our financial muscle (and I agree with you subject to us not selling our soul again) supporter investment generates far more than he ever will. At the end of the day you can do both - if the Club got behind it then Trucker Paddy's view that it is a dead duck would be proved within a month as no one wanted to invest. The potential reality, until the owners respond, is possibly that they want our support but don't trust us with any direct influence (and I am not talking control). I think there's an element of reaction to many things by them - the supporter committee (have you applied?) is a response to the Union's role and I understand you've had some feedback suggesting some sort of season ticket purchase assistance is in the offing, which in itself is a reaction to the Union's (and other supporters) saying for months that the Club should do more to help. Any news on the latter?
  15. Graham Smith
    I don't agree. I'll bet your £2000 that if FSG came out and said that they saw supporter investment as a great way of financing a refurbished stadium and it would be part of total engagement with supporters giving them some direct influence and recognition, then the vast majority of those who said they would be willing to purchase would stay on board - maybe even you. I don't think the majority of people were in for supporter investment solely to see Hicks and Gillett out, there was an awakening of supporters realising that they should have more direct influence in the Club and the investment could be completely positive for the Club. Supporter investment is a long term scheme anyway - FSG will presumably cash in at some point (which is perfectly reasonable) and at that point we'll be back at square one wondering who's next to walk up and buy us - no reason that supporters haven't got a foot in the door by that time.
  16. Graham Smith
    If this is right why wasn't the deal done with LFC? At the end of the day we will have to wait and see if the identifiable commercial benefit to LFC is significant based upon the effort he puts in.
  17. Graham Smith
    Al, How can this be a "great deal" when it is FSM getting the gravy and James getting part of the Club?
  18. Graham Smith
    Rather than clogging up this thread can I suggest you go to our website - this has all of our aims and objectives on it and if you read some of the relevant news items you will see what our members' expectations are. The request to FSG of what our members want addressing is in the document sent to them at Christmas and is also published on the site.
  19. Graham Smith
    I've posted the facts previously but I'll repeat them. A few of us met Werner and Henry when they arrived. They received a briefing document about the Union, its members and aims and objectives. It was a businesslike, to the point document as you would expect when dealing with businessmen. It made no demands, placed no deadlines and welcomed them to the Club. Two things happened pursuant to that meeting. Firstly Henry gave us (me) his personal email address (presumably the one ATK is using to tease out some sort of asistance with season ticket purchases) and secondly Henry invited us to keep in touch and that FSG would welcome an ongoing dialogue. I emailed him two or three times from my work email address (I am a solicitor) and got polite replies without comment or complaint. We asked for a further meeting which was not offered (despite the earlier assurances) and we then put together a document on Union headed paper which followed a consultation with members about the issues they wanted FSG to address over the short, medium and long term. This document was again businesslike and got to the point rather than waffle on over scores of pages (it is on our website). This document was sent as an attachment by me again from my work email address to Henry with a polite and warm covering message wishing him a happy Christmas - the document was Union headed and addressed from the Committee on behalf of the members. I have my suspicions that Henry didn't even draft the reply as he would have known that we had corresponded without comment via our respective email addresses.
  20. Graham Smith
    James hasn't invested anything. He's signed away marketing rights to a company called FSM (a subsidiary of FSG) and it is FSM that will make the return. James has been given part of LFC for signing up with FSM. LFC get no direct benefit.
  21. Graham Smith
    The response would be exactly the same. This deal is NOT with LFC or directly for their benefit, part of the Club has been given away for a deal that benefits the basketball player and a distant subsidiary company. Isn't that at least worthy of a little explanation and better information?
  22. Graham Smith
    Doesn't it click with you that part of the Club has been given to this lad but the deal he has done is for his commercial benefit and not even FSG, it is a subsidiary of them called FSM. He hasn't done any deal with either LFC or FSG - doesn't that make a big differecne when you know the full facts?
  23. Graham Smith
    Purslow was a liar as the tape of the meeting would bear out. My point was about the last news item about this issue - where is that hostile?
  24. Graham Smith
    I think the basketball player will have something to say about that, as he'll be busy with his own career and interests. No doubt he'd like to see LFC grow as he owns a bit, but such a small bit that anything he does is unlikely to really see him benefit massively. He got us as part payment. We get little.
  25. Graham Smith
    How do you figure that when LFC don't get anything from the deal, the deal has been done with a subsidiary of FSG and not even FSG themselves? No big fanfare by the Club explaining the LeBron world tour promoting everything scouse - our only involvement is that we were giben partly away as part of a deal that doesn't benefit us directly.
×
×
  • Create New...