Esteban We added three directors to the board a week or so ago and our credit rating improved. We've now removed three directors involved with our holding company, which we owe money to.l.
this isn't correct.
by multisync1830 » 02 Jun 2014 14:22
Esteban We added three directors to the board a week or so ago and our credit rating improved. We've now removed three directors involved with our holding company, which we owe money to.l.
by Elm Park Pasty » 02 Jun 2014 14:29
blueroyalshowser Delighted with the news that TSI are no longer attached to the club, accepting that they might still be on the pay roll of course, Sir John can now get on with the main item on the clubs agenda. The Burman interest has to be the acceptable one, he has a proven track record of backing his sporting investments, there will be some new blood at boardroom level, especially as the two remaining obstacles have now been removed.
Apart from the fact that they still own us?
by Agent Balti » 02 Jun 2014 14:37
Elm Park Pastyblueroyalshowser Delighted with the news that TSI are no longer attached to the club, accepting that they might still be on the pay roll of course, Sir John can now get on with the main item on the clubs agenda. The Burman interest has to be the acceptable one, he has a proven track record of backing his sporting investments, there will be some new blood at boardroom level, especially as the two remaining obstacles have now been removed.
Apart from the fact that they still own us?
This does seem open to question. Multisync a few pages back referred to the shares having been handed back to SJM, with Charles Watts tweeting something later in the morning. If they didn't have shares, then I'm not quite sure how AO and CS hung around.
by UpThePrem » 02 Jun 2014 14:40
multisync1830Esteban We added three directors to the board a week or so ago and our credit rating improved. We've now removed three directors involved with our holding company, which we owe money to.l.
this isn't correct.
by multisync1830 » 02 Jun 2014 14:56
Elm Park Pastyblueroyalshowser Delighted with the news that TSI are no longer attached to the club, accepting that they might still be on the pay roll of course, Sir John can now get on with the main item on the clubs agenda. The Burman interest has to be the acceptable one, he has a proven track record of backing his sporting investments, there will be some new blood at boardroom level, especially as the two remaining obstacles have now been removed.
Apart from the fact that they still own us?
This does seem open to question. Multisync a few pages back referred to the shares having been handed back to SJM, with Charles Watts tweeting something later in the morning. If they didn't have shares, then I'm not quite sure how AO and CS hung around.
by Reading4eva » 02 Jun 2014 16:00
by Reading4eva » 02 Jun 2014 16:02
multisync1830 I have only met CS once and whilst i wasn't left with a favourable opinion I don't think he's quite the villain the last week has portrayed him as.
by HoneyRoastHoax » 02 Jun 2014 16:07
Reading4evamultisync1830 I have only met CS once and whilst i wasn't left with a favourable opinion I don't think he's quite the villain the last week has portrayed him as.
Of course he was the villain. He has shown he was a scumbag before Reading FC and has been holding on for dear life to the club only to make himself a bit of wealth.
He should never be welcome in this town again
by From Despair To Where? » 02 Jun 2014 16:16
by HoneyRoastHoax » 02 Jun 2014 16:19
by Elm Park Pasty » 02 Jun 2014 16:30
Reading4evamultisync1830 I have only met CS once and whilst i wasn't left with a favourable opinion I don't think he's quite the villain the last week has portrayed him as.
Of course he was the villain. He has shown he was a scumbag before Reading FC and has been holding on for dear life to the club only to make himself a bit of wealth.
He should never be welcome in this town again
by Norfolk Royal » 02 Jun 2014 16:32
by maffff » 02 Jun 2014 16:44
HoneyRoastHoaxReading4evamultisync1830 I have only met CS once and whilst i wasn't left with a favourable opinion I don't think he's quite the villain the last week has portrayed him as.
Of course he was the villain. He has shown he was a scumbag before Reading FC and has been holding on for dear life to the club only to make himself a bit of wealth.
He should never be welcome in this town again
Stop believing everything journalists/ITK merchants tell you!
by Elm Park Pasty » 02 Jun 2014 16:46
Norfolk Royal When was the last time anyone went to Reading and did feel welcome?
by JIM » 02 Jun 2014 17:09
by multisync1830 » 02 Jun 2014 17:12
JIM PLEASE tell me is there any link between TSI and READING FC in any role.?
by Angry Shed Sex » 02 Jun 2014 17:14
JIM PLEASE tell me is there any link between TSI and READING FC in any role.?
by Royal Rother » 02 Jun 2014 17:32
RoyalBluePieEater I think he missed a trick in that press release by not opening it with "FAO RoyalBlue"
And now you fools give the great Ego praise for possibly sorting out the mess that he created in the first place?!!![]()
So now all he needs to do is provide the money (not from player sales) to cover the tax bills that the incredibly well run business that is Reading FC ran up during the past couple of years that he has been chairman and in day to day control.
And before he is given even more credit, Fordham makes the valid point that just because Samuelson and his mate are off the board doesn't mean that they are off the payroll or have completely disappeared.
As for the assurances of funding being in place - just how short are your memories? This is the guy who is on record as saying that funding would be available to Adkins during the last transfer window!
by ZacNaloen » 02 Jun 2014 17:35
by winchester_royal » 02 Jun 2014 17:47
Users browsing this forum: 6ft Kerplunk, Ascotexgunner, bcubed, Fluff, John Madejski's Wallet, Richard, Snowflake Royal, stealthpapes, Who Moved The Goalposts? and 228 guests