Ian Royal Er, yeah, because he won't just walk away.
Because he f/cked up the sale, is still desperate to sell and can't walk away, rather than being Lord Simon Kindtrousers, Duke of Lovely.
Glad we cleared that up.
by Baker's Dozen » 13 May 2014 00:21
by Extended-Phenotype » 13 May 2014 13:05
Ian Royal Er, yeah, because he won't just walk away.
by Norfolk Royal » 13 May 2014 14:10
by melonhead » 13 May 2014 15:03
by Davezk » 13 May 2014 15:07
Skills
A commercial director needs outstanding interpersonal and networking skills. You must be able to build and maintain effective working relationships with customers, partners, suppliers and staff. You must be computer literate and able to use customer relationship management databases. As you will have oversight of a number of different projects at different stages of development, you also need excellent project management and time management skills.
by Ian Royal » 13 May 2014 18:51
Extended-PhenotypeIan Royal Er, yeah, because he won't just walk away.
Because he f/cked up the sale, is still desperate to sell and can't walk away, rather than being Lord Simon Kindtrousers, Duke of Lovely.
Glad we cleared that up.
by paddy20 » 13 May 2014 19:05
Ian RoyalExtended-PhenotypeIan Royal Er, yeah, because he won't just walk away.
Because he f/cked up the sale, is still desperate to sell and can't walk away, rather than being Lord Simon Kindtrousers, Duke of Lovely.
Glad we cleared that up.
All that we've cleared up is that you apply one set of rules for Anton and another for Madejski, completely ignoring anything that shows you're sulking at Madejski to be childish baseless.
Anton has walked away, being desperate to sell his shares. Madejski hasn't walked away despite wanting to sell his shares to the right buyer. If Madejski wanted to, he could have sold for sod all to one of the many interested parties there's been over the years. Carson Yeung, the Omanis, the US lot, that Galatasaray bloke etc etc.
He won't leave or sell unless its to someone he thinks will take us forward. He got that right with Anton short-term but drastically wrong medium term. He'll be even more careful this time. Instead, he'll stay, looking for the right buyer, and making us as sustainable as possible in the meantime.
by Ian Royal » 13 May 2014 19:08
by philM » 13 May 2014 21:21
Ian Royal I haven't spoken to them so I really couldn't say. I believe the club has said their offers were derisory though, suggesting they may be more interested in making a quick buck and asset stripping than taking us forward.
Of course he'll want a good price. But he could sell for peanuts or to any unscrupulous tosser to get away so he's not caught holding the hot potato. He won't deliberately though.
by Nameless » 13 May 2014 22:10
philMIan Royal I haven't spoken to them so I really couldn't say. I believe the club has said their offers were derisory though, suggesting they may be more interested in making a quick buck and asset stripping than taking us forward.
Of course he'll want a good price. But he could sell for peanuts or to any unscrupulous tosser to get away so he's not caught holding the hot potato. He won't deliberately though.
Anton will have to agree to sell his shares at the sale price/share. SJM can't just sell his shares for peanuts, as all the buyer would get is the 49%. And who's going to want to buy that ie without at least the controlling share.
by RoyalBlue » 13 May 2014 22:20
by Man Friday » 13 May 2014 22:22
philM SJM can't just sell his shares for peanuts, as all the buyer would get is the 49%. And who's going to want to buy that ie without at least the controlling share.
by Royal Rother » 13 May 2014 22:40
RoyalBlue The manic cloth cutter strikes again! The club need to make more money. However, the man who seems to know the price of everything but struggles to see the value in much decides he can cut his way to growth by getting rid of The Commercial Director and, according to Noidea Howe, abandoning the strategic marketing plan that they had paid him to draw up!
As for Madejski being the good guy for not just walking away, his ego will prevent that happening. He knows damn well that if he disappears in that manner, his name is also likely to disappear PDQ. Why would whoever is left holding the baby want to pay homage to him by continuing to have his name on the stadium?!
by Nameless » 14 May 2014 09:24
by melonhead » 14 May 2014 10:17
Ian Royal I haven't spoken to them so I really couldn't say. I believe the club has said their offers were derisory though, suggesting they may be more interested in making a quick buck and asset stripping than taking us forward.
Of course he'll want a good price. But he could sell for peanuts or to any unscrupulous tosser to get away so he's not caught holding the hot potato. He won't deliberately though.
by Ian Royal » 14 May 2014 17:21
melonheadIan Royal I haven't spoken to them so I really couldn't say. I believe the club has said their offers were derisory though, suggesting they may be more interested in making a quick buck and asset stripping than taking us forward.
Of course he'll want a good price. But he could sell for peanuts or to any unscrupulous tosser to get away so he's not caught holding the hot potato. He won't deliberately though.
the problem is, that with our best players all sold, and a team half full of kids, and us battling relegation from the championship the club isnt worth the 38 million we are in debt. let alone either owner getting 12.5 million for their shares
by Cureton's Volley » 15 May 2014 09:33
Ian RoyalmelonheadIan Royal I haven't spoken to them so I really couldn't say. I believe the club has said their offers were derisory though, suggesting they may be more interested in making a quick buck and asset stripping than taking us forward.
Of course he'll want a good price. But he could sell for peanuts or to any unscrupulous tosser to get away so he's not caught holding the hot potato. He won't deliberately though.
the problem is, that with our best players all sold, and a team half full of kids, and us battling relegation from the championship the club isnt worth the 38 million we are in debt. let alone either owner getting 12.5 million for their shares
It was worth £25m with about £20m+ debt, no Cat 1 Academy and less high profile players.
by melonhead » 15 May 2014 10:09
Ian RoyalmelonheadIan Royal I haven't spoken to them so I really couldn't say. I believe the club has said their offers were derisory though, suggesting they may be more interested in making a quick buck and asset stripping than taking us forward.
Of course he'll want a good price. But he could sell for peanuts or to any unscrupulous tosser to get away so he's not caught holding the hot potato. He won't deliberately though.
the problem is, that with our best players all sold, and a team half full of kids, and us battling relegation from the championship the club isnt worth the 38 million we are in debt. let alone either owner getting 12.5 million for their shares
It was worth £25m with about £20m+ debt, no Cat 1 Academy and less high profile players.
by Pepe the Horseman » 15 May 2014 10:19
by Cureton's Volley » 15 May 2014 10:24
Users browsing this forum: ankeny, Google [Bot], Jammy Dodger and 307 guests