I was looking at the article from a slightly different angle. I was thinking that Ronnie G could easily have phrased things differently to limit the use of the we in the past tense. That might have deflected blame somewhat onto the parting directors even if in truth the voting arithmetic wouldn't have stacked up. Either way I assume the principal value of the article is to reassure our suppliers, business partners (Greaves, Warriors, Citroen), sponsors etc. that we're not about to go tits up.