Jump to content

Jim Alexander


1 John Lambie
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 321
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I see the beginnings of fingerpointing at the McMasters and Norman Springford. Fingers pointed everywhere but at the folk who now determine the direction of the club. The folk who are bankrolling the club because it's a bust.

 

But should this be the case, don't the voting figures suggest a degree of collusion between the two groups (and I appreciate describing them as groups may be over-egging it)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, just what the hell is going on?

 

I hope Jim Alexander does not object to me mentioning this, but he contacted me on the back of the questions I was asking re. Allan and Beattie's intentions to say he would walk if he got wind of a scheme to make money from the demise of the club.

 

Now, a few weeks later, this seemingly vocal opponent of Prop Co has been voted off the board. What's more, any mention of DB on the Harry Wragg FB page has been wiped from the records. Are certain members of the board holding a gun to the club's head?

 

Allan may be propping us up - how very Dundee FC - but I didn't realise until today that he didn't own any shares in the club. Yet he holds a stake in Prop Co and his employees appear to be responsible for the club's day-to-day management.

 

As McKennan says, it's an extremely tangled web they weave. Perhaps I was asking questions of the right people, just the wrong questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We might as well have a game of good guy/w@nk on the subject of the shsreholders and directors.

 

I've been reasonably close to the engine room at Firhell(pun intended) and the best that I can say for them is that they are a shower of arrogant self serving balloons who couldn't run a menage.

 

The fans don't and never will run the club, but very sadly it was too much to hope for that those who had made an arse of it for the last few years would retire gracefully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now this is all conjecture........

 

If the Trust had provided their support, there would have been enough votes their to guarantee them a place on the board regardless of the views of the current board of directors.....

 

.... but moreso, there would very probably have been enough votes for the old guard to get themselves back whether that's with or without the current board of directors.

 

I do believe that there was sufficient knowledge of the votes being in the bag (including proxies) that the outcome might have been assured. Whether this was made clear to the Trust or not remains to be seen, but you don't canvass support for something on the basis that you're not going to be succesful.

 

Anyway, nothing to beat a good conspiracy theory!!

 

Ok so the same shareholders who vote Jim out would effectively vote the JT in? Shocking.

 

Was thinking if it was a sure thing with or wothout the JT support then the best decision for the JTB to make would be to go with it and get a fan rep into the boardroom (particularly given those left have a particular interest in Propco) for 'the greatest good for the greatest number' but then I understand the point of principle being made by the JTB in rejecting the offer.

 

Worried, confused and a wee bit pi55ed off!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We might as well have a game of good guy/w@nk on the subject of the shsreholders and directors.

 

I've been reasonably close to the engine room at Firhell(pun intended) and the best that I can say for them is that they are a shower of arrogant self serving balloons who couldn't run a menage.

 

The fans don't and never will run the club, but very sadly it was too much to hope for that those who had made an arse of it for the last few years would retire gracefully.

 

This fiasco today was probably nothing more than crude revenge from the gang of failures who brought this club so low, but it probably suited everyone in that shocker of a boardroom to get the one genuine believer in fan involvement out the door.

 

The late and occasionally great Red Monkey shared an exchange he had with David Beattie on the working group for the CF/1876 merger. Beattie asked what we wanted. RM said £1 of shares for the fans for every £1 invested in the new scheme. Beattie burst out laughing and said, "But you'd end up owning the club!" RM said, "That's the idea."

 

So you got offered (and took) 10p of shares for every £1 to take the wheels off that wagon from day one. If Beattie ever offers the fans another deal, no matter how he dresses it up, remember what his true instincts are, what he thinks your money is worth compared to someone like his and which failed financial director is whispering in his ear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you got offered (and took) 10p of shares for every £1 to take the wheels off that wagon from day one. If Beattie ever offers the fans another deal, no matter how he dresses it up, remember what his true instincts are, what he thinks your money is worth compared to someone like his and which failed financial director is whispering in his ear.

DU, perhaps you can save this post for the date the "unique" scheme is unveiled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But should this be the case, don't the voting figures suggest a degree of collusion between the two groups (and I appreciate describing them as groups may be over-egging it)

 

Yes Allan, there's certain to be collusion/coincidence in voting. However, I get the impression that if we're looking at the politics of our boardroom then we rule out the most obvious doers first. Bankrolling a club doesn't mean a kiss on the foot from the fans. If folk here don't like the fact that Jim Alexander has been booted out and David Beattie had a foot in it, they should not be afraid to say so because he (David) has invested so heavily in the club and has a good PR touch.

 

Of course, David - if it was he and others - may have sound reasons for their actions. The trouble is, we'll probably never find out until one of the parties involved tell us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, David - if it was he and others - may have sound reasons for their actions. The trouble is, we'll probably never find out until one of the parties involved tell us.

 

Well, indeed. The "we're all in it together" line has limits usually defined by those with control of the pursestrings. Some of us are more "in it together" than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm disgusted with the way our club has been run, is being run and will no doubt be run until it is in the deck. Anything of note that has appeared at Firhill in recent years seems to have come from JA's input. Where does that leave us now with the PlopCo-Co seeming to be all we have left. I give us two years until we're in the mire and being told it's all OUR fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad to see Jim go, one of the good guys for definate. I'm sure that this will not be the last we hear from JJ :)

 

can someone please paste the facebook material of this onto this. Its bad enough that i've broken my no football forums policy without having to breach my no facebook policy by getting my account reactivated.

 

cheers

Edited by mrD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad to see Jim go, one of the good guys for definate. I'm sure that this will not be the last we hear from JJ :)

 

can someone please paste the facebook material of this onto this. Its bad enough that i've broken my no football forums policy without having to breach my no facebook policy by getting my account reactivated.

 

cheers

 

Your edit is noted. I had taken the original as sarcasm of the highest order ;):lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the figure of 4 million votes against Jim is true then even on the (unsubstantiated but plausible) presumption that Hughes, McMaster and Springford voted against the total would fall about 1 million short. As far as I know, only Prentice, Beattie and the Jags Trust (the latter-most who it seems voted in his favour) could have voted in such a way as to bring the figure comfortably over the 4 million mark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...