15-05-2021, 11:14 AM
(15-05-2021, 09:55 AM)exgaffer Wrote:(14-05-2021, 09:13 PM)BilltheCat Wrote: "Simply because at the time selling up appeared a better option for the club".
So you were told. The Trust was perfectly sustainable and could have continued to run the club to this day. The Eisners have spent fvck-all more than would have been available to the Community Club.
Catlin sold you the lie because it created a better paid opportunity for himself.
Be honest. How much further along is the club now than when it was run by people who actually cared?
‘The Eisners have spent fvck-all more than would have been available to the Community Club’.
With that one statement you completely remove any credibility from your argument BTC.
I liked being a shareholder ffs but the fact is we just didn’t have the money, if we had we wouldn’t have sold our shares.
Try taking the Socialist ‘all Yanks are evil, Catlin was only in it to feather his own nest’ hat off ffs.
We are mixing up two things: Catlin's personal credibility and Tornante's track record.
As it happens, I tend to agree with some of BTC's observations regarding the ownership.
Where I wholly depart from his view is his slander of Mark Catlin.
I just don't see why those two events have to be inextricably linked.
We are not back in the Chainrai years. There is no evidence of any misconduct or ulterior motive from our CEO.
The only source is a poisonous imagination.