Sports shield takeover

Straightforward question. 

With the takeover done and dusted, what is your initial reaction?

I'm still not 100% convinced that everything is kosher and above board. This sorry saga has dragged on and on for so long that I'm sure that there is an awful lot that us, the fans, have not been told.

I just hope the news has the desired effect on the pitch starting with our local derby with Preston tomorrow.

No. I think in the end (sooner than some might think) this deal is going to go sour and big time. I don't know how SSI can possibly do what needs to be done with the lack of money they have and I can't see them being able to pay the bills for more than a few months at which point they're probably hoping to sell us onto someone else with deeper pockets. I don't like or rate this deal really. I'm glad the taxman is off our backs for now but I fear it's a very short reprieve.

Something came to light last night which I can't divulge on here but I'm now far less sure about all this.

In the light of what I found out, I've now got some very real reservations about Sports Shield.

I'm not going to bang on about it and I wouldn't expect anybody to accept what I'm saying as fact, but I can honestly say that the person who told me is 100% trustworthy (we grew up in the same house) and the information I was given is 100% accurate and does not show SS in a good light at all.

In fact, I wouldn't touch anybody involved with a barge pole.

That's all I can say and I wouldn't expect anybody to take my word for it, but I'm more than a little concerned now.

Breadman wrote:Something came to light last night which I can't divulge on here but I'm now far less sure about all this.

In the light of what I found out, I've now got some very real reservations about Sports Shield.

Who told you, the mole or the horse?

For once, I'm not playing it for laughs.

This is serious.

Bloody hell bread. You can't just leave it at that! What do you know?  You can always use the word allegedly or something.

Sorry, mate.

I'm saying nowt.

Breadman wrote:Sorry, mate.

I'm saying nowt.

I prefer sir, if you don't mind. 

Sorry, my liege.

Breadman wrote:For once, I'm not playing it for laughs.

This is serious.

You bellend. So you've found out something the FL failed to?

Love it.

The Football League know all about it.

Why do you think they want to see the books every month for the next 18 months?

Do you know of any other takeover with that condition attached?

Breadman wrote:The Football League know all about it.

Why do you think they want to see the books every month for the next 18 months?

Do you know of any other takeover with that condition attached?

If you really do know something why are you scared to reveal it? Will you be killed?

How will ss approach the rest of the season I wonder. Do they waste some money on a lost cause and chase the dream of staying up or accept the fact we are as good as down whether they bring a few players in our not and save the money to put towards a league one promotion push next season?

they need to be realistic and expect us to go down and base their budgets going forward as a league 1 club. How we can do that in reality with so many high earners on the wage bill is beyond me

Breadman wrote:The Football League know all about it.

Are we supposed to guess what it is that is bad news for the club and yet has received the approval of both the FL and the Court?
It can't be lack of inward investment because we already know that SS are skint and there isn't going to be any, at least as far as team building is concerned.
It can't be asset -stripping because we already know they are going to have to sell everything that isn't nailed down just to keep us afloat.
We already know they are an investment company so will be preparing the business for onward sale as soon as is feasible, so what can there possibly be that we don't know already?

Or are you suggesting that the Court and the FL are party to some illegal activity?

Not at all.

As I've already said, I don't expect anyone to accept what I'm saying at face value and that's fair enough - I'd be the same.

The FL obviously have some reservations about the people involved and I now think I understand more about why this is.

In isolation, what we know about Anderson is mildly concerning but I've also now seen something else about someone else involved which concerns me greatly.

And that's all I'm saying.

If they've passed all checks from the football league, been vetted and passed, then that's good enough for me, despite what some fake mole says.

Well I was going to vote yes until I read Bread's message......Presumably it will be obvious to everyone when/if your suspicions are proved correct, Breaders......

Fuck sake.. So we've just got new owners after months of shite and already this is "going to turn sour". Give it a rest.