Guest red and breakfast Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Not suggesting for one moment that there is but who do you think would get their way if say: SL, as benefactor, wanted one candidate e.g. RobinsThe board and fans wanted another e.g. McInnesCould be a reason this saga is taking so long to sort out... all round!
Tales From The Front Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Not suggesting for one moment that there is but who do you think would get their way if say: SL, as benefactor, wanted one candidate e.g. RobinsThe board and fans wanted another e.g. McInnesCould be a reason this saga is taking so long to sort out... all round! Well lets hope not becuase the last time the board was split having to take a similar posistion we ended up with Pulis. I don't care what Pulis has achieved at Stoke..good for him, but he was never going to succeed here.
Chivs Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't understand why SL is being involved at all? What role does he have on the board?
Guest catcott_red1 Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't understand why SL is being involved at all? What role does he have on the board? he doesn't have a role on the board anymore. He shouldn't have any input at all, apart from this is what we can afford to pay him.
jimmer007 Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 He's still the majority shareholder, so Is still the main money man Bit like ambramovich at Chelsea, he doesn't do the day to day stuff yet he puts in the money. all cheques etc have to be signed off by SL It would be very awkward if Lansdown wanted one guy yet the rest of the board wanted another
havanatopia Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't understand why SL is being involved at all? What role does he have on the board? Rumour has it he counter signs the cheques. That is only according to my great aunt matilda (deceased) mind you.
KBbcfc Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't understand why SL is being involved at all? What role does he have on the board? Has SL actually had any involvement though? I have not read anything (except comments on this board) stating that he has
SC_Red Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't understand why SL is being involved at all? What role does he have on the board? its his money. I think he deserves to have an input baring in mind we cant afford a manager without him
Chivs Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 its his money. I think he deserves to have an input baring in mind we cant afford a manager without him If he handed over a large sum of money to the British Heart Foundation do you think he should be allowed to tell them how to run their charity? Of course he should have some input. That's what boards are for. But, he shouldn't have his cake and eat it.* *I have no idea what influence he has over this process....
pride of the west Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 SL has stated hes there to oversee and bankrole any business plan the board put before him. Preety much like any owner of a business whos not apointed to the board. Therfore to me, the board will choose a candidate, go to SL with said candidates and their plan and should he see it viable he will write the cheque. Whether or not this is realty nobody but those involved will know.
SC_Red Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 If he handed over a large sum of money to the British Heart Foundation do you think he should be allowed to tell them how to run their charity? Of course he should have some input. That's what boards are for. But, he shouldn't have his cake and eat it.* *I have no idea what influence he has over this process.... hardly the same thing as I'm sure you realise
BCAGFC Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I expect SL will leave it to the board, I think the Tinnion & Millen appointments/departures still leave a bad taste in the mouth for him. BCAGFC
Bristol_South_End Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 SL said the reason he stepped down as Chairman was to allow others to make the big decisions at the club after some of his previous appointments didn't work out
Pete1975Legend Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Well lets hope not becuase the last time the board was split having to take a similar posistion we ended up with Pulis. I don't care what Pulis has achieved at Stoke..good for him, but he was never going to succeed here. I don't want mcinness
Guest red and breakfast Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 If he handed over a large sum of money to the British Heart Foundation do you think he should be allowed to tell them how to run their charity? Of course he should have some input. That's what boards are for. But, he shouldn't have his cake and eat it.* *I have no idea what influence he has over this process.... We are skint, have had to pay up KMs contract. SL is our benefactor and I guess if he says"there is no way I am going to sanction a compensation payout for McInnes," then that limits the scope of choice for the board to make their choice from.
BCAGFC Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't want mcinness Lee Johnson or Cole Skuse for manager. BCAGFC
redfred Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 We are skint, have had to pay up KMs contract. SL is our benefactor and I guess if he says"there is no way I am going to sanction a compensation payout for McInnes," then that limits the scope of choice for the board to make their choice from. I'm quite sure SL will have been kept abreast of the Club's targets, so the notion that he has allowed the Club to approach a manager in work, when compensation is inevitable, just for him then to say "well I'm not paying compensation for a new manager, thank you very much" seems a bit ridiculous to me.
Turbored Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 If the board didnt have the say on the runing of the football club then suely there would be no reason for there to be one.?
Donald Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 He's not been directly involved to date and trusted sexstone with moyes and gould to narrow down options, but without doubt will be speaking to both of the McInnes and Robins before appointment and will put in his view. After all he pays the bills and has every right too.
Turbored Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 He's not been directly involved to date and trusted sexstone with moyes and gould to narrow down options, but without doubt will be speaking to both of the McInnes and Robins before appointment and will put in his view. After all he pays the bills and has every right too. How much influence do u think he will have Donald ? What if he wanted one candidate and the board wanted another , or do you think thats whats been hapening which is why its dragged on so long ? As there dont really seem to be any new candidates as to what there was 10 days ago.
Turbored Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 Moyes & Gould? Moyes - would be a no brainer........ Gould - Which one ??? if its the chap i am thinkinkg of it would be another no brainer.......NO !!
DT The Optimist Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I don't understand why SL is being involved at all? What role does he have on the board? Like its his football club! No Lansdown big problems for BCFC. Each year he buys up the £8 - 10 million loss. Without him (unless another came in) we would go to the wall, simple maths. The fact is he is really a tax exile and can only be in the UK for so many days a year (about 50) or HM Rev would be after his fortune. Why is SL involved. He has to OK paying off MILLEN, he might have to pay off others, he might have to write a big fat cheque to St Johnstone in compensation. While he is no longer the chairman, trust me, he is still the main man, with his son on the board, and Sexton his front man. I thank god for his love affair with this club and his dreams. His hopes and aspirations. I do worry what might happen still if the stadium ends in tears, we end up back in league One (which I doubt thanks to SL cheque book) Who else on the board has any funds ? Without him we are another Plymuff. Other thing I picked up is he returned today (Friday) from his hols in Africa. I bet he had a stinking phone bill Now we will see movement
Bobby kellard hero Posted October 14, 2011 Posted October 14, 2011 I know it probably won't happen but I hope SL is not allowed near any managerial appointments and leaves it to the current board.
Spud55 Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 Would it not make sense for the man who is going to be stumping up all the money for a new manager to potentially spend to be there when we talk to the prospective candidates ? We are hardly going to make ourselves look an attractive proposition if the board are interviewing candidates with no real idea of what resources we have available because we couldn't be arsed to involve SL in the process. Would be a fairly terrible interview, Sexton : So where would you like to see the club go in the future if you are given the job? New manager : What sort of resources are available? Sexton: no idea, we forgot to ask our owner for any input, so your guess is as good as mine, but he may stump up some cash if we ask nicely. New manager: Ummmm, bye then.
Superjack Posted October 15, 2011 Posted October 15, 2011 I'm quite sure SL will have been kept abreast of the Club's targets, so the notion that he has allowed the Club to approach a manager in work, when compensation is inevitable, just for him then to say "well I'm not paying compensation for a new manager, thank you very much" seems a bit ridiculous to me. SL is back off holiday and the very same day we get permission to talk to McInnes. Therefore it is clear to me that SL has sanctioned the compensation payment (barring an outrageous demand) 'in principle'. That said, he still may personally prefer another candidate.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.