simplythebest 0 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 The idea of someone getting our costs down and not letting sentiment get in the way is appealing, but Llambias treated the support with contempt and didn't seem to care about wasting money other ways. He wasn't the man for it at all 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little General 80 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Just because we disagree doesn't make me deluded. The Board who were in charge of the Club at the time determined that the finance offer from Ashley was the best available at the time and set out the details to the RFB. If any director failed in their duty to the Club then I have no doubt that KingCo will hold them to account. But I would not rely on anything King says in that regard unless it could be independently established as a fact. I have already said twice that Leach's position was untenable after his comments about T3B. When and what particular action(s) of Llambias rendered him unfit for his executive position? and it never occurred to you that he was lying through his teeth. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 and it never occurred to you that he was lying through his teeth. Yes of course it did given his at best previous association with Ashley and appointment as one of his placemen but I don't have the evidence to dispute the statements they put out regarding the finance deals and I do not regard Mr King as a reliable source in that connection. I just hope that if we spend another fortune on forensic accounting it is all worthwhile. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Yes of course it did given his at best previous association with Ashley and appointment as one of his placemen but I don't have the evidence to dispute the statements they put out regarding the finance deals and I do not regard Mr King as a reliable source in that connection. I just hope that if we spend another fortune on forensic accounting it is all worthwhile. what abot the fact they had to remove 3 board members to get it through 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Staff cuts are a classic way of saving money, whether the cuts that were made were appropriate at the time is another matter. Sure. I've done it myself plenty of times. However I understand that if you made a marketing enquiry you ended up being put through to Ashley marketing staff. if that's the case then it suggests that Ashley was benefitting from it and the saving being made were not all that they appeared to be. You know better than most that it will be up to whoever challenges previous director's decisions to prove that they did not act in the best interests of the company or that they had a conflict of interests. Sure. A lot of director's decisions are subjective but there is enough evidence to suggest that there was a conflict of interest, particularly as Llambias was appointed as a representative of Ashley. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to join the dots. I really don't see how anyone looking at it objectively can say otherwise. Whether it would be enough to stand up in a court, or if it's worth the time and effort is another matter, but just because you can't prove something definitively doesn't mean that it didn't happen. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Yes of course it did given his at best previous association with Ashley and appointment as one of his placemen but I don't have the evidence to dispute the statements they put out regarding the finance deals and I do not regard Mr King as a reliable source in that connection. Why are you make a judgement on King in this matter but not the directors? There has been plenty of evidence of the directors being untruthful over the past few months. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 Why are you make a judgement on King in this matter but not the directors? There has been plenty of evidence of the directors being untruthful over the past few months. Because a judge ruled that Mr King ""has no respect for the truth and does not hesitate to lie...etc etc and "is a glib and shameless liar"." 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 But why not the other directors? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted March 10, 2015 Author Share Posted March 10, 2015 Because a judge ruled that Mr King ""has no respect for the truth and does not hesitate to lie...etc etc and "is a glib and shameless liar"." And Llambias has been caught lying several times recently. So the question still stands. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted March 10, 2015 Share Posted March 10, 2015 But why not the other directors? And Llambias has been caught lying several times recently. So the question still stands. If someone has evidence of malfeasance by any past director of the Club then I would welcome them reporting that to the relevant authorities for investigation and prosecution if appropriate. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.