Jump to content


Photo

ton v alloa


  • Please log in to reply
439 replies to this topic

#1 beetee

beetee

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 298 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 10:52 AM

are yous all up for it lol


  • -1

#2 Jamie_M

Jamie_M

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5164 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 10:57 AM

1 nil Morton HT, 1-2 FT
  • 0

#3 so72

so72

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 490 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 07 April 2019 - 11:14 AM

Goodwin has our number but full of hope that the players take responsibility and win this one.
  • 0

#4 DreamOakTree

DreamOakTree

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 12:21 PM

1 nil Morton HT, 1-2 FT


I’m hoping Alloa’s midweek Record continues on Tuesday, I think they’ve lost every midweek game this season although it’s only a handful of games. They play a high pressing energetic game which may be more difficult after a day’s work!
  • 0

#5 DreamOakTree

DreamOakTree

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 66 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 05:17 PM

are yous all up for it lol


Lol at who?
  • 0

#6 EanieMeany

EanieMeany

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5633 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2019 - 05:51 PM

I don't really see that the identity of the other shareholders is particularly relevant anyway. They're not doing anything outrageous, whether we like it or not; they certainly don't deserve to be painted as villains.
  • 0

AWMSC


#7 beetee

beetee

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 298 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 05:52 PM

Lol at who?

the ones that arent lol


  • 0

#8 Lord Volvic

Lord Volvic

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:01 PM

I don't really see that the identity of the other shareholders is particularly relevant anyway. They're not doing anything outrageous, whether we like it or not; they certainly don't deserve to be painted as villains.

I think steve is suggesting they don't actually exist. There's certainly no evidence at Companies House that they do.

So I guess the question is, is Crawford telling the whole truth?
  • 0

#9 Alan_Partridge_Ton

Alan_Partridge_Ton

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 466 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:08 PM

I think steve is suggesting they don't actually exist. There's certainly no evidence at Companies House that they do.

So I guess the question is, is Crawford telling the whole truth?


There’s a hole in your bucket!
  • 0

#10 irnbru

irnbru

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:23 PM

I think steve is suggesting they don't actually exist. There's certainly no evidence at Companies House that they do.

So I guess the question is, is Crawford telling the whole truth?


Companies House wouldn't list shareholders - just directors. A shareholder doesn't necessarily need to be a director.
  • 0

#11 Lord Volvic

Lord Volvic

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:25 PM

Companies House wouldn't list shareholders - just directors. A shareholder doesn't necessarily need to be a director.

Companies House list 'Persons With Significant Control'.
  • 0

#12 irnbru

irnbru

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:34 PM

Companies House list 'Persons With Significant Control'.


Which is over 25% of shares. Not necessarily the case here.
  • 0

#13 Lord Volvic

Lord Volvic

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 149 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:57 PM

Which is over 25% of shares. Not necessarily the case here.

Try looking in the right place.
  • 0

#14 Jamie_M

Jamie_M

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5164 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 06:59 PM

I don't really see that the identity of the other shareholders is particularly relevant anyway. They're not doing anything outrageous, whether we like it or not; they certainly don't deserve to be painted as villains.

 

'Other' shareholders. It's not exactly like needing to know the identity of a few fans with a few shares, it's expecting to know who has the controlling interest in the club and is driving policy for the negative. 

 

Anyway, wrong thread when this discussion was on the other.

 

Back on topic - Goodwin School of tactics to get another showing. 


Edited by Jamie_M, 07 April 2019 - 07:00 PM.

  • 0

#15 irnbru

irnbru

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 07 April 2019 - 07:03 PM

'Other' shareholders. It's not exactly like needing to know the identity of a few fans with a few shares, it's expecting to know who has the controlling interest in the club and is driving policy for the negative.

They aren't driving anything. They are just saying the GC's money shouldn't be used to subsidise another business. It's entirely reasonable and what they should be doing. If anything, they are actually doing a good thing for the club as they aren't asking for money back under the current owners and even more importantly, would write it off for new owners.

Edit to add - the shareholders who've said that are the GC end. That's why the club can no longer use them as a source of money. It's not them dictating how the club is run.

Edited by irnbru, 07 April 2019 - 07:07 PM.

  • 0

#16 irnbru

irnbru

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 07 April 2019 - 07:03 PM

Try looking in the right place.


What do you want me to look at? A company doesn't need to list all their shareholders.
  • 0

#17 cmdc

cmdc

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4958 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 07 April 2019 - 07:07 PM

I think steve is suggesting they don't actually exist. There's certainly no evidence at Companies House that they do.

So I guess the question is, is Crawford telling the whole truth?


Then steve should stick to his Netflix conspiracy documentaries.
  • 0

#18 beetee

beetee

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 298 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 07:17 PM

They aren't driving anything. They are just saying the GC's money shouldn't be used to subsidise another business. It's entirely reasonable and what they should be doing. If anything, they are actually doing a good thing for the club as they aren't asking for money back under the current owners and even more importantly, would write it off for new owners.

Edit to add - the shareholders who've said that are the GC end. That's why the club can no longer use them as a source of money. It's not them dictating how the club is run.

yes but still wonder who they are


Edited by beetee, 07 April 2019 - 07:18 PM.

  • -1

#19 beetee

beetee

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 298 posts

Posted 07 April 2019 - 07:25 PM

Then steve should stick to his Netflix conspiracy documentaries.

if your meaning me im not steve an I trust big jed  he never said there was a conspiricy jist theres no new shareholders an folk can check easy if they want


  • 0

#20 irnbru

irnbru

    GMFC Supporter

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 5383 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 07 April 2019 - 07:39 PM

if your meaning me im not steve an I trust big jed he never said there was a conspiricy jist theres no new shareholders an folk can check easy if they want


Aye he meant you, Ernie.
  • 2


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users