Pedrodelawasp

It’s pretty decent. I first used it a couple of years ago to buy a ticket for a game away at Hamilton. Someone representing one of our players at the time had invited me and my dad along, but turned out there were only two complimentary tickets left at the desk. So I downloaded the app, registered and had my ticket bought within the five minutes or so I was in the queue for the turnstile.

Concentrating on ancient historic minerals. Potential contract offer for Broadfoot?

“An opportunity has presented itself in another country which he is keen to pursue”

Recent Tumilty chat reminded me of past Tumilty chat. Nothing deeper than that.

Kits are a relatively low level concern in comparison to the obvious big-ticket issues, but presumably we’re all capable of taking an interest in multiple things at once. In this case considering how the kits look might affect sales as well as them being ordered and manufactured with a logo for a company who’s still to be confirmed as shirt sponsor for next season.

Notice they’ve changed the socks to some of Joma’s standard plain ones rather than the white with blue tops from the design. ETA: Not a complaint, just an incredibly dull observation.

There was one where the blue hoops were narrower than the white, sort of a nod to the pinstripes, but still horizontal

My sincere condolences to you and your family

This section from the original proposal: The GMFC Board as outlined above, would work in tandem with the MCT Board, the vision would be to have these two Boards operating virtually as one – indeed, the longer-term option may well be to have one larger Board. This rings some particular alarm bells for me. If the two boards were to operate in tandem for a season and things ostensibly went well, that could be used as justification for formalising the arrangement by amalgamating the boards, marking a material change to the ownership/operational structure. While the proposal and the FAQ have both made allusions to MCT shares being ‘safe’ in the sense GMFC cannot sell or transfer them, the specific question around the raising of new share issues is unanswered, and would seem an even more likely possibility under a newly amalgamated board where the owners are represented as a minority. As presumably all supporters do, I really want an investor with the genuine intentions of supporting and continuing the fan ownership model and motivated to improve how that operates. I don’t want to appear to be dismissive, suspicious or overly pessimistic about the offer either. However, if the position of Dalrada, the GMFC board and the interim MCT board are legitimate, again, I believe they have to be understanding of fans’ hesitancy and need to do all they can to address that fully before expecting the proposal to be voted through. The chance to do so should really be welcomed as part of their stated drive towards transparency and good governance.

Had forgotten about that particular experiment!

Here’s some fun news to cheer everybody up: Queen’s Park have to find savings in the region of FOUR POINT SEVEN MILLION POUNDS

If those drafting the proposal are to be taken at their word that they truly only have the best intentions for the club and fanbase, a ‘no’ vote should not represent an immediate end of their interest. People with a genuine desire to improve things for the club and the community would respond by trying to ascertain why the vote didn’t go in their favour and formulate a series of amendments to get the deal over the line. There should be no room for an “offer” to be made in a strong armed manner that suggests the ownership can either take it or get stuffed.

Potentially an even bigger debacle than the One Pounders episode!