Quote M@islebugs="M@islebugs"Ernst Young has an iffy reputation? They're not part of an anti-Hood conspiracy are they? It's many years ago when I had dealings with them but they were very thorough and took no poop from anyone. www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... wer_Elima/ EGM to be held by 23rd May. Bradford Badger rightly points out there are legal responsibilities to be adhered to but 7 weeks from Caisley's statement to the T and A and over two months from the initial statement?[size=150 Something tells me spiting the great Satan that is Chris Caisley is much more important than getting any resolution to the situation we are in.[/size And as for those saying Caisley would take us into administration, this is as bad if not worse.'" Pot? Kettle? Black anyone? Coming from someone whose main aim seems to have been getting rid of the current chairman and not what's best for the club, I find that a bit rich.

Quote M@islebugs="M@islebugs"Ernst Young has an iffy reputation? They're not part of an anti-Hood conspiracy are they? It's many years ago when I had dealings with them but they were very thorough and took no poop from anyone. www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... wer_Elima/ EGM to be held by 23rd May. Bradford Badger rightly points out there are legal responsibilities to be adhered to but 7 weeks from Caisley's statement to the T and A and over two months from the initial statement?[size=150 Something tells me spiting the great Satan that is Chris Caisley is much more important than getting any resolution to the situation we are in.[/size And as for those saying Caisley would take us into administration, this is as bad if not worse.'" Pot? Kettle? Black anyone? Coming from someone whose main aim seems to have been getting rid of the current chairman and not what's best for the club, I find that a bit rich.

Not sure that can be right. If, as appears, Caisley has the backing of other shareholders such that he with them can call meetings and get through anything they want, it follows that he could (with their backing) have "got rid" of Hood long before now if that had been his aim?



What is now best for the club? I'll be perfectly honest and with a heavy heart and a sense of doom, say I'm fscked if I know

If Caisley's plan is to place the club into administration, would we not see all 'Other' shareholders rejecting his appointment, as they would be signing away their interest in the Bulls? (business politics are not my strong point).



The article in the YP is quite worrying really. Even the shareholders want to get involved and help out, but the impression they are giving, is that they are being pushed away.



I'm starting to take the view that, I don't care who is the Chairman, as long as we have a Club, in Superleague, keeping our young 'home grown' players.

Whether other shareholders support him I suspect is dependent on deals being done in private. I can't see caisley having financial clout to be able to buy the club outright from administrators. I'd imagine if any of other bigger shareholders are backing him it's because their part of his consortium to buy club out of admin and they would end up with a similar % shareholding to what they have now with caisley ending up with 51%+. suspect the reason ffor delay in EGM is that one or two of bigger shareholders are sitting on the fence. They'll back hood if he can get investment as that means they avoid having to put money in themselves. If no investment then they back caisley but have to put money in to retain their shareholding.

Has anyone any evidence to support the view that Caisley would put the club into administration?

Sorry guys, but the trouble with these kind of threads is that it's all what if, what if, what if.

I for one am getting fed up that the club seems to be still doing things a bit cloak and dagger, and we as paying supporters of the club shold have a right to know what is going on and if we are still going to have a club to support.

What if . . . they don't know?

I'm starting to believe they don't know whats going on!!!

Its the lack of any evidence that he has any other plan, combined with him trying to do exactly that last year, thats the worrying bit. If Caisley came out and outline what his actual plans are then he might get a more sympathetic hearing.As it is he's sat on the sidelines calling for board to resign and through various stooges demanding to know what plans the current board has to address the situation. yet he won't put forward any other options other than a mention of a review of clubs structure. No mention of any potential investment.



IF he does have investment lined up and its conditional on him returning as chairman then effectively he's putting his own interests ahead of the clubs. Get the investment into the club and stabilise it and then surely he'd get the backing of majority of shareholders at an EGM to become the chairman. Its the fact he isn't doing it that way thats making it look likely that he views administration as best alternative combined with his lack of comment on the possibility.

Then, having said they wouldn't take our money unless they did know, they have cemented their already considerable reputation as lying liars who lie.

I read it. Unlike some mugs I do not believe everything that is said / reported. You believe it if you need to.

That could be the case. Pure speculation but well possible - maybe there was a possibility of a deal with someone, who will no longer play as the board he is dealing with are likely to be removed at an EGM in a month? I'd guess that trying to persuade people to invest sizeable money when you're on borrowed time yourself may be less than easy.



Certainly though the intervention by Caisley, and the EGM elephant in the room, did arise [ibefore[/i they took our money. I can't find the original statement. The only one I can find is the FAQ on the Bulls site which states:

"=#FF0000Do not send us any money at this stage. When we make the £500 000 target you will be required to make payment immediately. You will be able to make your payment via the phone, online, at the ticket office or by cheque.



What if we don't reach our target of £500,000?



We will not ask you for any money. "