AND180Y Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 You must be joking??? Err nope, I might be dreaming but was there not property shennanigans at Berwick too? Not saying that Wilson was involved but they don't seem to like him for some reason. The Berwick Trust and others bought him out earlier this year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Err nope, I might be dreaming but was there not property shennanigans at Berwick too? Not saying that Wilson was involved but they don't seem to like him for some reason. The Berwick Trust and others bought him out earlier this year. Must investigate this. What about the Tait fellow? Please not another tainted one? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghLivi Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 As said, Albert Tait was at Cowdenbeath with McDougall so I assume he's alright. 2 apparent shysters and 4 apparent good guys on the board. So 2 out of 3 times, this takeover will be a success 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 As said, Albert Tait was at Cowdenbeath with McDougall so I assume he's alright.2 apparent shysters and 4 apparent good guys on the board. So 2 out of 3 times, this takeover will be a success Oh god! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Edinburghlivi you have had it lad! I'm in trouble now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghLivi Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 What have I done? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 That seems to be the rumour going about. Is that bad? Depends on your perspective. Btw, he was on SFL Management Committee in 2007 & 2008, IIRC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Livi 293 Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Official Site Board Statement (also in programme v Montrose, although edited now to reflect past tense of game). No idea if it's been posted, can't really be arsed looking through this thread for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghLivi Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Depends on your perspective. Btw, he was on SFL Management Committee in 2007 & 2008, IIRC. May I ask what your perspective is? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 (edited) May I ask what your perspective is? I had no problem with Robert Wilson: in fact I think he tried to do his best for the club, although in the end it fell to pieces. But a great many fans disliked him... Even I don't regard him as any hero. I think the Trust and Supporters' Club in particular found him and his board difficult to deal with. There were some bar PR moves as well (sacking Paul Smith "in the car park") which didn't help... EDIT: I don't imagine McDougall etc. wanting him at Livi unless it is to contribute in some manner. Edited August 16, 2009 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 Message from the board.http://www.livingstonfc.co.uk/news_160809_1.php Loved this bit. Looks like Duncan was right!! Poster on Livilions talking about P&B users; Oh I always knew I was right about council involvement..............some council members more than others. There is one in particular who I would consider unfit to hold public office, but hey, that's the business of the people of West Lothian. If they can ever be arsed enough to turn over the right stones, the actions of their council just might surprise (or even shock) a few people. I always enjoy the LL views on P&B. Since 90% of the decent posters on here are debating stuff that is simply beyond the grasp of your average LL occupant, it's not exactly surprising. I'm sure we can all remember a time as kids when we thought Shakespeare was utter bollocks. Then you grow up a bit, and a bit of free thinking takes over, and you can see beyond the language of that time. Then you realize old William really was a pretty smart guy, and he captured the essence of what being human is all about. You might never become a Shakespeare devotee, but you do grasp that he was right in what he said. Of course, there are those who never make that sort of leap in understanding..........not in terms of Shakespeare, and not even much further down the foodchain to the likes of us chaps on P&B. They are forever trapped in a place where they gain comfort in their stilted views by finding others equally incapable of thinking both in and out of the box. They gain comfort from meeting people with a common interest who are in general terms, as dumb as they are. They end up in safe harbours like LL. Even when they have an inkling that people like us know better than people like them, (and it's been that way for years), they never get it, because they are incapable of connecting up the intellectual dots. They just live in the moment........a bit like spaniels. The big difference is that spaniels don't censor what they don't like. Spaniels can handle a bit of painful truth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghLivi Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 I had no problem with Robert Wilson: in fact I think he tried to do his best for the club, although in the end it fell to pieces. But a great many fans disliked him... Even I don't regard him as any hero.I think the Trust and Supporters' Club in particular found him and his board difficult to deal with. There were some bar PR moves as well (sacking Paul Smith "in the car park") which didn't help... EDIT: I don't imagine McDougall etc. wanting him at Livi unless it is to contribute in some manner. Well at least he's only a director and shouldn't be making any moves such as firing people in carparks etc. As you say, McDougall will certainly have him pulling his weight on the board otherwise, he'll be getting shot of. I'm sure that a Cowden supporter said that McDougall's directors usually have to put a bit of money into the club to keep their position. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 16, 2009 Share Posted August 16, 2009 We play Berwick next week Duncan another differance is that spaniels are soft, cute & cuddly, Livi fans are not! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghLivi Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 I don't know; I'd say I'm at least 2 out of those 3. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AND180Y Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 As said, Albert Tait was at Cowdenbeath with McDougall so I assume he's alright.2 apparent shysters and 4 apparent good guys on the board. So 2 out of 3 times, this takeover will be a success In other words you only know the history of the 2 apparent shysters and haven't looked at those you think are the 4 apparent good guys? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Some interesting things in the detail of that statement as it throws up some pointed issues IMO.I think it's always been pretty obvious that the Council would write-off a large portion of debt, AND reduce the stadium rental, to save the club... For Livi fans that is a good thing, and from a football fans perspective I suppose it's welcome too. However, if I was a citizen of West Lothian without a particular interest in the club, I might not be so happy at hundreds of thousands of £ being written off ... particularly if the Council will now, effectively, be subsiding the stadium? Have to say I'll be astonished if the club can avoid "spending outwith its means" in Div 3... but it is relevant to note the fact that corporate sponsors are mentioned. This may be a part-solution. This is what I personally find difficult to stomach. The appeal seems to basically be on 'severity of punishment' - which, firstly, should be up to the SFL (who've now voted on the issue twice - once by Management Committee and once by Clubs); and secondly, shouldn't be up to the SFA - IMO. Going by past-precedent alone - an appeal to the SFA on 'severity of sanction' won't be upheld. In a way, I was kind of hoping they'd found a loop-hole for which the SFL could be ham-strung. Keeping this damaging appeals process going over 'severity of sanction' disappoints me frankly!! Reasonably common name: presumably not Robert Wilson, former Berwick Rangers supremo ? While a valid point... it begs the question, as to why the situation the previous week was so far removed that the club found it necessary to scratch a scheduled league tie at 20 hours notice. Technically speaking, in appealling to the SFA the club agree not to subsequently take the case to Court... although of course in practice, they can if they wish. My personal hope if that should Livi lose the SFA appeal, they will call it a day there; and I also hope that (as was the case in the Hassan Kachloul affair...?) the threat of any judicial recourse will not pray upon SFA minds... Since their appeal is over severity of punishment (not application of rules, or whether or not SFL rules permit them to demote Livi), I'm not sure what judicial process would find in their favour...? Exactly the point I made last week. However, interesting to read McDougall say this in The Sun "We had the protection of the rules on our side last week when we were under appeal and called our game off. Im still struggling to see how they can come to that conclusion when the SFL, seemingly, told them otherwise. Is there a chance, as appalling as it would be, that they actually will get away with scratching their first game?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marty_j Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 Apparently cleared their debt and got them promoted originally, I wonder what went wrong... Erm he had an "interesting" relationship with the Berwick Trust. I'm sure he's over it now and he'll welcome your Trust with open arms. Money = power was one of the famous quotes from one of his former directors. He might bring him along as well as your new director of PR, now that WOULD be fun 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) In other words you only know the history of the 2 apparent shysters and haven't looked at those you think are the 4 apparent good guys? They can have all the good guys they like. Their "board" is not a democracy. The council may have effectively given the chancers the green light to progress to the last bit of asset stripping, (so you have to work who could benefit from this kind of action). Why was the council keen to recover public cash when Massone was in charge to the point where they took them to court, but now, things have changed..... Why are they not so keen to recover that money now that Rankine and MacDougall are on the scene? Why do the council have one policy for LFC rent, and a different one for everyone else? What is Rankine's real passion...........football club development, or property development? What property could possibly be involved in LFC? Who owns that property? Who could help shift that property from the public to the private sector? Why today would a public sector employee be so active in supporting a private sector company acquire LFC and then seek to make it as easy as possible for them to hold on to a piece of public property? Who could gain from the transfer of the property from the public to the private sector? Once in the private sector, how could the value of the property be fully realized? Think it through Livvy fans. You are being fed a few sugar lumps to keep you happy today. You'll be given the bitter pill to swallow in the fullness of time. Edited August 17, 2009 by Guest 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdinburghLivi Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 In other words you only know the history of the 2 apparent shysters and haven't looked at those you think are the 4 apparent good guys? No, I've done sufficient research with the fans of Cowdenbeath for Tait and McDougall, both helped make the club a great success in their time there. The other two "good guys" are Ged Nixon who I've spoken to personally and an elected trust member. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted August 17, 2009 Share Posted August 17, 2009 It's going to sound like I'm having another pop here, or that I want Livingston to fail. The latter, at least, is not true, I really do hope they can sort themselves out. But, alarm bells should be ringing all over the place here. You would think, after having a whole string of saviours in the past who all left you in the lurch, that some degree of credulity would be applied to the current lot, but there's no signs of it so far, just blind trust that he knows what he's doing. And maybe he does, or at least he's a considerable improvement on Massone, but then that's not exactly setting the bar high. Successful businessmen tend to be full of confidence, and almost invariable assume that their success is down to their own merits and business acumen without necessarily acknowledging that there's often a huge amount of luck involved, and no particular reason to suppose that that luck will stay with them in any future ventures. Simon Jordan and Mike Ashley would be two obvious examples from people who've ventured into the world of footie. McDougall and Rankine have already worked within football so they're notploughing in quite so naively into a new industry in anything like the same way. Nonetheless, anyone assuming that because McDougall has achieved (relative) success at Cowdenbeath that everything's going to be fine, without paying any attention to the available evidence, has not learned any of the lessons from the past few years and may well find themselves with a nasty shock coming sooner rather than later. The early signs are that the consortium have made at least some miscalculations - at the time the consortium made the initial commitment (in buying Massone's shares) Livi were a first division club and their sums were based on that. Granted, they could have pulled out subsequently but it's very difficult for people to write something off once they've already made an initial investment. I suspect they've also misestimated the support they'llget from the Livingston public, in either division but especially in the first. It's already pretty clear that the promised policy of living within their means is unsustainable based on their current plan, and their behaviour during the appeals process doesn't smack of great judgement either. I may have misassessed all that, the SFA might prove me wrong on the last point very soon and maybe they do have some brilliant business plan that will pull full-time levels of income from somewhere without them having to subsidise it. But like I say, if it were me, warning bells would be going off all over the place already for the new regime. 0 Quote Link to comment 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.