- This topic has 136 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated 1 week, 3 days ago by
.
-
And Swann is vital to the club getting GP back so we’d do well to remember that.
Wow and people wonder why this forum gets accused of having PS apologists.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Swann didn’t destroy our club, Hilton stepped in and could have saved it. He didn’t and nearly destroyed us.
I believe this is closer to the reality of it than anything else.
I’m no Swann apologist, but it was Hilton who actually had the opportunity to do good and right by the club and didn’t.
He did not ‘save it’ at all. He set it on a crash course.
He bitched and moaned about the previous owner, engaged in dubious social media PR, stoked division and incited others to make threats, sometimes behaving abominably when engaging with supporters himself. Let’s not forget he u-turned often and lied who knows when and how many times about who knows what. Gaslighting in extremis! We also don’t know if he actually did put any money in at all, or – as some suspect – just used the season ticket cash, the 1899 Ponzi, the turnstile income, the sponsorship deals and whatever else was lying around when he took over.
4 users thanked author for this post.
And Swann is vital to the club getting GP back so we’d do well to remember that.
Wow and people wonder why this forum gets accused of having PS apologists.
That’s not being an apologist, it’s being a realist. Swann owns Glanford Park and the surrounding land.
5 users thanked author for this post.
Swann didn’t destroy our club, Hilton stepped in and could have saved it. He didn’t and nearly destroyed us.
I believe this is closer to the reality of it than anything else.
I’m no Swann apologist, but it was Hilton who actually had the opportunity to do good and right by the club and didn’t.
He did not ‘save it’ at all. He set it on a crash course.
He bitched and moaned about the previous owner, engaged in dubious social media PR, stoked division and incited others to make threats, sometimes behaving abominably when engaging with supporters himself. Let’s not forget he u-turned often and lied who knows when and how many times about who knows what. Gaslighting in extremis! We also don’t know if he actually did put any money in at all, or – as some suspect – just used the season ticket cash, the 1899 Ponzi, the turnstile income, the sponsorship deals and whatever else was lying around when he took over.
If Swann’s legacy was to bring the club into financial crisis and calamitous mismanagement, Hilton’s is to stoke divisions within the fans for his own ends. Even now we have fans calling others Swann lovers for making pragmatic posts about dealing with him. I think That Crazy New Yorker’s reply is closer to the truth and that wretched owner will get no thanks for me for being one of two recent owners who have brought us to ruin.
1 user thanked author for this post.
… that wretched owner will get no thanks for me for being one of two recent owners who have brought us to ruin.
Neither should be thanked. But we still have one that we must deal with to get ourselves back into best position, so it’s politically prudent to not aggravate him.
This is the argument, I understand. I am not sure how much attention Swann pays to Iron Bru forum members, but I don’t think the argument is from any sympathy to his ownership.
Mark – I agree that he almost did, but he didn’t and I said one of two owners in my last post to include him. Both him and Hilton have caused us to nearly die. The club was still salvageable in January. It still is, hopefully.
1 user thanked author for this post.
If Swann didn’t destroy our club then why do we not own our ground and the land it stands on, and why were we sold to a conman for £3
Well first of all, the club still exists so he didn’t destroy it.
What he did do was severely wound it by splitting it from the ground and land.
1 user thanked author for this post.
So the new board, with less than 48 hours in office, are already the target of people seeking to promote division amongst supporters. UNITY is what we need.
6 users thanked author for this post.
Will Ian not so Sharp still be sueing the club now he’s a director, and if as I hope he isn’t will he issue an apology for doing so in the first place. Lots of humble pie to be eaten St Simon and Ian and of course all those who thought the sun shone out their bums.
As you’re so vocal on the subject, please can you confirm the terms of the transaction between the club and Ian Sharp?
1 user thanked author for this post.
Sorry I can only go on what St Simon printed on the tuther side, like I say if he was lying he owes an apology to everyone and especially to Sharp maybe fisty cuffs in the boardroom, if like siderite and others are claiming it was a loan it wouldn’t be a good start for him on the board to ask for it back but then again a bit 2 faced as he asked Hilton for it back. I’ll leave you to to decide loan or gift either way apologies needed all round.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Agreed DM, we know Awaywego has to be different but this constant arse kicking of people actively trying to help our club out of this current situation is counter productive IMO.
6 users thanked author for this post.
And wasn’t Hilton trying to save the club, didn’t stop everyone arse kicking him. And you should know I’m fully behind the chairman like I have every other one while money’s being spent. Not many can say that.
1 user thanked author for this post.
And 1`m sure that all the previous chairmen have all taken the appropriate level of comfort from knowing that you were fully behind them.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I wonder if the narrative that honest Dave was trying to save the club will last after The Athletic part 2. I suspect such claims will lookeven sillier.
1 user thanked author for this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.