|
|
Post by axegas on Nov 20, 2015 14:51:25 GMT
They are doomed if mcCrory takes over, just ask any swindon fan
|
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 14:57:35 GMT
You sense they are doomed anyway!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 20, 2015 15:10:29 GMT
I thought someone confirmed it wasn't McCrory.
|
|
|
|
Post by aghast on Nov 20, 2015 15:13:44 GMT
I thought someone confirmed it wasn't McCrory. They were making that up. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 15:48:14 GMT
NH already has already said he doesn't know of a consortium - what more do you want? I honestly can not comprehend why the direction of questioning is being turned towards the subject of a rumour when the source of the rumour on this forum has conclusively been proved to be a liar. Assuming you accept JTS' tweet for the FFS exists then he hasn't been proved a liar? Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk Why do you find it so difficult to read what I've read before responding? I said "nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June". Remember that GasinCider says the tweet he's referring to is NOT JTS's. So yes he has been proved a liar. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 15:50:07 GMT
NH already has already said he doesn't know of a consortium - what more do you want? I honestly can not comprehend why the direction of questioning is being turned towards the subject of a rumour when the source of the rumour on this forum has conclusively been proved to be a liar. But he hasn't what he said was he'd like to know who the so called consortium are, not they don't exist. Read what you will into that comment. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk Following that logic you'd sell your house without knowing who the buyer is. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 15:50:40 GMT
Not sure what that proves though as JTS was tweeting about a consortium at the same time, and even GD tweeted about it!
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
|
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 15:50:47 GMT
What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Nick Higgs and the Board have to address a rumour promulgated by someone who won't even say where they allegedly saw the information on twitter. If you want to find out where GasinCider got his twitter info from you can easily find out for yourself. Go to twitter and type in the search box "Bristol Rovers Consortium" and look at the results - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Takeover" (if you want to be really thorough try "Take over" as two words too). - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Investor" - guess what you get? Nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff Do the same for "Bristol Rovers Investment", "Bristol Rovers £40m", "Bristol Rovers £40,000,000" "Bristol Rovers 40 million" "Bristol Rovers forty million". You can even go all out and just do "Bristol Rovers" and trawl all the way back through August and September. Can you see where I'm going with this? GasinCider's twitter source is a figment of his imagination. Holy feck!!! yous really needz tae get oot more pal Why? |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 15:54:03 GMT
Not sure what that proves though as JTS was tweeting about a consortium at the same time, and even GD tweeted about it! Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk I'm sorry, I'm really not trying to be personal but you're simply not responding to what I've posted. You're not sure what what proves? GasinCider said the tweet he saw was NOT JTS's. There is no other tweet BEFORE 18th September referencing a consortium. GasinCider says there is. It proves that what GasinCider says is not true. |
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Nov 20, 2015 15:54:09 GMT
He named it himself - a public tweet on twitter. But obviously he can't say by who or what it said because that public tweet available for the entire internet to see is confidential information. And by the way that public tweet contained a confidential document that made him 100% sure there is a consortium takeover bid. His words not mine. Well, you've called me a liar twice now, so to show you aren't, can you show me where I said I saw a confidential document on Twitter? I certainly don't recall that |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 15:56:31 GMT
He named it himself - a public tweet on twitter. But obviously he can't say by who or what it said because that public tweet available for the entire internet to see is confidential information. And by the way that public tweet contained a confidential document that made him 100% sure there is a consortium takeover bid. His words not mine. Well, you've called me a liar twice now, so to show you aren't, can you show me where I said I saw a confidential document on Twitter? I certainly don't recall that There's an easy way to prove you're not a liar. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 15:58:30 GMT
Suggest you read your post, you suggested NH didn't know of a consortium not he was unaware who they were.
Talking about selling a house to somebody I don't know is a bit ironic, as I sold my last house to ex pat leaving in South Africa who to this day I've never met! Although if the consortium does exist I'm sure NH now knows who they are.
Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
|
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Nov 20, 2015 15:59:44 GMT
What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Nick Higgs and the Board have to address a rumour promulgated by someone who won't even say where they allegedly saw the information on twitter. If you want to find out where GasinCider got his twitter info from you can easily find out for yourself. Go to twitter and type in the search box "Bristol Rovers Consortium" and look at the results - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Takeover" (if you want to be really thorough try "Take over" as two words too). - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Investor" - guess what you get? Nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff Do the same for "Bristol Rovers Investment", "Bristol Rovers £40m", "Bristol Rovers £40,000,000" "Bristol Rovers 40 million" "Bristol Rovers forty million". You can even go all out and just do "Bristol Rovers" and trawl all the way back through August and September. Can you see where I'm going with this? GasinCider's twitter source is a figment of his imagination. Well, you got me gov. I'll tell you coz you won't find it otherwise. I asked ' can you confirm whether it's true or not? Reply. Yes 100% Key that in and enjoy. Does that help? Or are you expecting a dozen pages on Twitter? Oh hang on, there's a word limit of some sort. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 16:06:52 GMT
What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Nick Higgs and the Board have to address a rumour promulgated by someone who won't even say where they allegedly saw the information on twitter. If you want to find out where GasinCider got his twitter info from you can easily find out for yourself. Go to twitter and type in the search box "Bristol Rovers Consortium" and look at the results - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Takeover" (if you want to be really thorough try "Take over" as two words too). - nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff in June. Try "Bristol Rovers Investor" - guess what you get? Nothing before September 18th this year apart from the Chris Samuelson stuff Do the same for "Bristol Rovers Investment", "Bristol Rovers £40m", "Bristol Rovers £40,000,000" "Bristol Rovers 40 million" "Bristol Rovers forty million". You can even go all out and just do "Bristol Rovers" and trawl all the way back through August and September. Can you see where I'm going with this? GasinCider's twitter source is a figment of his imagination. Well, you got me gov. I'll tell you coz you won't find it otherwise. I asked ' can you confirm whether it's true or not? Reply. Yes 100% Key that in and enjoy. Does that help? Or are you expecting a dozen pages on Twitter? Oh hang on, there's a word limit of some sort. You still can't find your highly confidential "source" tweet then no? You know, the one that someone posted publicly on twitter but wished to remain anonymous. Remember? That one that made you "100%" sure your rumour is true? No? Oh. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 16:08:58 GMT
Suggest you read your post, you suggested NH didn't know of a consortium not he was unaware who they were. Talking about selling a house to somebody I don't know is a bit ironic, as I sold my last house to ex pat leaving in South Africa who to this day I've never met! Although if the consortium does exist I'm sure NH now knows who they are. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk I didn't suggest anything. I said NH had said he didn't know who they were. Which is exactly what he said. If you knew it was an ex pat living in South Africa you didn't sell it to someone and not know who they are. |
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Nov 20, 2015 16:14:45 GMT
I'm sorry, I'm really not trying to be personal but you're simply not responding to what I've posted. You're not sure what what proves? GasinCider said the tweet he saw was NOT JTS's. There is no other tweet BEFORE 18th September referencing a consortium. GasinCider says there is. It proves that what GasinCider says is not true. Where did I say there was a tweet referencing a consortium, do share it with me. At least you said ' it's not true', this time. Of course if you're lying that wouldn't be very nice now would it. And far as I recall I said something like 'I see from Twitter'. Memory dimming now, but the only bit you have right, is that it was not JTS's tweet. Apart from that you've pretty much fabricated your whole argument which is quite sad. Or are you just so clever I've missed the whole thrust of your argument? |
|
|
|
Post by gasincider on Nov 20, 2015 16:20:11 GMT
You know, the one that someone posted publicly on twitter but wished to remain anonymous. Remember? That one that made you "100%" sure your rumour is true? No? Oh. Now I'm baffled. I've just posted it minus two names. Gosh you nearly tricked me into that one. I'd better explain so you can rest easy tonight laddy. Most of my communications are by phone or email. On the day in question I had confirmation of an issue I had known about, and made numerous phone calls and emails about over several weeks. On receipt of the answer to the tweet, I then posted on here. I won't name the names relevant to this, but if you can't see the wood for the trees, I can't help you. Mind, you, I might be lying. |
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 20, 2015 16:24:24 GMT
Suggest you read your post, you suggested NH didn't know of a consortium not he was unaware who they were. Talking about selling a house to somebody I don't know is a bit ironic, as I sold my last house to ex pat leaving in South Africa who to this day I've never met! Although if the consortium does exist I'm sure NH now knows who they are. Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk I didn't suggest anything. I said NH had said he didn't know who they were. Which is exactly what he said. If you knew it was an ex pat living in South Africa you didn't sell it to someone and not know who they are. I think your memory is playing tricks as you clearly said something slightly different 3 hours ago lordjusticegashead said: NH already has already said he doesn't know of a consortium - what more do you want? Not knowing of a consortium and not knowing who the consortium are are clearly slightly different. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 16:33:16 GMT
You know, the one that someone posted publicly on twitter but wished to remain anonymous. Remember? That one that made you "100%" sure your rumour is true? No? Oh. Now I'm baffled. I've just posted it minus two names. Gosh you nearly tricked me into that one. I'd better explain so you can rest easy tonight laddy. Most of my communications are by phone or email. On the day in question I had confirmation of an issue I had known about, and made numerous phone calls and emails about over several weeks. On receipt of the answer to the tweet, I then posted on here. I won't name the names relevant to this, but if you can't see the wood for the trees, I can't help you. Mind, you, I might be lying. So now it's not twitter it's phone and email? Had that slipped your mind when you posted the OP then? You get more and more believable every time you post I'm sure. I've fabricated nothing. Everything you've said is there for all to see on this thread. |
|
|
|
Post by LJG on Nov 20, 2015 16:34:28 GMT
I didn't suggest anything. I said NH had said he didn't know who they were. Which is exactly what he said. If you knew it was an ex pat living in South Africa you didn't sell it to someone and not know who they are. I think your memory is playing tricks as you clearly said something slightly different 3 hours ago lordjusticegashead said: NH already has already said he doesn't know of a consortium - what more do you want? Not knowing of a consortium and not knowing who the consortium are are clearly slightly different. Like I said. By that logic you'd be prepared to sell your house without knowing who was buying it. |
|
