I was also told that Assem Allam, in his meeting with Geraghty, said he'd received two bids for the club, one with the freehold and one without. Whether there was only one bidder I wasn't told and didn't ask. During the name change campaign I found out that two sales had fallen through because there was no freehold. Two different sources providing similar information.
I don't think it would be a good idea to give this ****ing useless council £15-20 million, the ****ing idiots might go out and buy a cpl of battleships with it !!!!!
It's the standard response of our little clique of Likely Lads (birds of a feather, ...) to almost anything when they (the Likely Lads) are losing an argument. ''Interesting", no. "Witty", no. "Funny", to these goons, yes; to anyone else? No. It's absolutely shameful that a "moderator" should be allowed to get away with his continued attempts at vilification of a fellow poster. Super mods, it's way beyond time for you to step in and control this ego-driven 'moderator' bully and his little circle of friends; they do not represent the majority opinion on this board. These A-holes are ruining this otherwise-excellent HCAFC forum. I'm sick of it, and I am sure I am not alone.
Colin Inglis on the comments quoted in the HDM... 2 and 3 would probably be unlawful without approval from the Secretary of State which I doubt we would ask for. Your "senior Council source" needs to mug up on their law, anything less than a District Valuer valuation of the asset would be very difficult to achieve!
A question for originalLambrettaman I realise it may not be one you either can answer or have the answer but here goes anyway. Do you have any indication on the potential Chinese/Hong Kong new owners stance re the name change? Would they go down that route or not?
I'm also curious about how OLM is more certain this deal will go through than the US bid when a price was agreed in that one but hasn't been in this one.
He was also 100% certain that was it the were no other bidders after the yanks sulked off. So you know...
Never know the Allams seemed pretty intent on pushing through on the asian market and they were already talking about selling the clubs the chinese may have asked about it for obvious reasons and the Allams tried to do it,using petty excuses like the word city is common to try shorten it.
If they want to change the name then they can **** off too. However, I'm sure they will have noticed that it's quite an unpopular idea and is also not allowed by the FA so not really worth pursuing. I expect that the Allams also know this but apparently it's easier to go into battle with the supporters than hold their hands up and say they got it wrong. Most people would probably have acted differently so I'm going to assume that collectively this Chinese consortium has a bit more sense than to destroy a relationship between a club and it's customers.
OLM may have more information, but I think it is clear that Ehab ****ed up the USA deal, and now the old man is back at the helm, I think they just want rid now. They know this is likely to be the best chance of getting their money back, and probably making a reasonable profit from the whole thing.
If it was them that asked not saying it was then they would have got Allams to try the dirty work as they will not be here afterwards,seems a little bit of a coincidence to me though.
If they had done that then I'd have expected the Allam argument to have some real substance in terms of what could be expected in terms of increased exposure and revenue but there really was no compelling argument and that does make me suspect there was no real encouragement from any Asian party. I could be wrong, obviously, but I think it was just spiteful bollocks. The only thing that will bring exposure in the East and its additional revenue is on field success (and maybe a sprinkling of top Asian players to pique interest)
