Sale is off! - or maybe not!

I read this earlier and was intrigued (as a non-resident) to read his very clear and deliberate comment. He very clearly refutes previously publishised versions of his view and states Hull is very clearly a Football City. He seems to embrace the whole concept of football success.

That should, I believe, be taken as a huge move forward in civic relations. Just a change of ownership needed and a common desire to move forward on all fronts.

 

It may well be FACT, but i have found FACTS unreliable and incomplete in the past.

Did the club owe him a promotion bonus, or any other monies?
Did he pay the full amount they claimed?
Was he liable for expenses of all parties?

I assume you know this, as it is critical to forming a judgement; a bit more FACT would be useful.

 

That Geraghty interview is very interesting.

He's said the exact opposite of what most of us would have expected. He openly and proudly says that Hull is a football City and he champions the City's potential for footballing success, which the Allams and their supporters don't. He states that they'd be happy to talk about developing the stadium.

As for Duffen, for a while I've been tempted to give him the benefit of the doubt regarding the finances, but there have been accusations about him stealing from the club such as those on this thread, and we know that the club took legal action against him leading to the out of court settlement. I also believe that tweet is probably real based on the various posts on this thread about it. I'd stay well away even though he has some skills that the Allams and their minions sorely lack.

What's also telling is his own explanation for his involvement in the talks. He says he's helping the Allams find a buyer as a close friend of theirs. That still doesn't add up with the previous animosity following the Allams' takeover and the legal action, but in any case it speaks volumes of both parties that they're friends with one another and working together. Both Allams and Duffen; all three are shady types who'd lie to anyone to get what they want.

 

I kind of agree with the unquoted element of your post, but, as I have said to OLM, I would prefer to have more information before condemning Duffen on this so-called theft allegation. As well as the questions I asked of OLM, can you assist with these:

Did the club owe him a promotion bonus, or any other monies?
Did he pay the full amount they claimed?
Was he liable for expenses of all parties?

Also:

Was it a criminal, or a civil action against Duffen?
Is the word 'steal' appropriate?
Is Assem Allam aware of the full details?
Do we seriously think AA would bring such a tarnished figure into his negotiations? If so, why?
Why is it that the less than exemplary charactor of Bartlett is not considered in al of these assumptions?

I guess my main concern (as I really don't have the answers) is that these threads will hang, draw and quarter someone who, if not as foul as it appears, could be a useful asset to our club. If you can prove him a liar and thief then hang him high.

 

I think Bartlett borrowed money using the SMCs future earnings as security?

 

We know very little about it so no it's not proven that he stole from the club. I'd be happy to be wrong in believing that because as I said, he does have some very useful skills which the current personnel at the club really lack.

Based on what we do know, we can't be sure, but I'm sure that OLM has a credible source for the claim and it does add up with him being taken to court by the club.

 

2 things jump out at me when you hear the Duffen talk.

1 if AA is willing to rebuild bridges (something he doesn't do) in order to get Duffens help in the sale then it shows just how utterly desperate they are to get rid of the club.

1 Duffen is many things be he isn't a fool. He knows anyone who takes 30 seconds can find out how dodgy he is and he knows he was close to jail.
He will know the new potential owners will be watching him like a hawk and he won't get the probable latitude he got before.

PLT is right however in that Duffen does have skills that the club currently lack. When you add all that together I don't have a problem with Duffen as the mouth piece of the owners if he is on a tight leash as I think he will be.

 

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice...
Duffen has got brass balls, returning to the scene of the crime. The takeover smells worse by the day. But at least we'll get rid of the terrible Allams, right?

 

True this.i have a low opinion of him but we are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty.whoever we get running our club both as owners and administration will be in it for themselves.i can't see any jack Walker types on the horizon. So what should we reasonably expect from this people.some asset strip.some use it as a form of money laundering.others for the high profile.personally I think the Allams wanted the profits from the business village around the area and ehab loves the high profile.very few care about the fans

 

you are aware that you have 2 #1's there?

 

I haven't been keeping up with this, but is Duffen's involvement in this intended to only cover the sale period or is it a permanent role?

 

At this stage just apparently advising the Allams with the sale. If it stays this way then fine, but I certainly wouldn't want him in any capacity within Hull City when the new owners take charge.

 

Then hopefully his damage to the club will be minimal.
Like you I wouldn't want him in any capacity long term, The man can't be trusted.

 

Not necessarily. He could just be on a huge one off fee to broker the deal.

 

Be interesting if he did get the ceo job, to see how he get on with Mike Phelan, unlike Phil Brown cant see MP being taken in by him, get the impression that MP does suffer fools gladly.

 

Duffen is helping with selling the club? I bet all he's done is put an ad in Gumtree.