He said it in the radio interview with BBC - please log in to view this image So basically their investment committee for whatever reason decided not to make a bid. A price was agreed and they did not want to pay it. There's all sorts you can read into this, both good and bad, but ultimately they declined to meet that asking price, whatever it was. Unfortunately, I think we're in for a longer haul on this one and right now, it isn't a takeover. The more Charlie talks, the more you realise that they didn't eye us up, we eyed them up. I still think there's a chance, but it's more likely that Donald pays this loan off in 18 months time.
So your statement "Donald said they declined to make a bid for the club" is rubbish and merely your bias interpretation of what he actually said. I get it you now, you put your own slant on statements, spin them to suit your agenda and repeat it often enough for people to believe it to be true.
I will give you a clue, the sentence in bold is the statement you wrongly attributed to Stewart Donald
Sunderland could be set for a cash inject with investor Juan Sartori set to return following a recent foray into politics. https://www.sportsanalog.com/2019/1...-financial-boost-with-investor-set-to-return/
That says nothing. Nothing at all. It doesn’t say he is going to give investment at all. What it means I do not know. Is he going to start attending games again ? Is he going to bring some talented Uruguayan youngsters with him ? A nothing article. I’m not having a go at you Smug ( don’t like that name) just the article. He has never looked like being a saviour.
He did though. I didn't quote him, I paraphrased what he said, which is that they had a meeting and did not opt to buy us and that you'd have to ask them why. Like what is your point here? That they did make a bid for us? They patently did not.
My point is that you talk rubbish and make things up as you go along. You stated to another poster "That's just a completely ludicrous statement at this point. Donald said they declined to make a bid for the club". I asked you to provide a link to that statement and you could not. Stewart Donald did not say they declined to make a bid for the club during that radio interview and your lie clearly demonstrates your negative agenda against him. As I said, you put your own slant on statements, spin them to suit your agenda and repeat it often enough for people to believe it to be true.
This is bollocks though. The quote does back up what I have said, and only someone being needlessly silly would suggest otherwise. The worst part is I don't see you pulling up smug for the patent bullshit that this is a takeover based on nothing more than a text. Complete nonsense and hypocrisy.
It is blatant that you have an agenda to be fair, and it's a consistently negative one. If there's something said that's ambiguous and could be either good or bad you'll take the bad side and make post after post trying to support it when nobody wants to hear it or believes you are correct.
Huh? I actually said Donald doing the deal was still a good thing. The only agenda is people like you who want to project their idea of what I think instead of actually reading. And as for @Montysoptician, are you calling smug a liar? Because at least I backed my statement up with evidence, even if you are too biased to accept it. If you can provide any evidence at all of a bid being made for SAFC by FPP to take us over, I'll gladly retract, but instead you keep arguing your semantic point and one day when smug's ****e about a takeover is proven wrong, you can have a think about what possessed you to sit and give me **** and refusing to allow anyone to paraphrase at all. Mental.
Just for the avoidance of doubt, Donald was describing what happens when an investment firm meet and decide whether to invest or not. As he said, they decided to loan us money rather than making a bid to buy us. Any other interpretation is null and void because the events and facts since completely validate that. There is no other way to read Donald's words. If I said 'that thing that happened on London Bridge the other day with the knives' you wouldn't expect me in every sentence to then put every word into context to be more specific that I was referring to the terror attack. Asking for each sentence of an interview to be completely specific is being wilfully difficult.
Mate I wouldn't get involved in a he said she said debate with you for a £100 a minute, utterly pointless and boring. I stand by everything I said.
I wouldn't call Smug a liar because he is up front with everything he has said, he identified when his information came from sources and when he was speculating. There is no doubt about his love for the club and he remained positive when it looked like things weren't going the way that he said they would. If you look at his original couple of posts on RTG most/all of what he said would happen, has already happened or is planned, even down to the development of the area (not something he would just pull out of a hat). You on the other hand have done everything in your power to undermine the club with your negativity and vague allegations about missing money, you were schooled by a couple of financially savvy posters, one on here and one on RTG, you chose to ignore their explanations and in some cases verbally attacked them for putting you right. You explain your loose relationship with the truth as semantics, I have another name for it. If you want to be taken seriously stick to the facts and not your interpretation of what little evidence we actually have.
You see, this is where you show yourself up, appear cheap and bitter. As you know very well this wasn't just a text. It was a series of WhatsApp messages from one of the FPP billionaires to a personal friend. They were never sent to me and there was no intent to impress me, have me on or anything else. The information was independently corroborated by a millionaire ex-employer with no interest in football, let alone Sunderland. Your pathetic attempt to pass this off as a text from some lad down the pub destroys your argument rather than supporting it. Seriously man, you really need to step back and have a think about the joke you've become.