Keegan to launch £9m unfair dismissal claim?

[ChezGiven]

You're saying that the PLC float didnt help us because in 2007 the club were not better off financially than before the float?

 

That is just stupidity on an enormous scale as there are thousands of other factors determining how well we did and how much money we have.

 

You're saying that the float made the Halls and Shepherd better off but only when you look at the events of 2007 when someone bought all of the share on the market, an event that can not be applied to an analysis of whether it was right to float the club in the first place. You also said the money 'disappeared' after the float insinuating that something inappropriate had happened to it.

 

In hindsight his mis-givings arent justified as the current state of the club is in no way at all causally related to the float itself. Just because we are worse off doesnt mean the club being a PLC caused it man

 

I never said what funded the rise to promotion, i asked you a question about it. The answer being debt. It was meant to highlight to you that the club did not rise out of the ashes of a boycott and second division football on the basis of being highly profitable, hence undermining your point that we were not in debt at the time of the float.

 

 

[Guest Howaythetoon]

You're saying that the PLC float didnt help us because in 2007 the club were not better off financially than before the float?

 

No.

 

That is just stupidity on an enormous scale as there are thousands of other factors determining how well we did and how much money we have.

 

Hence why I said "Now I don't put that all at the door of the PLC because bad decisions by people were mainly responsible for that"

 

You're saying that the float made the Halls and Shepherd better off but only when you look at the events of 2007 when someone bought all of the share on the market, an event that can not be applied to an analysis of whether it was right to float the club in the first place. You also said the money 'disappeared' after the float insinuating that something inappropriate had happened to it.

 

I never said them becoming rich from the PLC was an event that made the decision to float wrong so your entire point is moot. I didn't say it disappeared as such either, although I did question where it went which wasn't on players, debt or stadium plans so where did it go? I have my guesses like...

 

In hindsight his mis-givings arent justified as the current state of the club is in no way at all causally related to the float itself. Just because we are worse off doesnt mean the club being a PLC caused it man

 

Fair enough, I can understand what you're saying. However those misgivings were not all about money, but being able to run the club in the way KK was accustomed to which translated into today's language is still the best and only way to run a club- total control.

 

I never said what funded the rise to promotion, i asked you a question about it. The answer being debt. It was meant to highlight to you that the club did not rise out of the ashes of a boycott and second division football on the basis of being highly profitable, hence undermining your point that we were not in debt at the time of the float.

 

All budgeted for. If we were in debt it was pennies compared to the debt we got into in the final throes of operating as a PLC and very much manageable based on future income such as the CL expansion from 1 club to 2 and then 4, new TV deals and so on and so on. In short the club could operate as a private company as it had done brilliantly in the 5 years KK was manager without having to go public. There were ulterior motives from certain individuals for going public, other than the expansion of the club which was achieved despite being a PLC not because of being a PLC and I'm talking about increasing the capacity of St. James' Park for example.