Various: Mike Ashley in talks with Sheikh Khaled bin Zayed Al Nehayan

[gdm]

Amazing the SFA and FA allow it.

[NEEJ]

I know he’s far from popular on here but has anyone listened to the podcast where Michael Martin talks to guys from Rangers fan groups. Absolutely frightening the shit Ashley was doing at Rangers. I’ve no doubt even if he does sell he’ll do similar that sell the stadium naming rights to himself for £1, similar with the crest

There's very little MM, for anyone put off by the thought.

[gdm]

Like him, hate him or indifferent, Newcastle fans must listen to this

[Stifler]

Amazing the SFA and FA allow it.

The FA in particular have shown time and time again to not give a fuck about anyone. They don’t run the FA for the benefit of football clubs, or for the benefit of the sport. They run it to give rich people a means to gain money from the biggest sport in the country. Add on that SD is likely the store which sells the most England and Scotland tops, alongside shirts of their member clubs which they’ll get a share of, then the ability for them to give a fuck is reduced again.

[Super Duper Branko Strupar]

"Who do we replace them with?"

"We don't give a fuck"

 

Great from Sons of Struth. Great listen.

 

[Stal]

Just seen some summarised news feed on a TV. He reckons he will strive to keep all the staff and you can "hold my feet to the fire". If he gives these statements to journalists why are they not asking the questions about his track record with the truth?

 

Also, "strive to". I assume this is the precursor to "we tried".

 

*EDIT: was "vows to" and "keep all outlets open" but the point still stands.

[NG32]

Just seen some summarised news feed on a TV. He reckons he will strive to keep all the staff and you can "hold my feet to the fire". If he gives these statements to journalists why are they not asking the questions about his track record with the truth?

 

Also, "strive to". I assume this is the precursor to "we tried".

 

Its all lies to keep things quiet but once he has foot in the door, the axe comes out.

[Dr Venkman]

Listened to that podcast with the Rangers fans. I knew some of what went on, but the dirty tricks with legal action against the fans they did is awful. This guy is a cunt, we need him out now.

That’s why the @ifrafagoeswego twitter page aren’t helping anyone by tweeting out some of the twitter handles for the famous people who use Keith Bishop as their PR manager. All it does is give Bishop ammo if we are seen to start abusing people that have nothing to do with Ashley. They will use anything to get people to turn against us and we shouldn’t be helping them do it.

 

So fuck, TBH. What difference will 'people turning against us' make? The entire situation needs to be toxic for Ashley, Bishop, etc in order to get him to fuck off. What 'people' do or don't think of NUFC fans won't make the slightest difference.

[Darth Crooks]

Fine you can do that without looking like lunatics that lash out at popular Saturday night TV personalities. Even if you do take that route; you've got to be pretty clear about what you expect people to do. There's no strategy.

[Matt]

I know he’s far from popular on here but has anyone listened to the podcast where Michael Martin talks to guys from Rangers fan groups. Absolutely frightening the shit Ashley was doing at Rangers. I’ve no doubt even if he does sell he’ll do similar that sell the stadium naming rights to himself for £1, similar with the crest

There's very little MM, for anyone put off by the thought.

 

It doesn't really make a lot of sense for him to do the sort of things he did at Rangers because whereas then he didn't own the club, he just loaned them money, at NUFC as he owns the whole show anyway. Any buyer of NUFC with a half a brain would tell him to terminate the contracts as part of the sale. The only exception might be the merchandising operation, where there would be some merit.

[mozy]

Don't see what 'ammo' Bishop gets by a few people tweeting #ashleyout etc at Flavio from strictly or whatever. The end result will only be them complaining at Bishop which achieves the goal of disrupting his business. 

[Guest firetotheworks]

Don't see what 'ammo' Bishop gets by a few people tweeting #ashleyout etc at Flavio from strictly or whatever. The end result will only be them complaining at Bishop which achieves the goal of disrupting his business. 

 

That's not what was happening though, one or two were calling her a slag etc.

 

As I said earlier, the ammo is that it divides opinion among group members and distracts from the actual targets. Really, whether you're for or against it doesn't really matter.

[Sho Time]

Don't see what 'ammo' Bishop gets by a few people tweeting #ashleyout etc at Flavio from strictly or whatever. The end result will only be them complaining at Bishop which achieves the goal of disrupting his business.

 

Exactly. And potentially losing clients if they really get sick of it. It's the perfect way to attack him.

 

Edit : So long as it's not personal abuse or directed against the people you're tweeting (exc. KB)

[Guest firetotheworks]

Surely you can see that even if you think it's the perfect way to attack him, that a lot of other people (campaign members, NUFC fans, non-NUFC fans etc) think it's bang out of order and it's therefore far too polarising to continue promoting?

[Sho Time]

Surely you can see that even if you think it's the perfect way to attack him, that a lot of other people (campaign members, NUFC fans, non-NUFC fans etc) think it's bang out of order and it's therefore far too polarising to continue promoting?

 

Only to a certain extent, given the amount of people that think it's out of order to even be against Ashley in the first place.

 

I think it's a total grey area in the sense that as a campaign it's difficult to promote and hope that people fall in line and do it constructively, given the amount of nutjobs and idiots on twitter. But if you promote doing it sensibly, it's not so bad.

 

Then again leaving it without promoting leaves the people who wish to, free to do it and distances the campaign from any unwanted scrutiny those tactics might attract. The only issue then is that it's more likely inviting a higher % of people tweeting his clients in the complete wrong way.

[loki679]

I do think there's a difference between attacking companies associated with KBA and attacking individuals associated with them.  When you're going after an individual it's getting a bit too personal, it's too easy for it to become genuinely offensive and it makes us an easy target for the media to smear the campaign.

[mozy]

But it's only the local media (& likes of Caulkin, Hope etc) who write about the link between Ashley and Bishop. For the likes of Sky and Talksport to start a smear campaign against a minority of our twitter fans, they would first have to acknowledge said link which they won't do as they're probably on the payroll themselves.

[Guest firetotheworks]

Surely you can see that even if you think it's the perfect way to attack him, that a lot of other people (campaign members, NUFC fans, non-NUFC fans etc) think it's bang out of order and it's therefore far too polarising to continue promoting?

 

Only to a certain extent, given the amount of people that think it's out of order to even be against Ashley in the first place.

 

I think it's a total grey area in the sense that as a campaign it's difficult to promote and hope that people fall in line and do it constructively, given the amount of nutjobs and idiots on twitter. But if you promote doing it sensibly, it's not so bad.

 

Then again leaving it without promoting leaves the people who wish to, free to do it and distances the campaign from any unwanted scrutiny those tactics might attract. The only issue then is that it's more likely inviting a higher % of people tweeting his clients in the complete wrong way.

I think you'll find that the number of people against what IRGWG did far outweighs the number of NUFC fans that would defend Ashley. It's divisive, dividing our fanbase is the last thing we need.

[Stal]

I do think there's a difference between attacking companies associated with KBA and attacking individuals associated with them.  When you're going after an individual it's getting a bit too personal, it's too easy for it to become genuinely offensive and it makes us an easy target for the media to smear the campaign.

 

I thought about this and I don't think there is a massive difference. A company is no different to a brand. These people aren't just ordinary folk, otherwise they wouldn't be involved with bishop. They use him to expand their brand, their brand being themselves.

 

A personal account (which they will have under a different name most likely) no, but their public persona? Could be seen as fair game.

 

I'm not at all for sending them abuse mind you, but if it's the regular stuff I've seen about ashley posted on businesses associated with him. sports direct and kba then I don't see the issue with that.

[Guest firetotheworks]

I dunno if you're all missing the point or just think it's not important, but it doesn't matter whether you think it's an issue or not, enough people do to make it a polarising move and anything that polarises opinion like that isn't worth it.

[Stal]

I dunno if you're all missing the point or just think it's not important, but it doesn't matter whether you think it's an issue or not, enough people do to make it a polarising move and anything that polarises opinion like that isn't worth it.

 

That's a different point to whether we as individuals see it as fair game or not, which is what I was responding to. My point is brands are brands, regardless of being a company brand or an individual brand.

 

As for whether it's worth it because it's polarizing; Could it be worth it if there was an explanation as to whether it was fair game/not fair game? Educate then mobilise perhaps? And then guidance as to what is acceptable.

 

I don't know the right answer to this, but I think you do make a very valid point.

 

 

[loki679]

If you go for individuals people are more likely to be empathetic towards them and side with them making us look like cunts. Going after a nameless company's account doesn't have the same emotional resonance.

[Tooj]

Are there any articles anywhere summarising all of the dodgy practices that he imposed whilst at Rangers? Also how did they manage to uncover it all?

[Darth Crooks]

If you target a page like SD or their sub levels you are stopping that page from operating as it should. It’s got strategy against a business arm. Annoying a celebrity to the point they get annoyed isn’t.

[NEEJ]

Are there any articles anywhere summarising all of the dodgy practices that he imposed whilst at Rangers? Also how did they manage to uncover it all?

This seemed to be the best I could find in terms of summarising everything.

http://www.true-faith.co.uk/true-faith-mike-ashley-and-rangers/