Takeover bid from

[Lipsy]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

Shame. Brian Blessed would have been AWESOME on the tannoy, though we'd have to sign Michael Gordon, just so Brian could shout "Gordon's ALIVE!" every week.

[Sad-Rovers]

Posturing on BOTH sides.

Before I'm accused of being the Devil, JRs mouthpiece, KPs best mate I better come out and state the following:

I'm just a fan.

I don't think takeover deals should be conducted on the front page of the Current Bun

I'm pro JR but think TB and DW did a very good job bringing players in last Jan.

 

[River Don]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

It's not Simon Cowell, Sharon Osbourne, Louis Walsh and Mel B is it?

[Sad-Rovers]

In reality who cares who our owners are as long as they're doing the right thing for the club on and off the pitch they have my support.  That's all that matters.

Amen.

Let's not turn this forum into a massive bun fight like we did last season.

The deal will either happen or not, it's out of our hands.

[Wild Rover]

I cant help thinking that Tony whatshisfaces ( Stewart is it ) at RUFC speech the other day, pledging no limitations to RU budget for player aquisitions for next season is a catalyst for this "Bid".

[BigColSutherland]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

It's not Simon Cowell, Sharon Osbourne, Louis Walsh and Mel B is it?

It isn't, but you're certainly along the right lines Don.

[RJHeader]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

It's not Simon Cowell, Sharon Osbourne, Louis Walsh and Mel B is it?

It isn't, but you're certainly along the right lines Don.

I bloody hope its Cheryl Cole.

[Sad-Rovers]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

It's not Simon Cowell, Sharon Osbourne, Louis Walsh and Mel B is it?

It isn't, but you're certainly along the right lines Don.

I bloody hope its Cheryl Cole.

Warmer...

[River Don]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

It's not Simon Cowell, Sharon Osbourne, Louis Walsh and Mel B is it?

It isn't, but you're certainly along the right lines Don.

Good grief.

It's not Susan Boyle is it?

[RJHeader]

The names I've heard have no connection with Doncaster. To my knowledge.

It's not Simon Cowell, Sharon Osbourne, Louis Walsh and Mel B is it?

It isn't, but you're certainly along the right lines Don.

I bloody hope its Cheryl Cole.

Warmer...

Ashley Cole is coming as player/chairman. Delighted with that

[Lipsy]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club. That's good enough for me.

Right, there's work to be done and I refuse - point blank - to have another summer blighted by nonsense takeover speculation.

[sedwardsdrfc]

Fu*k sake not Will I AM

[Sad-Rovers]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club. That's good enough for me.

Right, there's work to be done and I refuse - point blank - to have another summer blighted by nonsense takeover speculation.

I'm with Lipsy. I'm buggered if I'm fighting millionaires fights for them. Unless they're prepared to bung me a few quid, then I'm anyones.

[DearneValleyRover]

Posturing on BOTH sides.

Before I'm accused of being the Devil, JRs mouthpiece, KPs best mate I better come out and state the following:

I'm just a fan.

I don't think takeover deals should be conducted on the front page of the Current Bun

I'm pro JR but think TB and DW did a very good job bringing players in last Jan.

 

Agreed, the only thing I want is a Club to support and doing everything in the media doesn't help. Let's hope it's sorted quickly and we can get back to doing what fans do and speculate who we will sign.

[Wild Rover]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

[Filo]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club. That's good enough for me.

Right, there's work to be done and I refuse - point blank - to have another summer blighted by nonsense takeover speculation.

I'm with Lipsy. I'm buggered if I'm fighting millionaires fights for them. Unless they're prepared to bung me a few quid, then I'm anyones.

Count me in on that one as well, let them play their games between themselves, too many ordinary people from all sides of the debate got demonised last time around to serve the ego's of the rich

[BigColSutherland]

Of course it's a secret society! Certain posters on here like to think they are in the know and crave the attention of others asking them what they know. It's just ironic that most who claimed to know something, especially those who were backing SC, were proven to be wrong.

And their sources aren't to be trusted.

All pathetic really.

[DearneValleyRover]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

[Sad-Rovers]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

Do you have concrete PROOF that the last deal was rejected on those grounds?

[Boomstick]

I highly doubt the last takeover attempt was turned down due to lack of assurances for the future.

[DearneValleyRover]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

Do you have concrete PROOF that the last deal was rejected on those grounds?

I have concrete proof that it was one of the reasons, yes.

[Wild Rover]

I swear he said in the past, if price is right we will sell up ( or similar wording ).

[Sad-Rovers]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

Do you have concrete PROOF that the last deal was rejected on those grounds?

I have concrete proof that it was one of the reasons, yes.

Would you mind sharing that with us?

[DearneValleyRover]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

Do you have concrete PROOF that the last deal was rejected on those grounds?

I have concrete proof that it was one of the reasons, yes.

Would you mind sharing that with us?

If I could I would so I'm sure thatI'm in the same position as others who claim to be in the know. WR of course money comes into it but that doesn't stop clauses being inserted to protect the Club. The word legacy is pivitol.

[BigColSutherland]

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

[Filo]

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

You first

[Sad-Rovers]

NO offence intended then DVR but unless that proof is in the public domain we can't comment on it.

As far as we can see, with what's publicly available, TB and DW are entertaining bids to buy the club and we don't know what caveat they are adding to the sale.

[Wild Rover]

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

Do you have concrete PROOF that the last deal was rejected on those grounds?

I have concrete proof that it was one of the reasons, yes.

Would you mind sharing that with us?

If I could I would so I'm sure thatI'm in the same position as others who claim to be in the know. WR of course money comes into it but that doesn't stop clauses being inserted to protect the Club. The word legacy is pivitol.
[/quote

At least we know that the board won't sell unless it's in the best interests of the club.

No we don't Lipsy. WE ASSUME. It could be that "Past" offers simply didn't meet TB/DW financial expectations.

No assumption WR it wasn't just down to finance, certain assurances about the future of the Club must also be met.

Do you have concrete PROOF that the last deal was rejected on those grounds?

I have concrete proof that it was one of the reasons, yes.

Would you mind sharing that with us?

If I could I would so I'm sure thatI'm in the same position as others who claim to be in the know. WR of course money comes into it but that doesn't stop clauses being inserted to protect the Club. The word legacy is pivitol.

Legacy ? im sure TB/DW did have some "Clauses" in there, but, at days end, if deal had gone through, these clauses would be forgotten by in coming party. No mate, money talks in the world of TB/DW ( just my opinion ).

[streatham dave]

Ok based on nothing I'm going to guess Ant and Dec.

[GazLaz]

Can you just put what rumours you know in the RM and stop attention seeking.