A $6.5m sponsorship waiting in wings if Pirtek pulls pin on Parra ...

[mickdo]

I'm treating every story coming out at the moment with caution and an open mind but I still think Osborne should stand down pending the findings of an investigation.

Isn't he on leave now?

 

[ParraAds]

More importantly, bart, if you're in possession of all the facts then why not go and debate it with other people in possession of all the facts - like the board - and keep your insinuations off this public messageboard.

We come here to talk about football, not to air our bullshit political grievances.

We come here to talk about whatever we like regarding the Eels.

You're not the forum boss... can you comprehend that?

 

[Stagger eel]

Isn't he on leave now?

yes but he's still the acting CEO and a go to man when necessary.

 

[Bigfella]

Yeah poo some clearly come here purely to act out grudges yet have against club administrators.

As if footy has anything to do with it.

And facts and fair analysis have nothing to do with it. Otherwise people calling for Osborne and spagnolos head would have done the same when the Fitzgerald allegations were aired and not just called it a witch hunt.

 

[Gronk]

Yeah poo some clearly come here purely to act out grudges yet have against club administrators.

As if footy has anything to do with it.

And facts and fair analysis have nothing to do with it. Otherwise people calling for Osborne and spagnolos head would have done the same when the Fitzgerald allegations were aired and not just called it a witch hunt.

And what do you come here to do ? You try very hard to sell yourself off as a level headed moderate, yet you only target the opinions of those with one particular view. So really, you're as bad as the people you criticise. ;-)

 

[Poupou Escobar]

FMD so you have no idea really and we should simply trust them explicitly.

Mate, even I don't trust them explicitly. I don't trust anyone explicitly, including the people who only come here to slander the members of club staff they're obviously jealous of.

Oh and by the way, if you question their methods, then you're simply a merkin with an agenda.

Mate, what methods are you questioning? The ones you're making up and posting on here with no proof?

So we can all have a discussion based on fabricated 'facts', and the targets of these allegations don't have right of reply.

It's weak as piss.

Do you actually read what you write ?

You obviously don't if you keep misrepresenting me (and anyone else you have a grudge against).

 

[Poupou Escobar]

The point is selling off assets to get yourself out of the red is hardly making a 'profit' as such. If you sell a brand new car for 30k and buy a 1993 year old used Commodore for 3k you might have an extra 27k in the bank, you can't call that profit.

Well mate, the value of the car is included in your bottom line. That's why they're called assets.

Though for the record, a car isn't an income-producing asset unless you use it for business. Otherwise it's a liability.

As for the club selling assets, if the income (or even the growth) of those assets doesn't make it worthwhile to keep servicing the debt on them, then selling them is the right move.

There are thousands of scenarios in which selling assets is a good move, so why all the snide comments about selling assets to turn the club around by $17 million? If that's what was required then who are these other nuffies to criticise that decision without any further information?

If you don't kow the details then don't come here and publicly insinuate that the board is converting everything to cash with no regard for the future. And if you do know the details then back your shit up so you don't look like a liar.

Because all I know is the board are professional businessmen who were elected to a position of responsibility, while you're just a whiny loser on the internet.

I know which one I trust more.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

No one's claiming to have all the facts PP. But just because no-one can possibly have all the facts, doesn't mean that people shouldn't be welcome to discuss what is in the public domain. You seem to have problems with people holding opinions other than yours, and regularly retreat to bully tactics, to try and close down discussions you may not like.

I just don't like people hiding behind online personas while they launch allegations against public figures who have no right of reply.

It's this kind of gossip that has destabilised the club for a long time.

Useless bogans like yourself who just see the club as a cash cow, and your attitude of "If I can't have it then nobody can."

Face it mate, your mob were ousted. Now it's someone else's turn.

Nah mate, we all come here for different reasons.... It's a forum about the Eels in all our facets - "the largest Eels forum online" as the tag says. You or I shouldn't make assumptions about why everyone comes here, or try and put limitations on what Eels matters can be talked about, and which cannot.

As for me I have no political grievances, merely opinions. If you don't enjoy reading Eels opinions that might be different to yours, and spend most of your time here telling other people to withhold their opinions (rather than discussing), then perhaps you should just make use of the handy ignore feature?

Because mate, I'm not going to f**king ignore failed politicians using my favourite messageboard to destabilise the club they no longer control.

I don't actually care who's in charge. I just want to see some stability and an end to the anonymous cowardly sniping in the media (incuding the internet).

So it's nothing to do with having a different opinion, because just like you I think the board are dodgy. And just like you, I have no proof. Also this isn't the forum for baseless, destabilising allegations.

 

[Gronk]

Mate, even I don't trust them explicitly. I don't trust anyone explicitly, including the people who only come here to slander the members of club staff they're obviously jealous of.



Mate, what methods are you questioning? The ones you're making up and posting on here with no proof?

So we can all have a discussion based on fabricated 'facts', and the targets of these allegations don't have right of reply.

It's weak as piss.



You obviously don't if you keep misrepresenting me (and anyone else you have a grudge against).

LOL ! Find me one instance. I'll accept your apology in advance for that. :roll:

I don't need to misrepresent you Poo, your doing a great job of f**king things up yourself.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

And what do you come here to do ? You try very hard to sell yourself off as a level headed moderate, yet you only target the opinions of those with one particular view. So really, you're as bad as the people you criticise. ;-)

The difference is only some are making unsubstantiated accusations. Only some are helping the media drag the club through the dirt.

Those are the 'fans' who deserve their opinions to be rubbished.

 

[Eels Dude]

If you don't kow the details then don't come here and publicly insinuate that the board is converting everything to cash with no regard for the future. And if you do know the details then back your shit up so you don't look like a liar.

Because all I know is the board are professional businessmen who were elected to a position of responsibility, while you're just a whiny loser on the internet.

I know which one I trust more.

I never said anything of the sort. And I actually agree with you if they needed to sell assets to get the club out of the red then that is only a good thing. But to claim to make a profit, and to claim you've turned the clubs financial situation around when all they've really done is sell off assets the previous administration invested in then it's hardly innovate really.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

LOL ! Find me one instance. I'll accept your apology in advance for that. :roll:

I asked you a question.

Which of the board's methods are you questioning?

 

[Poupou Escobar]

I never said anything of the sort. And I actually agree with you if they needed to sell assets to get the club out of the red then that is only a good thing. But to claim to make a profit, and to claim you've turned the clubs financial situation around when all they've really done is sell off assets the previous administration invested in then it's hardly innovate really.

Why does it need to be innovative to be the right decision?

And why couldn't the previous administration sell assets if that's what was needed? We were $9.5 million in the red, FFS! If selling assets was that easy then why wasn't it done earlier?

 

[bartman]

I just don't like people hiding behind online personas while they launch allegations against public figures who have no right of reply.

It's this kind of gossip that has destabilised the club for a long time.

No one is launching allegations via this website, the comments would get pulled. All people are doing is passing comment on info about our club that is in the public domain. You seem to simply not like comments or opinions here that don't match yours, and so unsuccessfully try to type nonsense like the above over the top of any discussions taking place.

Useless bogans like yourself who just see the club as a cash cow, and your attitude of "If I can't have it then nobody can."

Face it mate, your mob were ousted. Now it's someone else's turn.

I have no idea what you're going on about re the club as a cash cow? I'm an Eels member, have been a season ticket holder for 25 years and pumped money into the club. I'm entitled to have an opinion and post a comment here, and will continue to do so despite the feeble namecalling.

As for "my mob", I voted for 3P. We don't vote for CEO, and like others I felt Fitzgerald's time was up. But we all were allowed to give our opinions of the performance of the club CEO and old Board before they were punted, so people sure as hell should be able to give opinions of the current CEO and Board on a discussion forum. To carry on like you seem to whenever someone types a differing opinion to yours is self-righteous hypocrisy, plain and simple.

Because mate, I'm not going to f**king ignore failed politicians using my favourite messageboard to destabilise the club they no longer control.

No one posting on here is a politician. No one posting on here is or was a candidate for Board elections. So your comment is again petty name-calling in an attempt to bully your way through discussions you personally don't want to hear.

I don't actually care who's in charge. I just want to see some stability and an end to the anonymous cowardly sniping in the media (incuding the internet).

Agree with the bold bit, we haven't had stability for years - and that's all most of us want. Trouble is, you have some misguided agenda that trying to limit people discussing differing opinions on an internet message board will somehow achieve stability in the club? It won't. Open your eyes and you'll see there are deeper factors involved than that. But if pushing your internet weight around makes you feel like you're doing your bit for the club's stability from your lounge chair (and not your wallet), then all power to you... keep up the good fight!

So it's nothing to do with having a different opinion, because just like you I think the board are dodgy. And just like you, I have no proof. Also this isn't the forum for baseless, destabilising allegations.

Again, no-one here has made any allegations, PP. And no-one here is claiming they have proof of anything....

All people are trying to do is discuss their different opinions of whatever's in the public domain about our club. You're on a hiding to nothing imo with your grumpy man act, and your attempts to limit some people passing comments that you happen not to like or agree with. Serious, for your own sake cut your losses. And instead of playing the internet hero, just use that ignore feature on people that are having discussions here that you don't want to join or read.

 

[The Colonel]

Jerry Maguire said it best...... if they have it, put a name to it. We had a bank sometime ago that never materialised.

 

[Maroubra Eel]

Jerry Maguire said it best...... if they have it, put a name to it. We had a bank sometime ago that never materialised.

If Pirtek pull the pin let's just hope the bank is still interested. Maybe the new sponsor ready to jump onboard with $6.5m is the bank. I hope the bank get into a bidding war with the $6.5m mob if not.

 

[Suitman]

I don't think it's the bank that's ready to jump on board.

Suity

 

[Maroubra Eel]

I didn't think so. I thought they would have moved on to other opportunities by now.

 

[Bigfella]

It's probably the daily tele at this rate...

 

[Gronk]

I asked you a question.

Which of the board's methods are you questioning?

<groan> You were supporting the sale of assets, but then conceded that you had no idea what they were or even if they were sold. You were however, in support of whatever they saw fit to do. This is where you and I differ.

I don't have "agendas" as you put it. You have pigeon holed me because if i don't support the current mob, then I must by default have an agenda against them AND be a supporter of the former Ayatollah. Wrong again. Use the advanced search features of this site and search my posts. Use "Fitzy" as a keyword and you will see that I have bagged him as much as anyone and I have repeated many, many, many times that he had to go. Following that I voted for 3P. I had to because it was a two horse race.

The difference with me compared to some here is that I am not convinced that the sun shines out of the new Board's arse and I am watching them with a very, very cautious and suspicious eye.