Was just a thought mate. I don't really think it is that absurd at all.
it is still absurd.
Putting 2 and 2 together.
and getting 22....
A guy in Tinkler saying he felt the Knights never really did want to get a deal made and made life difficult for him, combined with the knowledge directly from you yourself that the Knights have been working on a Patrons Model concept for quite some time. This with a strong impression I received from our chats that Burro was very keen on the idea to proceed without privatisation.
I recall in the first instance of Tinkler making his first offer initial ( which was rejected ) that you were very supportive of not privatising because you had faith that Burro was working on this patrons model which he thought would work better and keep the team community owned.
we discussed the patrons trust BEFORE any privatisation deal was put mate.
and for the record, the trust is still a better deal than Tinkler's first offer was. Or his "final" offer for that matter. The "middle" offer (the one that was unilaterally changed) was superior to the trust - hence it was endorsed!
I hope I remember correctly, and if not I do apologise, as it was awhile ago.
yes it was a while ago - before any offer was put.
It is that knowledge armed with Tinkler saying roadblocks were in his way, that leads me to a ' SPECULATION ' - that's all it is - that the Knights really wanted to proceed with the Patrons Model all along.
refer to my previous post. it is an absurd assertion that a board would agree to something and then actively work to thwart it. absolutely absurd.
it also completely ignores that TINKLER CHANGED KEY PARTS OF THE DEAL.
oh, gee, and it also ignores that TINKLER PULLED OUT WHEN QUESTIONED ON THOSE CHANGES.
your whole tin-foil hat absurdity relies on Tinkler being a douche in negotiations. you are asserting that the board knew he would be a douche in negotiations?
Add to that the timing of the announcement of the Patrons Model - with the idea being it will be put to members as soon as this Monday, and it comes across as a bit wrong.
they should be congratulated, not suspected, for having a plan B ready to go.
why is it so hard to believe that the patrons had said that if Tinkler falls over they were there to help.... yet you find it easy to believe that Tinkler has carried on like a saint here.....
Here we have Plan B somehow able to be organised within a couple of days to present to members, while Plan A somehow dragged on for months. Unless that was all Tinklers fault?
the timeline for Plan A has been well covered. documents recieved wednesday evening, unanimous support demanded by Friday. Tinkler pulls out Monday morning.
It's really not as absurd as you make out when you take all of the above into account.
still absurd mate.
Here's another conspiracy theory - Maybe you really want to go out of your way to make it seem absurd because maybe its true? ;-)
you give me way too much credit - I am not that sophisticated, just ask my wife (or any of my mates, for that matter).