Stewart wallace and FOH representatives

[EIEIO]

1 minute ago, iainmac said:

 

The 2 on the club Board could make a stand & resign if they feel that their views are being ignored.

They could however I suspect they won't.

[Jambo61]

On 30/03/2021 at 16:50, portobellojambo1 said:

We are not the owners of the club at the moment, that doesn't become the case until the shareholding moves across. At the moment the owners of the club are Bidco, in the guise of Ann Budge. FOH have two members on the football board at the moment, but when the owner is surrounded by what seem to be a number of her friends any decisions will always pass on her say so, at the moment. Once the shares change hands I think FoH then have to make it clear it is effectively a fresh start and can then lay down the ground rules for going forward, including the basis of the committee to run the football side of the business, with the right to remove any existing members of the club board. If it is a fresh start everything needs to be fresh.

You write as if the agreement in place can simply be set aside! If that was the case, why bother writing one?

[Jambo61]

1 minute ago, EIEIO said:

They could however I suspect they won't.

They will if the members tell them to!

[iainmac]

3 minutes ago, EIEIO said:

They could however I suspect they won't.

 

There is literally no point in them being there then, other than they get in to see the matches that we can't.

 

Probably punishment enough for them.

[OTT]

On 30/03/2021 at 16:50, portobellojambo1 said:

We are not the owners of the club at the moment, that doesn't become the case until the shareholding moves across. At the moment the owners of the club are Bidco, in the guise of Ann Budge. FOH have two members on the football board at the moment, but when the owner is surrounded by what seem to be a number of her friends any decisions will always pass on her say so, at the moment. Once the shares change hands I think FoH then have to make it clear it is effectively a fresh start and can then lay down the ground rules for going forward, including the basis of the committee to run the football side of the business, with the right to remove any existing members of the club board. If it is a fresh start everything needs to be fresh.

 

I think we need to have a serious think if Ann should be invited to stay on once the shares are handed over. I think it should be a vote for the FOH members as I think she has opened up quite a few questions on her judgement. I'm not going to shit on what she's done for the club, but I do think her slowless to react in binning Levein and now Neilson has cost the club a lot and a fresh face may be what we all need. 

 

Hopefully Budge already knows this and plans to depart anyway. Perhaps James Anderson might be willing to step in. He would certainly be a uniting figure across the support for his work not just in helping us but supporting Scottish football.

[soonbe110]

2 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

I think we need to have a serious think if Ann should be invited to stay on once the shares are handed over. I think it should be a vote for the FOH members as I think she has opened up quite a few questions on her judgement. I'm not going to shit on what she's done for the club, but I do think her slowless to react in binning Levein and now Neilson has cost the club a lot and a fresh face may be what we all need. 

 

Hopefully Budge already knows this and plans to depart anyway. Perhaps James Anderson might be willing to step in. He would certainly be a uniting figure across the support for his work not just in helping us but supporting Scottish football.

What happens when the share transfer happens has always been the elephant in the room re the whole FoH journey. 

[EIEIO]

5 minutes ago, iainmac said:

 

There is literally no point in them being there then, other than they get in to see the matches that we can't.

 

Probably punishment enough for them.

For me it would be enough for the FoH to publicly state that they had no faith in the manager. The FoH nominees on the board would not need to say anything publicly just concentrate on accelerating the share transfer.  It would be clear enough to Neilson that his days are numbered post the FoH takeover.

[JDK2020]

32 minutes ago, EIEIO said:

The FoH guys on the Hearts board are in a difficult position. However, the FoH committee/executive are less so and should be able to represent their members views from the hundreds of emails and Direct Debit cancellations made. If they are ignorant of FoH members views perhaps they could canvass the remaining members, afterall they have our email addresses.  There recent statement was a pitiful forelock  tugging couple of sentences echo the statement from Budge and co.

 

I'll say it again, I do not want to seem like I am attacking any or all of the FOH, I am more skeptical of the concept of fan ownership/fan running of clubs in general, and suggesting it is not the way forward.

I will say though that some of the contentious issues that seem to be arising within the FOH may be symptomatic of what may tend to happen in fan ownership. 

[iainmac]

2 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

I'll say it again, I do not want to seem like I am attacking any or all of the FOH, I am more skeptical of the concept of fan ownership/fan running of clubs in general, and suggesting it is not the way forward.

I will say though that some of the contentious issues that seem to be arising within the FOH may be symptomatic of what may tend to happen in fan ownership. 

 

I doubt the Chairman of the football club will be able to completely ignore the views of the majority shareholder.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

6 minutes ago, JDK2020 said:

 

I'll say it again, I do not want to seem like I am attacking any or all of the FOH, I am more skeptical of the concept of fan ownership/fan running of clubs in general, and suggesting it is not the way forward.

I will say though that some of the contentious issues that seem to be arising within the FOH may be symptomatic of what may tend to happen in fan ownership. 

 

Fan owned and fan run are two very different things yet they always get conflated here. We nearly went bust because of a rogue "investor" who really didn't care about the club or fans and just wanted a football club as an ego booster and plaything. 

 

Fan ownership is simply designed to prevent that happening again. For me it just rubber stamps the fact that without fans football is nothing. As a Hearts fan, and future part owner, I don't expect to have any more say in running the club though, but I'll be very happy it's mostly owned by people who care about the club more than making money or anything else.

 

Some people seem to want FoH to be more like a supporters group to put pressure on the board or hold the board accountable. Not saying that's not a good thing, although this forum proves that not everyone has the same idea of how the club should be run.

 

FoH is simply a vehicle for investment into the club and a means to an end when it comes to fan ownership. What happens next is up to FoH directors and members, but saving the club then transferring ownership was always the primary aim.

[iainmac]

[davemclaren]

17 minutes ago, iainmac said:

 

I doubt the Chairman of the football club will be able to completely ignore the views of the majority shareholder.

Not indefinitely anyway. 

[merrymac]

2 minutes ago, iainmac said:

Would have to give a fail on at least two of those.

[iainmac]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

Not indefinitely anyway. 

 

A key difference from the current situation so it would be worth pursuing on that basis alone.

[portobellojambo1]

1 hour ago, Jambo61 said:

You write as if the agreement in place can simply be set aside! If that was the case, why bother writing one?

I apologise if I made it sound awfully simplistic, that wasn't my intention. I made be wrong here but the actual company, BidCo, was created as the vessel to hold the shareholding, and any existing agreement, I assume, was agreed between that body and the HMFC board. I would think it is likely that once the shares change ownership, from BidCo to FoH, there would be little point in Ann Budge keeping BidCo in business, so chances are that the existing company could well be dissolved, although not sure if it would have to remain as an active company until such time as the more recent loans made by BidCo to HMFC have been repaid in full.. A new arrangment would then exist between FOH, as the major shareholder, and HMFC, so to me it would seem logical for a fresh arrangement to be put in place. It is only my thoughts, and I have no idea if possible how long it would then take to draft, or indeed if FOH would be more comfortable simply continuing with the structure of the exisitng arrangement.

Edited March 31, 2021 by portobellojambo1

[Jambo61]

40 minutes ago, portobellojambo1 said:

I apologise if I made it sound awfully simplistic, that wasn't my intention. I made be wrong here but the actual company, BidCo, was created as the vessel to hold the shareholding, and any existing agreement, I assume, was agreed between that body and the HMFC board. I would think it is likely that once the shares change ownership, from BidCo to FoH, there would be little point in Ann Budge keeping BidCo in business, so chances are that the existing company could well be dissolved, although not sure if it would have to remain as an active company until such time as the more recent loans made by BidCo to HMFC have been repaid in full.. A new arrangment would then exist between FOH, as the major shareholder, and HMFC, so to me it would seem logical for a fresh arrangement to be put in place. It is only my thoughts, and I have no idea if possible how long it would then take to draft, or indeed if FOH would be more comfortable simply continuing with the structure of the exisitng arrangement.

No worries, I have been saying for months if not years 'who' takes on Budges mantle after the shares transfer.........I see a rudderless ship unfortunately. I've also mentioned Jack Walker and Blackburn being a trust overturned in court as unsustainable, that is where we are heading if reliant on fairly 'fixed' future incomes given 'normal' football inflation rates.

The happy clappers who assume total control is coming their way are likely to be disappointed as 1) it isn't and 2) the general malaise in keeping 8,000 or so interested and aligned!

[EIEIO]

1 hour ago, merrymac said:

Would have to give a fail on at least two of those.

First two definitely not met. 

[davemclaren]

30 minutes ago, Jambo61 said:

No worries, I have been saying for months if not years 'who' takes on Budges mantle after the shares transfer.........I see a rudderless ship unfortunately. I've also mentioned Jack Walker and Blackburn being a trust overturned in court as unsustainable, that is where we are heading if reliant on fairly 'fixed' future incomes given 'normal' football inflation rates.

The happy clappers who assume total control is coming their way are likely to be disappointed as 1) it isn't and 2) the general malaise in keeping 8,000 or so interested and aligned!

It certainly gets interesting if major changes such as a European-ish league happens and we have to raise £xxM capital to get included. 

[EIEIO]

1 hour ago, JDK2020 said:

 

I'll say it again, I do not want to seem like I am attacking any or all of the FOH, I am more skeptical of the concept of fan ownership/fan running of clubs in general, and suggesting it is not the way forward.

I will say though that some of the contentious issues that seem to be arising within the FOH may be symptomatic of what may tend to happen in fan ownership. 

Not a huge number of fan owned or run clubs in League football in Scotland or England , Wimbledon probably the best example.  Seems to work in Germany though where fans must have a 51 percent share.  I realise Red Bull Leipzig  and  Hoffenheim are the two exceptions, that I know of, in the Bundesliga. Bayern Munich have done OK though for instance.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

31 minutes ago, Jambo61 said:

No worries, I have been saying for months if not years 'who' takes on Budges mantle after the shares transfer.........I see a rudderless ship unfortunately. I've also mentioned Jack Walker and Blackburn being a trust overturned in court as unsustainable, that is where we are heading if reliant on fairly 'fixed' future incomes given 'normal' football inflation rates.

The happy clappers who assume total control is coming their way are likely to be disappointed as 1) it isn't and 2) the general malaise in keeping 8,000 or so interested and aligned!

 

Budge has said she's staying on as Chairman after the handover of shares. However she also said she'd stay on as CEO and she's already relinquished that role. So I think she'll probably say enough is enough and someone else will take over. I have no idea how that process works though. Maybe one of the geniuses on this forum will step up and prove how easy it apparently should be to run a football club.

[Jambo61]

1 minute ago, davemclaren said:

It certainly gets interesting if major changes such as a European-ish league happens and we have to raise £xxM capital to get included. 

Again I've said how do we expect to raise any funding above the FoH and (hopefully) benefactors.

Hearts will have issues guaranteeing loans, obtaining attractive interest rates etc!

[Jambo61]

3 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Budge has said she's staying on as Chairman after the handover of shares. However she also said she'd stay on as CEO and she's already relinquished that role. So I think she'll probably say enough is enough and someone else will take over. I have no idea how that process works though. Maybe one of the geniuses on this forum will step up and prove how easy it apparently should be to run a football club.

My issue with your statement is "Budge said she's staying on" since she will be a minority shareholder. That alone begs the question 'who leads Hearts'! The tail wags the dog!

[EIEIO]

2 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

It certainly gets interesting if major changes such as a European-ish league happens and we have to raise £xxM capital to get included. 

This is true but our current owner has us in the second tier and unable to compete in the Scottish Premiership for the past 4 seasons.  We can only dream of participation in a European league under her stewardship. I won't mention our current head coaches European record.

[NANOJAMBO]

37 minutes ago, Jambo61 said:

No worries, I have been saying for months if not years 'who' takes on Budges mantle after the shares transfer.........I see a rudderless ship unfortunately. I've also mentioned Jack Walker and Blackburn being a trust overturned in court as unsustainable, that is where we are heading if reliant on fairly 'fixed' future incomes given 'normal' football inflation rates.

The happy clappers who assume total control is coming their way are likely to be disappointed as 1) it isn't and 2) the general malaise in keeping 8,000 or so interested and aligned!

No one on here is even talking about that - but as ever it's used as a stick to have a go. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

6 minutes ago, Jambo61 said:

My issue with your statement is "Budge said she's staying on" since she will be a minority shareholder. That alone begs the question 'who leads Hearts'! The tail wags the dog!

 

You don't have to be majority shareholder to be chairman do you? As I say I have no idea about, or any real interest in, the governance of football clubs and I'm an FoH member (lapsed now) and shareholder.

Edited March 31, 2021 by ToqueJambo

[davemclaren]

6 minutes ago, EIEIO said:

This is true but our current owner has us in the second tier and unable to compete in the Scottish Premiership for the past 4 seasons.  We can only dream of participation in a European league under her stewardship. I won't mention our current head coaches European record.

I think any restructuring like that will be done in the basis of ( tv ) potential rather than domestic league positions. 

[Jambo61]

9 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

You don't have to be majority shareholder to be chairman do you? As I say I have no idea about, or any real interest in, the governance of football clubs and I'm an FoH member (lapsed now) and shareholder.

I too am lapsed, my point was she needed 'invited' to stay on, not simply appoint herself, she is no longer the owner except by delaying the transfer! I smell something rotten!

[EIEIO]

8 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

I think any restructuring like that will be done in the basis of ( tv ) potential rather than domestic league positions. 

Would have to be on this basis rather than performance for us to be involved.

[Jambo61]

17 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

No one on here is even talking about that - but as ever it's used as a stick to have a go. 

Not even remotely sure what you are saying.......are you taking offence at the happy clappers?

[davemclaren]

5 minutes ago, EIEIO said:

Would have to be on this basis rather than performance for us to be involved.

It’s not happening this season. 😉

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 minutes ago, Jambo61 said:

I too am lapsed, my point was she needed 'invited' to stay on, not simply appoint herself, she is no longer the owner except by delaying the transfer! I smell something rotten!

 

I think everyone wants a smooth handover. COVID delayed the handover.

[Jambo61]

25 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

I think everyone wants a smooth handover. COVID delayed the handover.

I want a smooth handover, but I don't know into what, that's the issue for me!

It is as clear as mud how it will work and who on a daily basis sets the parameters and pulls the strings! I get it there will be a, so far ghostly, CEO and a board, but who sets the targets, takes them to task if all seems not well? Can the CEO/ Board overrule the FoH? Are the minority shareholders, who it has to be noted had nothing of value when the club went bust, actually deemed more important/ have more of a say? The happy clappers say all will be well, the FoH will be in charge, what can go wrong!

[Guest ToqueJambo]

10 minutes ago, Jambo61 said:

I want a smooth handover, but I don't know into what, that's the issue for me!

It is as clear as mud how it will work and who on a daily basis sets the parameters and pulls the strings! I get it there will be a, so far ghostly, CEO and a board, but who sets the targets, takes them to task if all seems not well? Can the CEO/ Board overrule the FoH? Are the minority shareholders, who it has to be noted had nothing of value when the club went bust, actually deemed more important/ have more of a say? The happy clappers say all will be well, the FoH will be in charge, what can go wrong!

 

FoH (and the fans) are not going to be in charge. FoH (and the fans) were never going to be in charge.

[Jambo61]

1 minute ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

FoH (and the fans) are not going to be in charge. FoH (and the fans) were never going to be in charge.

I agree, totally get it.....but who is? Is it the minority shareholders who had shares with no value?

If so we have been sold a pup!

[Seymour M Hersh]

The FOH Board don't seem to be reading the room all that well. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

6 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

The FOH Board don't seem to be reading the room all that well. 

They never expected to have to challenge Budge and it’s abundantly clear that they don’t have the stones to do it. They’ve been too comfortable for too long and seem totally paralysed by our complaints 

[Bull's-eye]

3 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

They never expected to have to challenge Budge and it’s abundantly clear that they don’t have the stones to do it. They’ve been too comfortable for too long and seem totally paralysed by our complaints 

 

You mean your complaints, there's not enough time in the day to deal with that list.

[Toxteth O'Grady]

5 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

They never expected to have to challenge Budge and it’s abundantly clear that they don’t have the stones to do it. They’ve been too comfortable for too long and seem totally paralysed by our complaints 

Utter Charlatans

[Jambo-Fox]

5 hours ago, iainmac said:

 

I doubt the Chairman of the football club will be able to completely ignore the views of the majority shareholder.

Who is the majority shareholder and what are their views?

[iainmac]

5 minutes ago, Jambo-Fox said:

Who is the majority shareholder and what are their views?

 

The majority shareholder will be FoH in the future and I guess the 300 emails will constitute their views.

[NANOJAMBO]

3 hours ago, Jambo61 said:

Not even remotely sure what you are saying.......are you taking offence at the happy clappers?

No offence taken. 

Just pointing out the cliched use of it. 

[Jambo61]

6 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

No offence taken. 

Just pointing out the cliched use of it. 

Unfortunately a large proportion seem to simply think it will be alright on the night and no one should think otherwise!

[Footballfirst]

FOH email

 

FOUNDATION UPDATE

Dear Member

As we are all aware, the last week or so has been a difficult time for all Hearts fans. Through that, though, we are really grateful to everyone who contacted us over the last few days. As ever, it is invaluable to hear your range of views. We have tried to respond to emails but the volume has been huge, so our apologies if you haven’t had a reply.

There have been some recurring themes in the messages we received, so in addition to giving you an update on where we are with pledge numbers, we thought it would be helpful to address these in a general update to Foundation members.

First, a number of pledgers who have been in touch with us have attacked the Foundation for not representing the views, as they see it, of Foundation members and for not making these views clear to the club. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our communications with the club reflect the strength of feelings that pledgers have brought to us and is passed on with no diluting of the emotions expressed. This does not fall on deaf ears - and of course, the club itself hears from fans and is well aware of people’s many opinions. We are able to supplement that and can also report on pledge numbers.

Equally, the views of Foundation members inform and shape the standpoint of those who represent the Foundation on the club board.

We have also been attacked by some for – to put it bluntly – not firing the manager. As most pledgers understand, the Foundation does not run the club. It is right and proper that the club board makes the final management calls, and it is right and proper that the Foundation - through communicating with the club and through our representatives on the board - aims to inform and influence strategies and decision-making. That is what we have done and that’s what we will continue to do when the Foundation becomes the majority shareholder of the club. The Foundation has always put forward the message of fan owned, not fan run. Foundation members overwhelmingly sanctioned the governance model which has this concept at its heart and it remains a pillar of the organisation’s structure.

Sadly we must also mention that there has been a level of vitriol and abuse in some of the emails and other communications which is intolerable. This type of attack has also been visited on club officials and staff and we utterly condemn it. Equating passion for a club with this kind of behaviour is totally misplaced. Passion for a club comes in many shapes and forms but abusing others, many of whom are working on a voluntary basis, is most certainly not one of them.

Looking ahead, the board is considering ways in which debate among Foundation members can be encouraged and structured. As mentioned above, we are very appreciative of members taking the time to bring us their views and constructive advice, and we will shortly be looking to create a new post - a director of members affairs - which, we believe, will help the communication process, but we are certainly open to other positive developments on this issue.

Meanwhile, to update you on pledge numbers and activity, we have seen in recent days around 250 cancellations of pledges. That equates to approximately 3 per cent of the membership. We’ve also seen some new pledgers coming on board and that range of activity leaves us with a total number of current pledgers today of just over 8100.  

It is in times of real pressure or challenge that individuals and organisations reveal their true character. This was the case when our club faced possible extinction. The character of the supporters then was unbelievable and has paved the way for the most successful fan initiative in British footballing history. We thank everyone who has been involved in this and who, by pledging, continues to lay the platform for a better future for Heart of Midlothian.

Kind regards

Stuart Wallace, Alastair Bruce, Paul Cheshire, Donald Cumming, Garry Halliday and Louise Strutt

The board of the Foundation of Hearts 

[tamanov]

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

FOH email

 

FOUNDATION UPDATE

Dear Member

As we are all aware, the last week or so has been a difficult time for all Hearts fans. Through that, though, we are really grateful to everyone who contacted us over the last few days. As ever, it is invaluable to hear your range of views. We have tried to respond to emails but the volume has been huge, so our apologies if you haven’t had a reply.

There have been some recurring themes in the messages we received, so in addition to giving you an update on where we are with pledge numbers, we thought it would be helpful to address these in a general update to Foundation members.

First, a number of pledgers who have been in touch with us have attacked the Foundation for not representing the views, as they see it, of Foundation members and for not making these views clear to the club. Nothing could be further from the truth. Our communications with the club reflect the strength of feelings that pledgers have brought to us and is passed on with no diluting of the emotions expressed. This does not fall on deaf ears - and of course, the club itself hears from fans and is well aware of people’s many opinions. We are able to supplement that and can also report on pledge numbers.

Equally, the views of Foundation members inform and shape the standpoint of those who represent the Foundation on the club board.

We have also been attacked by some for – to put it bluntly – not firing the manager. As most pledgers understand, the Foundation does not run the club. It is right and proper that the club board makes the final management calls, and it is right and proper that the Foundation - through communicating with the club and through our representatives on the board - aims to inform and influence strategies and decision-making. That is what we have done and that’s what we will continue to do when the Foundation becomes the majority shareholder of the club. The Foundation has always put forward the message of fan owned, not fan run. Foundation members overwhelmingly sanctioned the governance model which has this concept at its heart and it remains a pillar of the organisation’s structure.

Sadly we must also mention that there has been a level of vitriol and abuse in some of the emails and other communications which is intolerable. This type of attack has also been visited on club officials and staff and we utterly condemn it. Equating passion for a club with this kind of behaviour is totally misplaced. Passion for a club comes in many shapes and forms but abusing others, many of whom are working on a voluntary basis, is most certainly not one of them.

Looking ahead, the board is considering ways in which debate among Foundation members can be encouraged and structured. As mentioned above, we are very appreciative of members taking the time to bring us their views and constructive advice, and we will shortly be looking to create a new post - a director of members affairs - which, we believe, will help the communication process, but we are certainly open to other positive developments on this issue.

Meanwhile, to update you on pledge numbers and activity, we have seen in recent days around 250 cancellations of pledges. That equates to approximately 3 per cent of the membership. We’ve also seen some new pledgers coming on board and that range of activity leaves us with a total number of current pledgers today of just over 8100.  

It is in times of real pressure or challenge that individuals and organisations reveal their true character. This was the case when our club faced possible extinction. The character of the supporters then was unbelievable and has paved the way for the most successful fan initiative in British footballing history. We thank everyone who has been involved in this and who, by pledging, continues to lay the platform for a better future for Heart of Midlothian.

Kind regards

Stuart Wallace, Alastair Bruce, Paul Cheshire, Donald Cumming, Garry Halliday and Louise Strutt

The board of the Foundation of Hearts 

Brilliant email. Anyone resorting to personal abuse just because the team’s performances or results aren’t going their way should hang their head in shame. The work done by Stuart Wallace and everyone connected with the foundation has only one purpose, to benefit Hearts and I for one am eternally grateful for all their efforts in ensuring we try to never return to the position our club found itself in previously. 

[GinRummy]

1 hour ago, tamanov said:

Brilliant email. Anyone resorting to personal abuse just because the team’s performances or results aren’t going their way should hang their head in shame. The work done by Stuart Wallace and everyone connected with the foundation has only one purpose, to benefit Hearts and I for one am eternally grateful for all their efforts in ensuring we try to never return to the position our club found itself in previously. 

Not returning to the position of going into administration isn’t enough. We have a better financial footing than anyone else in Scotland outwith the old firm but need loans from Ann Budge and her directors because the money has been mismanaged, right in front of the eyes of FoH. 

Edited April 1, 2021 by GinRummy

[Italian Lambretta]

23 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

The FOH Board don't seem to be reading the room all that well. 

The FOH is dead we now have Chris Robinson MK 2 running the club

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

3 minutes ago, Italian Lambretta said:

The FOH is dead we now have Chris Robinson MK 2 running the club

This

[kevins_barnet]

3 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

FOUNDATION UPDATE

As we are all aware, the last week or so has been a difficult time for all Hearts fans. 

They make it clear in the first sentence of the letter just how out of touch they are. This isn’t just about the last week, it has been going on for years, last week was simply the culmination of years of mismanagement.

Edited April 1, 2021 by kevins_barnet

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

12 minutes ago, kevins_barnet said:

They make it clear in the first sentence of the letter just how out of touch they are. This isn’t just about the last week, it has been going on for years, last week was simply the culmination of years of mismanagement.

It’s a way of avoiding talking about Ann because FOH have their tongue so far up her ring piece they’d never dare criticise her

[JamboAl]

11 hours ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

It’s a way of avoiding talking about Ann because FOH have their tongue so far up her ring piece they’d never dare criticise her

They don't need to.  You do enough of that for everybody.