Kinight to make quick decision on new boss

[sir albion]

Have you not considered the possibility that the Board CHOOSE to manage the public relations side of the business in this way?

Or to put the same question in another way ... step aside for WHO?

bob the builder would quiet easily do a better job than knight

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Our PR has long been shit.

 

[withdeanwombat]

Sorry for all those that love him to death but thats the way more and more of us see it.

Hang on.Who are the other two who don't like/trust Dick Knight ?

 

[withdeanwombat]

difficult, we need a man to save us from relagation , next year we need a man for promotion. Are they the same man ?

Only if it's McGhee,Wilkins,Cappello or Dowie; Ince,Wilkinson,Saunders or Scolari.Is God busy?

(edit:is God a man?)

 

[EastbourneGull]

I've just listened to that Harty interview with Knight. For what it's worth I thought Ian did very well and went about as far as he could in questioning the almost unbelievable chain of events as outlined by the chairman.

It just didn't stack up at all. He claimed there was no intention at all of sacking Micky, yet had spoken to the board beforehand about the meeting. I cannot believe in those conversations that Adams' future was not raised.

Then there are the pre-prepared mantras to deflect awkward questions. 'Micky and I have always been open and honest with each other.' 'It became clear during the meeting that it was in the best interests of the football club if he went now.' Why? What was said? What precisely made them both draw that conclusion? What does any of this actually mean?

Increasingly it's just words with Knight, everyone's getting a bit fed up with his brand of bullsh*t, and if people are brave enough to question what he is actually saying it soon becomes clear that it's all a load of spin and he just cannot cut to the chase and give a straight answer.

All DK was doing was not wishing to divulge the events leading up to the meeting and who said what and how the decision was arrived at. I don't think he owes us a straight answer, as you put it.

For all we know it might have been an emotionally charged meeting - MA might have broken down in tears in mid-meeting, saying "I'm sorry Dick I just can't handle this pressure any longer". A possible scenario and one which DK would not wish to share with us. In such a case his reponses to Harty's questions were entirely reasonable.

IMO his tactics were deeply flawed, he presided over 8 home league defeats including three 4-goal drubbings, his summer signings were questionable at best. However it happened, whatever was said, he has gone and we just have to move on.

 

[Deano's Invisible Pants]

All DK was doing was not wishing to divulge the events leading up to the meeting and who said what and how the decision was arrived at. I don't think he owes us a straight answer, as you put it.

For all we know it might have been an emotionally charged meeting - MA might have broken down in tears in mid-meeting, saying "I'm sorry Dick I just can't handle this pressure any longer". A possible scenario and one which DK would not wish to share with us. In such a case his reponses to Harty's questions were entirely reasonable.

IMO his tactics were deeply flawed, he presided over 8 home league defeats including three 4-goal drubbings, his summer signings were questionable at best. However it happened, whatever was said, he has gone and we just have to move on.

Good post - I agree with this 100%. To be honest, a 9 year old could pick holes in DK's answers, but as with the circumstances surrounding Wilkins' sacking, DK has to balance the fans' desire to hear the full story with his completely understandable wish not to humiliate MA. Equally, much as we would all like to know how decisions are taken at the club and the balance of power between the Directors and benefactors, no business, football clubs included, would want to share this sort of information.

 

[Russell Slade's hat]

Nothing wrong with White and Booker

 

[jonesie]

Roy Keane?

 

[Knotty]

Equally, much as we would all like to know how decisions are taken at the club and the balance of power between the Directors and benefactors, no business, football clubs included, would want to share this sort of information.

Agreed. We simply don't have a right to know, and I am intrigued why people want to know so much. We only know a fraction of what goes on apart from the 90 minutes of football that we watch, but why does anyone want to know more? We can't change anything and don't have a right to. Like any customer, we have a right to complain if we don't like the product we are buying but we have no right to know about employment matters or anything else that a business wishes to keep private.

Looking at all the posts on here this morning one could be forgiven for not realising we had a match yesterday, let alone that we won it!

You could also be forgiven for thinking that DK was the first chairman in the history of football to have employed an unsuccessful manager. It happens. The Edwards at Man U employed one or two failures, then they got Ferguson who the fans wanted out until...

Still, a complete lack of realism, patience, commonsense and knowledge of the facts does not seem to be a hindrance to some 'fans'.

 

[Icy Gull]

Roy Keane?

A manager who might actually have a full blown fight with the fans when they mass behind the dugout and hurl abuse :yahoo:

 

[Deano's Invisible Pants]

Roy Keane?

Yeah, or Scolari? Or Capello?

 

[Forster's Armband]

Yeah, or Scolari? Or Capello?

Whilst Keane is NEVER gonna come to us he is not in the same league as Scolari or Capello. So your sarcy replie is floored!!!

 

[Deano's Invisible Pants]

Whilst Keane is NEVER gonna come to us he is not in the same league as Scolari or Capello. So your sarcy replie is floored!!!

Not as flawed as your spelling though!

 

[jonesie]

I dont see Keane coming down to us as such a radical and way out thought. OK so the wages might be a stumbling block but not much more than Ince's and he is everyones favourite.

by the way unless something has happened Capello is still in a job ?!?

 

[bhaexpress]

Roy Keane?

I thought that this morning but I think he would have a problem dealing with players at this level as he's never played at this level.

 

[jonesie]

Yeah you're right, what would he make of El-abd. Still be great to see him fall out with Tommy Fraser et al.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

This was the full shareholding at 31st August 2008, which is where you got the 23% from, however I am told the Blooms have got a much higher shareholding now.


Harry Richard Knight* 1,602,500 23.02%
William John Brown 1,100,000 15.80%
Anthony Grant Bloom 850,000 12.21%
Pig City Incorporated Limited (Norman Cook) 750,000 10.77%
Kevin Griffiths 582,000 8.36%
Raymond Alexander Bloom* 535,000 7.68%
Friday Ad Holdings Ltd 500,000 7.18%
Derek Leonard Chapman* 460,750 6.62%
Michael John Hastilow 250,000 3.59%
Robert Leonard Pinnock 142,000 2.04%
J Gold 100,000 1.44%
John Edward Vickers 50,000 0.72%
Joseph David Hirschel 15,000 0.22%
Edward Norman David 10,000 0.14%
Peter McDonnell 10,000 0.14%
John Town 5,000 0.07%
Martin John Perry* 130 0.00%

Quite correct, these figures are from the Annual Return made by BHA Holdings Ltd for the period ending 31/08/2008.

As of this morning, there have been no share transactions listed at Companies House since that date.
The authorised company share capital is £50,000,000 (ie 50,000,000 x £1 shares); shares issued = 6,962,380.
DK is the major shareholder and Board members(*) own 37.4% of the shares currently issued; even including Tony Bloom's shareholding does not give the "Board" a majority.

 

[Spiros]

I thought that Harty did well today to - my interpretation on is that Dick didn't want Micky to go but had been instructed by the board to do so - How can you say that it wasn't your intention to sack Micky and Micky himself says he won't resign and then after the meeting he loses his job - mind you nothing with Dick Knight makes sense anyway - if I was the Blooms i would be getting a bit fed up with paying people off because of Dick Knight

If you and others on here are to be believed every great decision is made by 'the board' and every bad one by Dick Knight. I think this decision is the same as most since the sacking of McGhee - Knight has a say but so do the other shareholders/board members and it ends up being a collective decision.

However, don't let that get in the way of your obviously personal vendetta against Knight. It gets more amusing with every post

 

[BensGrandad]

From the above shareholding figures the Blooms together do not have as many shares as DK so while they may be pulling the purse strings they do not control the board.

 

[The Large One]

From this listing it can be seen that D Knight still has the largest shareholding followed by Bill Brown. The Blooms only have the largest if they are combined and together.

From the above shareholding figures the Blooms together do not have as many shares as DK so while they may be pulling the purse strings they do not control the board.

Make your mind up.