Why are people wary of Mo?

[Andyregs]

So it's a mixture of pro-board people sh!t-stirring and lies? Fair enough.

 

It's just that lies and dirt-dishing normally have some kind of base in truth, if you see what I mean. Joan Whalley may have got Bratty his MBE and be a friend of his (or whatever) but that still doesn't explain why she was (apparently) so vehement in her dismissal of Mo. Similairly, Jackson's comment about the bank refusing to work with Mo. Is that really a completely made-up statement or does it have any basis in fact. It seems quite a bizarre and random thing to lie about if it's completely fabricated.

 

I don't live in the area and have never heard of Roger Ibbs. Why is his opinion so dismissable?

 

I really want Mo to succeed in his takeover; I'm just curious as to why he seems particularly open to such vehement mistrust.

 

They claimed there wasnt even a bid on the table. So I have no doubt that Jackson will say whatever is needed to dismiss the bid. Do you believe that he is doing everything for the best of the club, even to his own detriment as he also made out? The board have been caught out lying countless times, to fans, shareholders and each other. They were even caught out doing it yesterday.

I class Whalley as one of the V2001 backslappers who like having "my mate Bill" running the club.

As for Ibbs, just google it. But I find it amazing that the board question Mo's suitability due to certain allegations, but are happy to take Ibbs advice.

As for the banks, like I said its a joke. Despite openly not wanting to accept, and barely giving the time to discuss the bid, have they actually gone to the bank to ask whether they would be happy with Mo taking over??? And even if by some stretch of the imagination it was true, there are more than one bank around. I am sure a number wont mind having a multi millionaire give them business. Or does Mo keep his millions under his mattress?

And back to businessmen, I have given names of those that support him. Which businessmen don't?

[suge1w]

The bigger question is why are people so taken with him? The only reason seems to be 'he's got money and he's saying the right things'.

 

Some people are so adamant about getting the current board out that they don't stop and think what would happen if he got off his white horse and didn't turn out to be the saviour everyone assumes he is.

 

I seriously think he could be a poorer version of Mike Ashley.

[Andyregs]

Under the agreement undetaken by V2001, the council can now end the payment holiday the board have enjoyed up to this point. If there is a change of ownership the council can enforce repayment in FULL.

 

In answer to the original question my wariness of Mo is based on things i have been told about his business practices. I believe that Mo Chaudry is only interested in his own personal gain and not the best interests of PVFC or its fans. And im not on about redeveloping the ground or any of that, i just think that Mo Chaudry will be associated with PVFC while it suits him, and when it doesnt he'll walk away no matter what state it'll leave the club in.

 

Im no supporter of the current board, but equally im not taken in by Mo Chaudry's well rehearsed PR offensive.

 

How do you know the terms of the loan? However, Mo is still in a better situation to deal with this. Isnt the plan to turn this into directors loans anyway?

Are you suggesting that the current board are doing this for the best of the club? And what state do you think the club will be in when they go?

 

ANd what are these business practices you talk of?

[MarkB2]

So it's a mixture of pro-board people sh!t-stirring and lies? Fair enough.

 

It's just that lies and dirt-dishing normally have some kind of base in truth, if you see what I mean. Joan Whalley may have got Bratty his MBE and be a friend of his (or whatever) but that still doesn't explain why she was (apparently) so vehement in her dismissal of Mo. Similairly, Jackson's comment about the bank refusing to work with Mo. Is that really a completely made-up statement or does it have any basis in fact. It seems quite a bizarre and random thing to lie about if it's completely fabricated.

 

I don't live in the area and have never heard of Roger Ibbs. Why is his opinion so dismissable?

 

I really want Mo to succeed in his takeover; I'm just curious as to why he seems particularly open to such vehement mistrust.

 

I think any business person who has been even mildly successful will attract criticism....see link below (although hold your nose before you read it)...

 

http://www.thegreenarrow.co.uk/writers/arrow-straight/1362-the-sun-mo-chaudry-and-the-bnp

 

I am sure that Mo isn't without his skeletons, that is not for me to say or speculate on - what I know is that he is successful, has a good track record, is prepared to take risks and has strong ties to the local area. Quite honestly, nothing else is of any importance to me.

 

I would suggest that very very few of us would survive intact if all our dealings and all the things we have done in our lives were laid bare for all to see, with no or little context or explanation.

 

You have to remember that these people are now desperate, as this is a sustained challenge to them - something they have not been used to. As a result, it is not clear what they are saying has any basis in fact.

[NLVMalc]

There seem to be quite alot of people that are adamant in their dislike/ distrust of Mo Chaudry. Is this just due to the Miners' pensions scandal? I imagine that any successful business man would have people criticising him, but in Mo's case there does seem to be a larger amount than normal.

 

(This isn't an exercise in ****-stirring; I'm genuinely interested in why some people are apparently so dubious.)

 

Mr H,

I think we should quantify quite a lot. From the NLV survey this less than 20% would say no to Mo's bid for 51%, whilst 73% say yes. There is never going to be unanimity, on such things, but 73% in favour of change is a large percentage when talking about change, people are normally reticent about change.

 

As to why people seem to have a distrust, that is a very good question, because no one is actually saying anything factual. For me that says it all. There isn't a good reason so people play on fear or innuendo.

 

The choice is plain. Who do you trust more, V2001 or Mo Chaudry?

 

The voice of the fans has been heard very clearly, it was a resounding vote of no confidence in the board and to place their trust in Mr Chaudry.

[VantaaVale]

The bigger question is why are people so taken with him? The only reason seems to be 'he's got money and he's saying the right things'.

 

Some people are so adamant about getting the current board out that they don't stop and think what would happen if he got off his white horse and didn't turn out to be the saviour everyone assumes he is.

 

I seriously think he could be a poorer version of Mike Ashley.

 

What more can he do? He's willing to put money in and publish a summary of his bid which outlines a rather ambitious plan for the club.

 

I said before, if it all goes wrong, Bill Bratt et al can come on here and say "we told you so".

 

All I see is that with the current board things will definitely go wrong. We need an alternative and at this time Mo is the only one.

[Jason]

I have yet to see one comment that is actually based on someones personal dealings with Mo, as oppose to hearsay and ***** stirring

[Fosse69]

The bigger question is why are people so taken with him? The only reason seems to be 'he's got money and he's saying the right things'.

 

Some people are so adamant about getting the current board out that they don't stop and think what would happen if he got off his white horse and didn't turn out to be the saviour everyone assumes he is.

 

I seriously think he could be a poorer version of Mike Ashley.

 

New on here are you? Read his plans? Why are you not convinced?

[NLVMalc]

The bigger question is why are people so taken with him? The only reason seems to be 'he's got money and he's saying the right things'.

 

Some people are so adamant about getting the current board out that they don't stop and think what would happen if he got off his white horse and didn't turn out to be the saviour everyone assumes he is.

 

I seriously think he could be a poorer version of Mike Ashley.

 

More fear and innuendo...

 

May I suggest you look at Mo's business plan and compare that with the blueprint for the future issued by the board. Therein lies your answer.

[MarkB2]

Under the agreement undetaken by V2001, the council can now end the payment holiday the board have enjoyed up to this point. If there is a change of ownership the council can enforce repayment in FULL.

 

In answer to the original question my wariness of Mo is based on things i have been told about his business practices. I believe that Mo Chaudry is only interested in his own personal gain and not the best interests of PVFC or its fans. And im not on about redeveloping the ground or any of that, i just think that Mo Chaudry will be associated with PVFC while it suits him, and when it doesnt he'll walk away no matter what state it'll leave the club in.

 

Im no supporter of the current board, but equally im not taken in by Mo Chaudry's well rehearsed PR offensive.

 

Ever heard of re-negotiation or,indeed, negotiation? You really think that the Council will call in this loan in the aftermath of Mo purchasing a majority of shares with no negotiation? You really think that they will not listen to a word of what he has to say and stick to the agreement they have in place, so that the club could potentially go down the tubes?

 

I suggest that any business person you could name would have similar question marks against their names. What is the alternative to this? A fan owned club? Well, we've tried that one! Who is there who can take this club forward? Who has the money? If we dismiss every potential buyer/investor based on your criteria,then the list will be a very short one!

 

I happen to think that good PR is important - he has said nothing or done nothing which offends me or makes me think he is in it for anything other than success off and on the field.

[VantaaVale]

You really think that the Council will call in this loan in the aftermath of Mo purchasing a majority of shares with no negotiation?

 

If they do then surely this is some sort of discrimination.

[Smallthorne Dog]

One of the other things you hear from the pro Mo fans is ..... "If the anti Mo lot have any actual evidence of dodgy practices against Mo, lets hear them on the forum".

 

This rather simplistic outlook fails to consider that succesful businessmen with "colourful" pasts and questionable practices are rarely stupid enough to leave hard evidence of these practices lying around. They cover their tracks well. They also have considerable financial might and will use the full force of the legal system to come down on anybody that accuses them of something specific without being able to back it up.

 

Hence i wont be putting out the specifics of what i have heard on OVF. But i am one supporter who thinks the fact that the police found it nessesary to investigate messers Ibbs, Meredith and Chaudry very intetesting.

[TheLegalBeagle]

So it's a mixture of pro-board people sh!t-stirring and lies? Fair enough.

 

It's just that lies and dirt-dishing normally have some kind of base in truth, if you see what I mean. Joan Whalley may have got Bratty his MBE and be a friend of his (or whatever) but that still doesn't explain why she was (apparently) so vehement in her dismissal of Mo. Similairly, Jackson's comment about the bank refusing to work with Mo. Is that really a completely made-up statement or does it have any basis in fact. It seems quite a bizarre and random thing to lie about if it's completely fabricated.

 

I don't live in the area and have never heard of Roger Ibbs. Why is his opinion so dismissable?

 

I really want Mo to succeed in his takeover; I'm just curious as to why he seems particularly open to such vehement mistrust.

 

Dear Mr H,

 

I can assure you without hesitation that PJ's statement regarding the bank is an outrageous lie. Why he would make such an inaccurate remark in public is beyond me, other than in malice.

 

The interesting point from my perspective is the detractors cannot fault the bid so they discredit the man - but of course Mo is but one person as there is a team of people behind him and this bid, all of whom bring experience and expertise in the running of a football club.

 

One could of course question the credentials of the board members before V2001 (and I stand to be corrected) because I do not believe any of them had experience in running a football club - yet they are now qualified to judge others.

 

All I ask is the matter is now put to the shareholders, bypassing the board. However I suspect a number of the shareholders hold a nostalgic view of the board and so will vote with their heart not head.

 

C'est la vie.

 

Kind Regards

[Jason]

Dear Mr H,

 

I can assure you without hesitation that PJ's statement regarding the bank is an outrageous lie. Why he would make such an inaccurate remark in public is beyond me, other than in malice.

 

The interesting point from my perspective is the detractors cannot fault the bid so they discredit the man - but of course Mo is but one person as there is a team of people behind him and this bid, all of whom bring experience and expertise in the running of a football club.

 

One could of course question the credentials of the board members before V2001 (and I stand to be corrected) because I do not believe any of them had experience in running a football club - yet they are now qualified to judge others.

 

All I ask is the matter is now put to the shareholders, bypassing the board. However I suspect a number of the shareholders hold a nostalgic view of the board and so will vote with their heart not head.

 

C'est la vie.

 

Kind Regards

 

further to your point LB, I would question exactly which facet of their running of the club they believe to be successful enough to allow them to judge others.

[Jason]

One of the other things you hear from the pro Mo fans is ..... "If the anti Mo lot have any actual evidence of dodgy practices against Mo, lets hear them on the forum".

 

This rather simplistic outlook fails to consider that succesful businessmen with "colourful" pasts and questionable practices are rarely stupid enough to leave hard evidence of these practices lying around. They cover their tracks well. They also have considerable financial might and will use the full force of the legal system to come down on anybody that accuses them of something specific without being able to back it up.

 

Hence i wont be putting out the specifics of what i have heard on OVF. But i am one supporter who thinks the fact that the police found it nessesary to investigate messers Ibbs, Meredith and Chaudry very intetesting.

 

interesting enough to see vale drift out of business and into oblivion Rob?