Is This The Same Mo......?????

[eh up nah]

Thankfully enough of us have signed the Starve em Out petition that they will simply have to go surely.

 

I go to the matches with my uncle, always have. He is an intelligent guy but typical Stoke-on-Trent in that he is overly sceptical about any change. Just as I thought he was coming round to realising the board has to go, I turned up Saturday and first thing I said was "have you seen that crap in the sentinel?" He replied "Well, I cant help thinking he's got a point." I laughed, or I would have cried!

 

There are still a fair share of backward thinking sticks in the mud out there. Luckily, if those who've signed up keep to their word, there will be no choice for the board.

[TheLegalBeagle]

I spoke to someone on Saturday this Guy said Chaudry was a property developer and would stitch the club up when it was suggested he should speak to Chaudry who was only a few yards away he said he didnt need to because he knew !

 

Dear Sonny,

 

Says it all really. People are happy to gossip and spread rumour behind Mo's back but when presented with the opportunity to speak to Mo direct to raise such concerns do not have the courage of their convictions.

 

The mis-information about Mo is astonishing. The source of most of the gossip and innuendo is pretty much consistent. However once a rumour is started the same few anti-Mo posters pick up on them immediately and speak of thew rumour as if it is fact (e.g. Banbell).

 

I could spend all day answering such posts but to be honest the momentum behind the bid is such now that I do not have to trouble myself with such mischievous posts.

 

Thanks for flying the flag.

 

Mo's response to the BB article will be in The Sentinel this week and it will certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons. It will present the board with a dilemma - to practice what they have longed preached in terms of the v2001 ethos or stand as hypocrites and answer to the EGM.

 

Kind Regards.

[the old bycars tea bar]

i thrust the leaflet in his hand he just dropped it on the floor, as i have said i'm keeping away i'm not falling out with all in sundry for port vale football club, mr bratt has the chance to stop all this it's him and his mates i blame they are tearing the very fabric of this club apart, it's supporters.

 

the last bit of LB's post is very intresting

[Timothius]

i thrust the leaflet in his hand he just dropped it on the floor, as i have said i'm keeping away i'm not falling out with all in sundry for port vale football club, mr bratt has the chance to stop all this it's him and his mates i blame they are tearing the very fabric of this club apart, it's supporters.

 

the last bit of LB's post is very intresting

 

If it is what I think it could be, it is very interesting and I look forward to reading it and then listening to how the board try and wriggle out of it.

 

No where to run to anymore Mr Bratt and co, your cards are marked and your days are numbered.

[IanW]

Dear Sonny,

 

Says it all really. People are happy to gossip and spread rumour behind Mo's back but when presented with the opportunity to speak to Mo direct to raise such concerns do not have the courage of their convictions.

 

The mis-information about Mo is astonishing. The source of most of the gossip and innuendo is pretty much consistent. However once a rumour is started the same few anti-Mo posters pick up on them immediately and speak of thew rumour as if it is fact (e.g. Banbell).

 

I could spend all day answering such posts but to be honest the momentum behind the bid is such now that I do not have to trouble myself with such mischievous posts.

 

Thanks for flying the flag.

 

Mo's response to the BB article will be in The Sentinel this week and it will certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons. It will present the board with a dilemma - to practice what they have longed preached in terms of the v2001 ethos or stand as hypocrites and answer to the EGM.

 

Kind Regards.

 

I look forward to seeing this response!

[X-Valiant]

I hope Bratty makes sure's he buys the paper everyday this week ===

[banbell]

immediately and speak of thew rumour as if it is fact (e.g. Banbell).

 

 

Dear Leagle Beagle,

 

Can you please provide evidence where I have once stated on this forum anything about Mo???????? ONE single post, comment or otherwise??

 

I asked one very simple question, did Mo produce a brochure outlining his business plan when he purchased a radio station and asked another regarding whether a story in the local rag was referring to him.

 

And just an observation, as I will soon be leaving this forum, I would suggest to Mo that his soft skills approach is letting his bids creditability down quite badly. The internet is an important part of communication in todays world and I'm sure he could have appointed someone with better communication and people skills than some one other than yourself. Your very title "The Legal Beagle" and your bullying and patronising manner when anyone questions Mo's credibility leads people, rightly or wrongly, to believe you have something to hide. Why not appoint an internet representative who could just chat to other forum members (99.9% who are behind him anyway) on their level and in their language without being pompously arrogant and alluding to law suits to anyone that dares to questions Mo's past. Why not call yourself a more user-friendly name and instead of talking your business jargon pomp speak properly – you have somehow achieved the incredible task of actually getting a minority of the already converted to question Mo's motives behind his takeover – that is some feat.

 

Anyway, I await the link to where I have spoken on something about Mo as though it was fact when it was actually rumour or retract your inaccurate statement – come on Mr LegalBegal, the floor is yours…..

[tisdeano]

Can you please provide evidence where I have once stated on this forum anything about Mo???????? ONE single post, comment or otherwise??

 

I think he was on about your non-factual posts in general, not about mo, just any thing vale related

[The Man in the Stand]

 

And just an observation, as I will soon be leaving this forum,

 

 

Only cause youve been rumbled

 

:clap::clap::clap:

[the old bycars tea bar]

by your own admission banbell you have used this forum as a wind up merchant and i'm afraid you have lost all creditability, if approached in the right manner i have found LB to be nothing but polite and informative, he is here as he says to answer any questions regarding the bid and he has said that the past of both the board and mo are irrelevent as regards the bid and as such he will not be drawn into it, can't see the problem myself

[The Man in the Stand]

Dear Leagle Beagle,

 

Can you please provide evidence where I have once stated on this forum anything about Mo???????? ONE single post, comment or otherwise??

 

I asked one very simple question, did Mo produce a brochure outlining his business plan when he purchased a radio station and asked another regarding whether a story in the local rag was referring to him.

 

And just an observation, as I will soon be leaving this forum, I would suggest to Mo that his soft skills approach is letting his bids creditability down quite badly. The internet is an important part of communication in todays world and I'm sure he could have appointed someone with better communication and people skills than some one other than yourself. Your very title "The Legal Beagle" and your bullying and patronising manner when anyone questions Mo's credibility leads people, rightly or wrongly, to believe you have something to hide. Why not appoint an internet representative who could just chat to other forum members (99.9% who are behind him anyway) on their level and in their language without being pompously arrogant and alluding to law suits to anyone that dares to questions Mo's past. Why not call yourself a more user-friendly name and instead of talking your business jargon pomp speak properly – you have somehow achieved the incredible task of actually getting a minority of the already converted to question Mo's motives behind his takeover – that is some feat.

 

Anyway, I await the link to where I have spoken on something about Mo as though it was fact when it was actually rumour or retract your inaccurate statement – come on Mr LegalBegal, the floor is yours…..

 

This post confirms to me it is Oliver, talking about using the internet,Oliver tried to bully people on the internet, he also extolled the idea of buying shares to give us more of a voice, fat chance of that

 

Im glad your going you arrogant individual, go up to Primark and get your self a suit that fits,your day of reckoning is nigh ===

[banbell]

This post confirms to me it is Oliver, talking about using the internet,Oliver tried to bully people on the internet, he also extolled the idea of buying shares to give us more of a voice, fat chance of that

 

Im glad your going you arrogant individual, go up to Primark and get your self a suit that fits,your day of reckoning is nigh ===

 

***!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The only Oliver I know is the one from the Musical :razz:

[Yukon]

Dear Leagle Beagle,

 

Can you please provide evidence where I have once stated on this forum anything about Mo???????? ONE single post, comment or otherwise??

 

I asked one very simple question, did Mo produce a brochure outlining his business plan when he purchased a radio station and asked another regarding whether a story in the local rag was referring to him.

 

And just an observation, as I will soon be leaving this forum, I would suggest to Mo that his soft skills approach is letting his bids creditability down quite badly. The internet is an important part of communication in todays world and I'm sure he could have appointed someone with better communication and people skills than some one other than yourself. Your very title "The Legal Beagle" and your bullying and patronising manner when anyone questions Mo's credibility leads people, rightly or wrongly, to believe you have something to hide. Why not appoint an internet representative who could just chat to other forum members (99.9% who are behind him anyway) on their level and in their language without being pompously arrogant and alluding to law suits to anyone that dares to questions Mo's past. Why not call yourself a more user-friendly name and instead of talking your business jargon pomp speak properly – you have somehow achieved the incredible task of actually getting a minority of the already converted to question Mo's motives behind his takeover – that is some feat.

 

Anyway, I await the link to where I have spoken on something about Mo as though it was fact when it was actually rumour or retract your inaccurate statement – come on Mr LegalBegal, the floor is yours…..

 

 

Now you're trying to turn it back! You know full well that LB is Mo's internet representative- who is neither pompous, nor arrogant. I'd say something like that if I was trying to do a hatchet job. Admittedly, not "Pompously arrogant" as you put it, because that sounds stupid. Also, no one backing Mo has turned against him, you are simply muck spreading and it won't work- " If I start saying people are changing their minds about Mo, maybe some actually will!". Yeah, right.

 

In addition, you are a fine one to talk about fact. Your frankly appalling attempts at pretending not to know anything, whilst at the same time stipulating false hoods and generally winding people up are frankly ridiculous. You horrible little stooge, you.

 

Lastly, if you are "soon to be leaving this forum", does us all a favour and make your next stop after OVF Beachy Head

[X-Valiant]

***!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

The only Oliver I know is the one from the Musical :razz:

 

I am sure people use to say to Glenn, "please sir may I have some more" before the authorities put a stop to it

[banbell]

by your own admission banbell you have used this forum as a wind up merchant and i'm afraid you have lost all creditability,

 

I have not at all, I do go and watch Vale – their my 2nd team, and to generate debate I did spice up my posts but my beliefs are what I am saying, there is far too much negativity around the club and I have reservations about Mo's bid. Just because that doesn't conform to the majority on here and just because I don't go week in, week out surely doesn't mean I can't have an opinion. I bet I've spent more money this season than some on here following Vale.

 

Sometimes a neutral observer can step back and see the bigger picture – one of my sons for his sins is a Liverpool Supporter and I take him to games when I can, European away games and the like where it’s the old school scousers who have long since stopped going to Anfield and just do the Euro games. I've witnessed at close hand how fan power can overturn a hated regime, was at Anfield last night and the feel good factor and atmosphere compared to 10 months again is a total transformation. And although there is no direct comparison to Vale I've seen men with ego's, wallets, recourses and lawyers a lot bigger than this lot at Vale walk away with nothing, with a big influence from the fans. And I know a lot more about what went on than you do as I'm sure you know more about Vale than me.

 

As stated before, I have nothing but admiration for the Black and Gold campaign but as stated before I think you're making mistakes and I don't think Mo is the answer to your problems. Just my opinion.