Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Citizen Journalist Foghorn

Ashton Transfer - The truth??

Recommended Posts

It is not an allegation it is stated as proven " after certain details of BOTH Ashton transfers made their way into our hands."

I wonder whether we will ever see these ''details'' or be told of their source.

But why should we when the Pinkun is happy to post up any old fanciful tosh as long as it states that the club has lied to the fans ?

I''d be curious to see if it''s sister paper''s the EDP and the NEN would be willing to run this statements as fact

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Well, Vital Norwich understands that this could well be and is more than 99% likely to be the truth after certain details of BOTH Ashton transfers made their way into our hands."

''Citizen journalism'' at its best...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Web Team - Pete"]

"Well, Vital Norwich understands that this could well be and is more than 99% likely to be the truth after certain details of BOTH Ashton transfers made their way into our hands."

''Citizen journalism'' at its best...

[/quote]

very true!!!  The link was on WOTB, anything signed off by BarclayBoy has to be a reliable source tho!, surely?[;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Waghorn happens upon this he won’t like it, here’s another Norwich supporter capable of joined up thinking and we all know he doesn’t approve of such things.

 

If this is a lie then the club must take the very strongest action possible against the originator as clearly this is libellous stuff and must not be tolerated.  Having already rattled the sabre a few months ago with all the stuff being peddled about Ashton, Francis McKenzie etc they must act to stop those intent on causing harm to the very fabric of the club

 

However if this is indeed correct then the board have lied to us plain and simple which must surely raise questions over their ongoing ability to run the club? For those of us who attended the previous AGM we were told in plain terms that the purchase of Dean Ashton was facilitated by the cancellation of the debt owed to the estate of the late Geoffrey Watling and by way of share holders not redeeming them. 

 

Is this true or is this false?

 

Perhaps for the first time in many months we might hear something from the majority share holders about it? I for one really want to hear them come out and deny this allegation and prove it to be nothing more than a barefaced lie.

 

  But they need to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Funny how these informed sources can never give chapter and verse for their sources. Even funnier is how such other claimants as Fluff are unable or unwilling to tell exactly who they are.

Not so funny is their need to constantly fill this board with scaremongering and slander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If any of this were true, much of it would have to have been reported, by law,  in the last accounts the club produced in May and as a shareholder, i can assure you there is no mention of anything like this.

So make your own mind up...............

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The article forgets that allegedly the benefactor was Geoffrey Watling- they probably had no idea who he was and assuend he wanted payback. I recall that Watling gifted the club a large sum of money so presumably that isn''t required to be paid back at all. This article contains nothing new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...