Analysis of Borley's comments.

"I believe the widely advertised protest is fundamentally flawed."

Ok, let's see the reasons.

"The protest is against the board and that includes the man who heads a group who we hope will provide the stability we all hope for."

Notice that fails to mention Ridsdale - a subtle subtext there?

"What sort of message do you want me to deliver to the Malaysians or for that matter any other group."

Please invest in us, ignore the bullshit. That's the message.

"The questions asked have been answered at last weeks EGM and been widely publicised. There are no unanswered questions in my opinion. There are questions people dont like the answers to but no unanswered ones. "

Except for those commercially sensitive ones, that is.

"It is interesting that the person organising the March VOTED AGAINST ME BUYING THE HOUSE OF SPORT SITE which released much needed money into the club. If I had not taken on this LIABILITY the club would already be in Administration, so whats the logic in voting against that motion unless you want to drive the club into Administration. There is no gain in this for me and even after the deal I remain the largest single fit out contractor creditor ."

Reads like victim status is being applied for; I'd have thought the sale of the Hotel land was more important, what with more money allegedly being made from that.

"Also if the purpose is to bring down the board then again you are driving the club into Administration because there are no ready replacements. The supporters groups should work with the club, not against it even if you dont entirely agree with it AFTERALL ITS ALL WE HAVE GOT!!!!. "

Work with a club with a proven record of lying.

"I urge people not to let this get personal and pull together to find a solution, FORGET PERSONAL VENDETTAS and stop and think of what your actions could bring. Please work to attract the investment or even change of ownership but please dont send out the wrong message as we could all live to regret it."

No, let's not get personal. Didn't get personal in the EGM or in the statement, eh Steve?

Now about the wrong message - what wrong message is being sent out Steve? That the fans don't like bullshit, lies and incompetence? the ONLY people who would take offence would be money grabbing parasites - I do hope Stevie boy isn't implying the Malaysians aren't on the level?

I eagerly await a reply... from his wife.

good reply nerd

"The protest is against the board and that includes the man who heads a group who we hope will provide the stability we all hope for."

I assume Borley is referring to TG in that statement? I wonder what TG will be more unimpressed by, our demo or a £500k p/a CEO who can't fill in an Appointment of Directorship notification form correctly?

Why did Annis vote against the sale of the land?

"It is interesting that the person organising the March VOTED AGAINST ME BUYING THE HOUSE OF SPORT SITE which released much needed money into the club. If I had not taken on this LIABILITY the club would already be in Administration, so whats the logic in voting against that motion unless you want to drive the club into Administration. There is no gain in this for me and even after the deal I remain the largest single fit out contractor creditor ."

Reads like victim status is being applied for; I'd have thought the sale of the Hotel land was more important, what with more money allegedly being made from that.

In fairness, as far as I'm aware the hotel land would notbe able to be sold unless the House of Sport project is sorted first. I think the deadline has been moved to this December now, but originally it had to be built by last December or otherwise the council would be able to take possession of the house of sport + hotel land and they could sell the hotel land in order to build the house of sport. I think there was also a potential issue with the ownership of the stadium if it wasn't completed.

People have every right to be annoyed with him, and I don't agree with a lot of what he has said in that statement but I do think he is the only hope we have at the moment and no matter what his views are on the protest we should not turn against him.

Seeing as he is already owed millions, why would he also want to take on the house of sport liability? Before anyone mentions that fact he will make money from it, I believe the club have the option to buy it back at cost price and also Borley stated that anybody who thought it was a good investment could go in partnership with him to build it

Why did Annis vote against the sale of the land?

Not sure but you can bet if Annis had voted in favour of the land sale Borley and Co would also be throwing that down his throat to, you can just hear them moaning why are you protesting against us when you voted in favour etc.

TBH there was no right or wrong with that vote, but in Annis' place I would have done the same.

Why did Annis vote against the sale of the land?

Not sure but you can bet if Annis had voted in favour of the land sale Borley and Co would also be throwing that down his throat to, you can just hear them moaning why are you protesting against us when you voted in favour etc.

TBH there was no right or wrong with that vote, but in Annis' place I would have done the same.

Maybe I'm not aware of all the facts, but at that stage, Borley was still going to back a vote of no confidence in PR, and if the sale didn't go ahead, we were pretty much screwed.

Seems like the 'right' thing was to vote for it?

Maybe I'm not aware of all the facts, but at that stage, Borley was still going to back a vote of no confidence in PR, and if the sale didn't go ahead, we were pretty much screwed.

Seems like the 'right' thing was to vote for it?

I don't really see any reason why anyone would vote against it either.

Why did Annis vote against the sale of the land?

Not sure but you can bet if Annis had voted in favour of the land sale Borley and Co would also be throwing that down his throat to, you can just hear them moaning why are you protesting against us when you voted in favour etc.

TBH there was no right or wrong with that vote, but in Annis' place I would have done the same.

Maybe I'm not aware of all the facts, but at that stage, Borley was still going to back a vote of no confidence in PR, and if the sale didn't go ahead, we were pretty much screwed.

Seems like the 'right' thing was to vote for it?

Fair comment but as 22m votes had already been cast by proxy in favour of the land deal and thus the motion couldn't be defeated, Annis 0.01% shareholding against wasn't going to ever make much difference.

Not sure but you can bet if Annis had voted in favour of the land sale Borley and Co would also be throwing that down his throat to, you can just hear them moaning why are you protesting against us when you voted in favour etc.

TBH there was no right or wrong with that vote, but in Annis' place I would have done the same.

Maybe I'm not aware of all the facts, but at that stage, Borley was still going to back a vote of no confidence in PR, and if the sale didn't go ahead, we were pretty much screwed.

Seems like the 'right' thing was to vote for it?

Fair comment but as 22m votes had already been cast by proxy in favour of the land deal and thus the motion couldn't be defeated, Annis 0.01% shareholding against wasn't going to ever make much difference.

Even less reason for him to do it then, surely?