Jump to content
The Dark Blues

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

23 minutes ago, TheDarkBlues said:

Sorry, but from someone who has tried to stay out of the politics of Dundee FC, all I see is people with their own agenda's and political aims over the last near twenty years. And, while for the most part it has helped the club stay alive, there comes a point were it does more harm than good. All I see is everyone blaming everyone else for the problems and issues we are facing and it seems to sides are NOT willing to work with the other for one reason or another.

This whole situation could and should have been handled much better, but because of bad blood and history between all the different factions of Dundee FC, this didn't happen and it will probably happen again. I just wish, for once, that all sides put aside their differences and started working for the club and the fans and stopped blaming each other.

I agree with the sentiments 100%

I think where people are taking issue is that the main shareholders of the club seem to have gone out of their way to paint the second biggest shareholder of the club in a poor light over something they didn't do, when there was no apparent need to.

That in itself has people questioning motives and what seems like political manoeuvring. As you are saying that is EXACTLY the problem. However when one organisation seems to be actively jockeying to maintain an 'us and them' situation, it's difficult for those impartial people looking on not to see the two organisations as factions.

I, like you, hope that BOTH sides are 'bigger than that'. Recent history and current events would suggest however that they are not. Neither of them.

So the question remains, as was posed right at the start of this thread, what should be done about it, because there is an action ready to be taken and the two 'factions' with control over the situation don't appear able to see eye to eye on it and, in the view of some, are playing one against the other.

Like Chomp says, I'm not on a 'side'. However, unless FPS and DFCSS are willing and able to get their heads together and release a joint statement that highlights a preferred path for the club, rather than responding to paper talk, then the impasse and the bad feeling will continue and possibly escalate.

You, me and everyone else can wish for no 'us and them', but the reality is that there would appear to be exactly that. So, again, what's to be done about it? Because wishing it away isn't the answer.

  • Like 1
  • Star Post 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Barkblue said:

I agree with the sentiments 100%

I think where people are taking issue is that the main shareholders of the club seem to have gone out of their way to paint the second biggest shareholder of the club in a poor light over something they didn't do, when there was no apparent need to.

That in itself has people questioning motives and what seems like political manoeuvring. As you are saying that is EXACTLY the problem. However when one organisation seems to be actively jockeying to maintain an 'us and them' situation, it's difficult for those impartial people looking on not to see the two organisations as factions.

I, like you, hope that BOTH sides are 'bigger than that'. Recent history and current events would suggest however that they are not. Neither of them.

So the question remains, as was posed right at the start of this thread, what should be done about it, because there is an action ready to be taken and the two 'factions' with control over the situation don't appear able to see eye to eye on it and, in the view of some, are playing one against the other.

Like Chomp says, I'm not on a 'side'. However, unless FPS and DFCSS are willing and able to get their heads together and release a joint statement that highlights a preferred path for the club, rather than responding to paper talk, then the impasse and the bad feeling will continue and possibly escalate.

You, me and everyone else can wish for no 'us and them', but the reality is that there would appear to be exactly that. So, again, what's to be done about it? Because wishing it away isn't the answer.

Dfcss should go straight to DFC and say...lets sit round a table and agree whats best for OUR club.  Jesus even North and South Korea are talking! Be big and put the past aside. I will even be the Kissinger if required!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Billy Campbell's Ghost said:

Dfcss should go straight to DFC and say...lets sit round a table and agree whats best for OUR club.  Jesus even North and South Korea are talking! Be big and put the past aside. I will even be the Kissinger if required!

Feel free to offer your services but in all candour, The Society have very little of interest to FPS other than those pesky vetoes. As a lay member for a number of years and knowing a number of the people involved in 'high office' in the Society, you might find that you'll be banging your head against the wall. I salute your 'sans frontieres' spirit though.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TheDarkBlues said:

I don't see the issue regarding their statement. All they said was that they were disappointed that DFCSS didn't come out and rubbish the statement that was in the papers regarding a merger, after all, it was a DFCSS statement that led to all of this merger talk.

Why didn't DFCSS come out beforehand and quash this merger rumour talk before it got to this stage? 

I do not understand why DFCSS should have come out and quashed the merger talk. 

DFCSS do not have a clue what is going on with FPS.

Only Tim Keyes and John Nelms the two remaining partners in FPS know exactly what is going on and in my opinion it is up them to make an announcement that no merger talks with Dundee United have or will take place as long as they have a majority shareholding in Dundee Football Club Limited. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, TheDarkBlues said:

Not what I mean't bud, DFCSS should have released a statement after the Tele article on the so called 'merger', stating that this had never never been discussed by either parties..... In my opinion, DFCSS put the cat in amongst the pigeons and let everyone else clean up the mess. No one party is exempt from blame here.

should they have also made it clear that they hadn't discussed moving the club to the moon or our ambitions to join the korean national league 🤔 Its no right that you need to list all the things that weren't discussed - at no time did the society raise the idea of a merger - they also couldn't rule one out as FPS hadn't make their plans clear. Saying it was never discussed would still leave the rumours 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Billy Campbell's Ghost said:

Tax dodge are strong words. Its to minimise their tax obligations is how I see it. Sensible and legal if thats the case...and it may just help us get a new staadium.

It’s a tax loophole of some sort they want to take advantage it would seem. That does give me a slight concern given that HMRC challenge the legality of loopholes all the time. It could happen years later and all of a sudden the club or FPS are left with a huge liability. Pretty much why Rangers got into the mess they did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Edin_Dee said:

It’s a tax loophole of some sort they want to take advantage it would seem. That does give me a slight concern given that HMRC challenge the legality of loopholes all the time. It could happen years later and all of a sudden the club or FPS are left with a huge liability. Pretty much why Rangers got into the mess they did. 

It's not an HMRC thing as far as I am aware.

Americans are taxed on their income, even after they emigrate. It's this really bizarre thing that only the US and Eritrea do. The only option to not pay tax to the US Government is for a citizen to formally denounce their citizenship. This even applies in some cases to people running businesses - there are some potentially stark implications with pieces of new tax law this year in fact.

I don't know the way it needs to work specifically and I'm not qualified to know all the mechanics but I think it's pretty procedural that a US citizen would want any attached losses to be their, there's nothing sinister in it for me and it's obviously the case that they need that 75% mark to make it happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Groups and trading losses. If your company or organisation has a qualifying group relationship with another company, then you can choose to offset certain losses, including trading losses, against profits of other members of the group, instead of carrying it forwards or b don't think it's a loophole or a dodge at all. It's an absolutely standard arrangement where losses in one company can be offset against profits in another company that you own.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd hope that FPS look at what is happening at Westminster with Theresa May's attitude of not talking to other parties until the eleventh hour and arrange a meeting with DFCSS to put all their cards on the table re their wish list - Premiership football retention; stadium; need for the A shares and not just the ordinary shares etc. It's good to talk!

  • Star Post 1

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

  • Recently Browsing

    0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.