Jump to content

Chansiri - F-off


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, BRADDO said:

DC puts in and spends tens and tens of millions of pounds. However, the club is far worse off in every single aspect and department. We're clearly heading to league one and most likely beyond. At that point, the club is worth peanuts rather than the 100 million that DC would ludicrously expect. Can someone please explain to me what DC and Paxo could possibly gain from running the club into the ground? Because, as I see it, they aren't getting their money back. 

 

DC has nothing to gain. He's just an arrogant, monumentally incompetent rich kid.

 

Appropos of nothing, there are plenty of ways for an intelligent and unscrupulous person to make money by attaching themselves to a wealthy but stupid individual.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, T Hardy said:


I’m aware of that.

 

Like the example I used though, if Dave Zuckerberg in the future buys a football club and runs them into the ground, I think it would be reasonable to contact Facebook/Mark Zuckerberg and express an opinion which disapproves on the way that money has been used, and to remind them that Facebook was plastered everywhere when the club was bought and Facebook was widely reported as the company behind it - regardless of the dispute regarding that now 

 

OK, to put it simply, I have a very minor stake in Thai Union as part of a Chinese consortium. We have held the shares for quite a bit longer that Chansiri has been at Wednesday. Though proportionately only a tiny shareholding, I still get all the dispatches put out by the investor relations department of the PLC. I know for a 100% fact that various parties have questioned the PLC Board about connections with UK football through Wednesday and Reading. Every time the come deny it. They cannot deceive shareholders. That would not only constitute possible criminal proceedings but would also have an adverse affect on shareholder relations, something I guarantee that they would not allow to happen.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hornsby
25 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 


It's the press release I want - not a newspapers 'angle' or  'spin' if that makes sense
I need the actual facts/press release so that I can use it in the knowledge that I have the facts right

I dont have our Accounts but, like you , willing to bet....this time that we are loss making.

 

Press Association timed and dated copy release fine by me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest T Hardy
2 minutes ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

OK, to put it simply, I have a very minor stake in Thai Union as part of a Chinese consortium. We have held the shares for quite a bit longer that Chansiri has been at Wednesday. Though proportionately only a tiny shareholding, I still get all the dispatches put out by the investor relations department of the PLC. I know for a 100% fact that various parties have questioned the PLC Board about connections with UK football through Wednesday and Reading. Every time the come deny it. They cannot deceive shareholders. That would not only constitute possible criminal proceedings but would also have an adverse affect on shareholder relations, something I guarantee that they would not allow to happen.


But they wouldn’t have to say anything about what Dejphon does with his dividends, I get that.

 

And the more I think about it, it probably is very petty, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to go through TUG and express disappointment at a business using the Chansiri name. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest T Hardy
4 minutes ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

OK, to put it simply, I have a very minor stake in Thai Union as part of a Chinese consortium. We have held the shares for quite a bit longer that Chansiri has been at Wednesday. Though proportionately only a tiny shareholding, I still get all the dispatches put out by the investor relations department of the PLC. I know for a 100% fact that various parties have questioned the PLC Board about connections with UK football through Wednesday and Reading. Every time the come deny it. They cannot deceive shareholders. That would not only constitute possible criminal proceedings but would also have an adverse affect on shareholder relations, something I guarantee that they would not allow to happen.


Thanks for sharing btw, interesting stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hornsby
3 minutes ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

OK, to put it simply, I have a very minor stake in Thai Union as part of a Chinese consortium. We have held the shares for quite a bit longer that Chansiri has been at Wednesday. Though proportionately only a tiny shareholding, I still get all the dispatches put out by the investor relations department of the PLC. I know for a 100% fact that various parties have questioned the PLC Board about connections with UK football through Wednesday and Reading. Every time the come deny it. They cannot deceive shareholders. That would not only constitute possible criminal proceedings but would also have an adverse affect on shareholder relations, something I guarantee that they would not allow to happen.

I have shares in several companies.

 

I just assume they lie to me all the time to hide their incompetence or justify excess salaries.

 

BP said Deepwater was nowt to worry about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, T Hardy said:


But they wouldn’t have to say anything about what Dejphon does with his dividends, I get that.

 

And the more I think about it, it probably is very petty, but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to go through TUG and express disappointment at a business using the Chansiri name. 

 

It will not reach any of the Chansiri family. It will be dealt with by someone in the investor relations department. The reply you can expect is that Thai Union do not comment on unrelated organisations and that it is entirely a matter for Dejphon Chansiri.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hornsby said:

I have shares in several companies.

 

I just assume they lie to me all the time to hide their incompetence or justify excess salaries.

 

BP said Deepwater was nowt to worry about.

 

Corporate shareholders question the PLC Board at the AGM. It would be a dangerous move to deceive corporate shareholders. The damage would far outweigh the gain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hornsby
1 minute ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

Corporate shareholders question the PLC Board at the AGM. It would be a dangerous move to deceive corporate shareholders. The damage would far outweigh the gain.

Siemens corporate shareholders backed their  executives supporting  Hitler cos it meant mega money for firm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hornsby said:

Siemens corporate shareholders backed their  executives supporting  Hitler cos it meant mega money for firm.

 

Therein lies the difference. Shareholders invest to make ROI. But shareholders are not daft people and they weigh up the likelihood of a return. Owning Sheffield Wednesday as a company asset is definitely more likely to result in loss than gain. If TUG wanted to invest circa £350 million, there is a greater chance of a return investing it in companies connected with the core discipline of TUG namely food processing and manufacturing rather than diving into markets as uncertain as football investment.

Edited by ChinaOwl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Hornsby
10 minutes ago, ChinaOwl said:

 

Therein lies the difference. Shareholders invest to make ROI. But shareholders are not daft people and they weigh up the likelihood of a return. Owning Sheffield Wednesday as a company asset is definitely more likely to result in loss than gain. If TUG wanted to invest circa £350 million, there is a greater chance of a return investing it in companies connected with the core discipline of TUG namely food processing and manufacturing rather than diving into markets as uncertain as football investment.

You have given me an idea.

 

Calling Schwabs Monday to buy some TUC shares.  Will ask Trust if they want a few.

 

You remember when that Irish consortium of race horse owners blew away Ferguson by buying a few Man Utd shares.

 

We need to get an in, as long as legal, ethical and tasteful.

 

Decapitating the elephants or bothering Chansiris kid is not.

 

See you at the AGM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WatfordOwl said:

 

I'm probably better backing out of a thread and having an opinion on a day like this tbh. 

 

I'd just say have a look at the first few pages of pretty personal insults that are levelled, and ask yourself if putting an opinion poll out on Social Media were countless 'fans' would add to that rhetoric is a great idea. 

 

We can make comments about his tenure without resorting to basic insults. 

 


But a simple ‘do we want him to sell or not’ is not inviting personal or vindictive comments.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My biggest conern is that Chansiri never seems to learn from anything.

 

It was so important at the start of his reign given the model he was wanting to have a CEO, Finance Director, Director of Football, Commercial Director and of course a proven Football Manager.

 

If this has been put in place we could have created a sustainable club structure and the club could have progressed.

 

Norwich City are run in exactly that way for example.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don’t understand with DC is that, as a businessman, if you’re company is not doing so well you act to address it. Even if those actions don’t work, you’re in there night and day to influence change. You do it because not to do so costs you thousands/millions.

 

DC really is fiddling while Rome burns, to HIS cost. I don’t get it.

Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...