Wednesday Weakness

You may also like...

13 Responses

  1. Nigel Short (Shareholders Association) says:

    Its hugely innacurate.

    The 14% of shareholders committed to selling their shares for the same price as those negotiated by the directors for their own shares. That would still apply.

    Its actually a non-story.

  2. David Wood says:

    And you my friend are a non-entity. It’s time for you and the rest of the self righteous supporters groups to get out of this club. Your superiority complex has done nothing but create divisions among our fanbase.
    Surely it’s time for a “Statement From Wednesdayite”, we haven’t had one for nearly a week now.

  3. Mark Murphy says:


    I am relieved to hear that. Exactly what I wanted to hear, in fact.

    So, for clarification, whatever the 14% sell for, would go towards the club’s debts in the same way as Wednesdayite’s? And for the same price?

  4. Tony Johns says:

    An article full of innacuracies that reeks of agenda.

  5. Dave Allen Partridge says:

    Re : David Wood (for brains)

    Personally I would be extremely embarrassed to have been led down the wrong path for so many years by someone who was pursuing his own selfish interests. You clearly don’t realise that all the vitriol against the likes of Wednesdayite was initially to further the ends of a certain individual and was based on lies and misrepresentations.

    Having been played so thoroughly for such a long period of time, I think we can reject your views as those of someone unable to form logical opinions for himself and who responds to the pulling of his emotive levers with reasoning that may be superficial or even downright false.

    The house is burning down around us and all you can do is whinge about who does what in the rescue attempt.

    Dear me.

  6. Mark Murphy says:

    Am I in irony hell? “Hugely innacurate”, “full of innacuracies” ??

    Seriously, though, my “agenda” is simply to find out why the two descriptions of the SA initiative differed. And I’m desperately hopeful that there is an innocent explanation and that the idea is as good as it looked at first. Hopefully, Nigel will be able to put my mind at rest.

  7. GGGGranville says:

    Nothing like missing the point is there.

    ‘the details aren’t key’

    Says it all really

  8. Mark Murphy says:


    That was a flippant point about Ken Bates. Support for him is always going to upset people, regardless of the “details.”

  9. Ricardo Maximus says:

    Matthew and Nigel,

    Help me out here? I heard that Dave Allen is prepared to give away his shares… Is this true for rest of board or do they also require 3p/share. If they require nothing, why would SA expect 3p per share?

  10. Nigel Short (Shareholders Association) says:

    The article (and the SA proposal) is irrelevant now as the clubs position is far worse than was realised at the time the suggestion was made. For example the club had still not announced the second hearing set for Dec 1st at that point.

    The suggestion wasn’t agenda driven – it was aimed at uniting the shareholding held by 4 shareholders in order to save the club from admin. A shareholding that would have been essentially worthless had admin happened last week.

    It provided a genuine short term solution that would have kept us out of court for what we believed would have been another 2 months – to allow for takeover/investment talks to continue.

    The vast majority of all shareholding will be largely worthless regardless of whether admin or a share issue is made – the shareholders of this company have kept this club afloat in the past (the 1970s most recently) and have all seen massive devaluations – and we dont think theres anything wrong with asking those responsible to do the same.

  11. Mark Murphy says:


    Yes, you are right. A weekend has proven a long time in Wednesday politics (I wrote the article on Friday, and its my fault it didn’t come out until today). My concerns, frankly, no longer matter. And, presumably, the club’s financial situation regresses by the day.

    As I said, the proposal was good and Wednesdayite’s quick response was equally good. If other protagonists can be as constructive before Wednesday week, there’s hope for the club.

    Thanks for taking the time out to reply, it is appreciated. And good luck.

  12. Nigel Short (Shareholders Association) says:

    No worries Mark

    Please feel free to contact me in the future if you want to check anything out.

    All the best (and UTO)

  13. David Wood says:

    Mr Partridge

    That certain individual put thousands of pounds of his own money into our club. Under his tenure we were reducing the debt and were a stable mid table championship club. How much did Strafford spend of his own money?
    Why are all the people asscociated with the club and all the fans groups opposing the one deal that could see us debt free by the end of the week? Instead they are supporting a consortium led by a bigot who wants to keep the current board in place.
    Is your name Strafford by the way as you certainly sound like him. Do you also look like a weeble?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>