Mark Lawn

Evidence of this Dennis?

 

Not when he is challenging everyone that posts a different opinion than him and abusing others and calling them WUMs because they refuse to bow to him.

He needs to feck off back to Old Trafford and the Prawn Sarnie brigade unless he can back up his claims with some evidence

 

We go back to the old scenario Den, business men don't get rich by giving their money away. Lawn lent the club the money when no one would go near them but lets not kid ourselves about the risk involved. I don't blame him though, i would want as many guarantees as possible to reduce the risk of my money going down the toilet.

 

So why did both Lawn and Rhodes claim that the club needed the money (from the loan) and that he risked losing his family’s legacy? I can see why Lawn would want to lie, but why would Rhodes claim it too?

 

Refuse to bow to him? Give over, its a football forum, albeit the softest one on the internet. His angle of posting against what seems to be a love in for Lawn is welcome.

 

How would the charge work if the club doesn't have a great deal of assets?

 

Fully agree Dennis, but one stand out comment in there is 'Joint-chairman'. He couldn't have done this on his own. In fact the Rhodes family were majority shareholders at this time. Lawn was not culpable as an individual for this.

 

A love in? Give over. Most comments have criticised Lawn. But his loan did come at a critical time for the club. It was needed and helped take us forward. We may not have had the success without.

But Simon keeps claiming this and that and hasn’t provided 1 scrap of evidence to back it up. Instead he has balled out a City fan and threatened to get him banned for WUMming. Who is WUMming who though?

Rahic is allegedly taking a monthly salary of £11k a month (not to mention a similar amount for his wife). Just Rahic’s “expense” alone equates to £121k a year, yet Simon is hammering Lawn for taking nearly £95k? Please!!!!

 

I'm glad someone else sees it like this. I for one am not knocking Lawn for putting in the money in. But he is an astute business man and with that comes the need for a return on any investment on any monies put into the various businesses he has a vested interest in.
For some reason some get all dewy eyed when talk of Lawn and his role of joint chairman pops up. Yes he made a better fist of it than the two current incumbents but if it wasn't for Parky where would we be. Its him that got us to where we were two years ago.

 

But has has been asked, what assets did we have at the time of the loan? No ground, no players worth £50k let alone £1m, no profit streams (hence the need for the loan in the 1st place). So come on, what assets did he secure against?

 

He isn't hammering Lawn. Read it with out the Lawn specs on. He's looking at it from a neutral point of view as he has no attachment to our club.

 

No Dennis, it was sent to the club in used notes in a large cardboard box with a big claret and amber bow on it marked donation.

 

Nobody is denying he got a healthy return on his loan. The question is how he managed to secure it against ZERO assets. I don’t think anyone is claiming it to be a ‘gift’.

This is the kind of ‘debate’ I am talking about, where folk make up comments to reinforce their own views.....!

 

If it’s easy to check, I await you providing the evidence. We had no assets, no players of any value and I’m sure it isn’t possible to place a charge against a ‘what might be’, such as Delph. Look what happened to Cleverly for example. Absolutely no guarantee we would get any money from sell-ons, so I’m not sure you could add hypotheticals to a legal charge?