Mark Lawn

For clarity, the charge wasn't just about assets - the charge also included future revenue streams from all sources.

Why would I know what the assets or revenue streams were to protect Mr & Mrs Lawn's loan. Personally, I didn't sign off the accounts quantifying the assets; I didn't audit the accounts without a qualification; I wasn't inolved in the drafting and the signing off of the charge against the club. But other professional advisers were involved. And I and anybody else who has access to these documents can see who signed off on them.

If you are saying that despite all of this, these documents are wrong or have been falsified in some way, then you must know better than those whose signatures including those of JR and the Lawns have signed off on them all.

 

First of all have you seen the original thread? Again we were having a discussion about a certain type of owner like Man City’s or Salford’s. He claimed Lawn was such an owner despite him getting 9% above base rate return. I explained multiple times to him that that wasn’t the kind of invested we were talking about, we were talking about owners who were medium range Philanthropists types who weren’t concerned with making a return until they reached a level where they club was self sustaining long term.

And I’m not hammering him, if he could get that return good on him but this idea this myth some people on here have about him is crazy, it’s almost like some people think he took everything he had, liquidated all and just gave it all to the club with no strings attached

 

You didn’t state an opinion. Stop playing the victim. You intentionally ignored the disucssion point to a point I got sick of you intentionally choosing to ignore the context. You then called me a clown and then implied I left a disucssion because you proved me wrong (with an article that proved you wrong)

 

No. I said to someone else who complained that I said he was being a dick in the other thread that he got off lightly as I should have had him banned for trolling as that’s what he was doing on the other thread (His evidence was https://widthofapost.com/2013/06/27/the-clubs-in-the-black-and-so-too-is-mark-lawn/ which shows he was getting a return every year and which states specifically 'This is a tidy profit, which he’d have done well to have made in a different manner, such as investing'. When he is using that article as evidence of Lawn being the kind of investor we were talking about in football then he isn’t doing anything but trolling as it shows full well he wasn’t)

 

How is that made up. He could divest investments or remortgage assets if his only motivation was a love for the club. Coming in as an investor before meant he could almost write his own terms but being part of a takeover he wouldn’t have been in a position to get a return equal or higher than his other investments bring in.

 

You don’t have to be a fan to have an opinion on the discussions I’ve been involved in. Infact in many cases not being a fan and not having emotions cloud judgement actually is an asset in discussions.

 

When people stop attacking me because of Fools Gold's lies and trolling I will. I have a right to defend myself

 

I appreciate that discussions regarding the Club's owners, both past and present, involves widely varying points of view and can be quite emotive but, without pointing fingers at anyone in particular, a few people need to calm down.

By all means, make your points, but please try and respect other posters and their points of view, even if you disagree with them.

 

Thread locked..

Emotions are running high and I dont want this forum heading in the same direction as the club