Late David Gold, Sullivan and Brady

The Forum for all football-related discussion, including West Ham United FC. Our busiest Forum and the place to begin if you're new to KUMB.

Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Post Reply
Miles Standish Proud
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 2:45 pm
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 57 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Miles Standish Proud »

Look, am sure the board has done some isolated 'good' things (but no examples spring to mind).

But the fact is, nothing can or will overturn - or compensate for - the damage they have done by taking us away from a, proper, history-filled football ground to a soulless athletics stadium that is totally unfit for purpose and in so doing ripping the heart and soul out of the club and what it used to stand for.

The odd gesture now and then is simply throwing a rubber bone to a starving dog.

They are vermin.
User avatar
taffhammer
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by taffhammer »

All i can think of is they converted a few of the ladies toilets to mens and put a few shelves up for beers. They did clean up the memorial garden after a bit of pressure from supporters groups. They helped out with the supporters club after more pressure and a few years of discussions.
I'm struggling to think of anything they did for our benefit of their own backs and without a bit of pressure.
mushy
Posts: 18460
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 3:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009
Has liked: 640 likes
Total likes: 840 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by mushy »

hammerdivone wrote:
If I suggested one thing that I thought they may have got right, I would guarantee at least 90% of the replies would be telling me why I'm wrong or what people think of me, hence why I will not answer directly your question. I have neither the time or the energy to enter into that sort of discussion again.
Hang on a minute, are you not the king of the reply, always insisting on having the last word no matter what?
I dont mean that in a derogatory way (honest), but when did you have the stuffing knocked out of you?
Even now you say you havent the time or the energy, whilst at the same time replying with both time and energy!
HD1 -you can do better then that.
User avatar
iLoveLasagne
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:17 am
Has liked: 204 likes
Total likes: 216 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by iLoveLasagne »

Agree with Miles and Taff.
Last edited by Up the Junction on Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Edited by moderator.
User avatar
S-H
Posts: 49113
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:05 am
Location: Kumb Inn
Has liked: 5738 likes
Total likes: 9649 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by S-H »

This comment was removed by a moderator because it failed to abide by our community standards. For more details, please refer to the Forum Terms of Use. Replies may also be deleted.
User avatar
Diogenes
Posts: 5049
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:07 pm
Has liked: 432 likes
Total likes: 1144 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Diogenes »

To be fair to HD1 it is sometimes difficult to post a more moderate or contrary view on here without some (certainly not all) taking a personal swipe rather than respectfully replying with an alternate view. After all, it is all about opinion and one persons positive is another's negative. As for Georgees question on 'one good decision' or thing I would venture to say - affordable football or at least more affordable for some. Now I know there will be some 'yes but' replies, but it is an honest answer/opinion to a valid question.
wobble
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 8:05 pm
Total likes: 20 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by wobble »

taffhammer wrote:I'm struggling to think of anything they did for our benefit of their own backs and without a bit of pressure.
I have the answer to that, Nothing, not a god damn thing.

But one thing they have done and are still doing and that is robbing our club.
If they can sell it, it's sold.
If they can loan it, it's loaned.

Absolutely the club spy's should be called out, let see them, put then on the spot, we have a right if they are pulling our pissers
It's bad enough having to watch their paymaster rape our club, I for one don't want to waste any of my time reading their drivel.
Call them out or block em".
Miles Standish Proud
Posts: 824
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 2:45 pm
Has liked: 6 likes
Total likes: 57 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Miles Standish Proud »

Diogenes
I think that given that feelings are running so high, the debate on here is extremely measured with a high degree of respect afforded to all posters. Anything out of bounds is swiftly moderated,
The idea of pro-board posters somehow getting a raw deal is a bit off the mark in my view.
But vocally pro-board do have to understand that the general consensus among contributors is that the board are shafting us. Anyone that challenges the prevailing narrative - or any widely held belief on this or any other forum and indeed in all walks of life - needs to expect to be challenged.
The other thing to remember is that anyone with a pro-board stance is currently arguing in the face of all the evidence.
User avatar
EastBrisHammer
Posts: 732
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:24 pm
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by EastBrisHammer »

Hammerite wrote:Honest question (not looking to dig you out), but is that all it would take to get you back on side?
Yeah it would. I would start to believe they weren't just here to milk money out of the club. I'm not a STH so I have only been to the bowl a couple of times. It was OK. I'm one of those people that thought the Boleyn wasn't that great towards the last ten years or so, except for the occasional time so maybe I wasn't expecting too much. I think I really have lowered my expectations because I generally find top flight football to be dull and uninspiring.

But TBH, I think they will completely fail this window and carry on with the same pattern.
User avatar
DaveWHU1964
Posts: 14873
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:14 am
Has liked: 1302 likes
Total likes: 677 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by DaveWHU1964 »

Georgee Paris wrote:Seriously though, have they made a single solitary good decision?
Depends what you mean by 'good' mate. Good for us? Nothing much springs to mind. Good for them? Plenty.
User avatar
Coops
Posts: 8340
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Rayleigh, Essex
Has liked: 442 likes
Total likes: 573 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Coops »

They have made plenty of good decisions from a personal and business point of view. Unfortunately none of those decisions have been good for West Ham or us fans.
User avatar
S-H
Posts: 49113
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 7:05 am
Location: Kumb Inn
Has liked: 5738 likes
Total likes: 9649 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by S-H »

Coops wrote:They have made plenty of good decisions from a personal and business point of view. Unfortunately none of those decisions have been good for West Ham or us fans.
In a nutshell Coops.
User avatar
taffhammer
Posts: 2736
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:37 pm
Location: from the wick of hackney to the seaside
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by taffhammer »

Diogenes wrote: As for Georgees question on 'one good decision' or thing I would venture to say - affordable football or at least more affordable for some.
Good point, and affordable football was definately a plus point to them so good on them for that.

They need to keep the £99 kids tickets for real kids who go every week and make people give up those season tickets if they aren't being used for kids. I also think the affordable football promise made a lot of supporters accept the move without a fight.
User avatar
sanchoz
Posts: 12444
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 3:41 am
Location: Founder of the Carlton Cole Fan Club - Rainham & Guildford Branch
Total likes: 11 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by sanchoz »

Diogenes wrote: As for Georgees question on 'one good decision' or thing I would venture to say - affordable football or at least more affordable for some.
taffhammer wrote: Good point, and affordable football was definately a plus point to them so good on them for that.

They need to keep the £99 kids tickets for real kids who go every week and make people give up those season tickets if they aren't being used for kids. I also think the affordable football promise made a lot of supporters accept the move without a fight.
But on the other hand there are no concessions offered for Cat A games

https://www.whufc.com/tickets/tickets-i ... lan-prices" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Club doesn't have a pricing strategy it says for next season
TW (Tara Warren) also explained WHUFC haven’t set prices for 18/19 yet. TW also explained not to take last year’s prices as a guide for founders as we move into 18/19 season.
https://whuisa.org/news/2018/1/2/minute ... ember-2017" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
Side of Ham
Posts: 4546
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:30 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Side of Ham »

Yep, they need to eff off and get into a business where being frugal gets you good return and the product is tat.

Sound familiar?

FOOTBALL especially PL football is for owners who don't mind to speculate with large sums of money and also let others with more expertise in the field to do the speculating......you just pay the bill and make sure the 'brand' is at it's maximum exposure.
User avatar
Georgee Paris
Posts: 27162
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 3:07 pm
Location: The Amazing Adventures of Wicked Willy & Fearless Steve
Has liked: 496 likes
Total likes: 1038 likes
Contact:

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Georgee Paris »

So we have places to put beers, more toilets for men, affordable ticket prices at a stadium not many like and a well timed appointment of a manager the vast majority never wanted :thup:
User avatar
Remo
Posts: 962
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 3:58 pm
Has liked: 4 likes
Total likes: 1 like

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Remo »

:crest:
Last edited by Remo on Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Side of Ham
Posts: 4546
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:30 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Side of Ham »

These lot....Brown promised f*** all and gave us f*** all.
Fishdo
Posts: 2615
Joined: Tue Feb 07, 2012 1:23 pm
Has liked: 105 likes
Total likes: 33 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Fishdo »

I notice in the recent pages here that some posts suggest that there was a personal investment by our owners in either buying the club or running it since buying it....

If you go back on this thread you will see how in fact these owners have so far, since buying us and their previous ownership of Birmingham City have a total net spend of £4 million between them....

When you also read some posts listing reasons why this lot should go ASAP.... it should also be noted there are many many more reasons than those mentioned here recently.... anyone looking to justify any support for the board only needs to go back here and other relevant threads to clearly see overwhelming proof and consensus from the majority who want to see this board gone.....
User avatar
iLoveLasagne
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:17 am
Has liked: 204 likes
Total likes: 216 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by iLoveLasagne »

At least Brown built us a new stand at Upton Park. Circa £25m redevelopment of UP I have just read online. Compare that to a few shelves at the LS.
Last edited by iLoveLasagne on Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Post Reply