I find it difficult to believe that this letter is gaining so much attention...This is the internet, accessible by hundreds of millions of people daily, some of whom are intent on causing mischief to anyone for whatever reason!

(Do you guys fall for the better phishing attacks?)

The facts remain that CC and his side now occupy the bridge and are preparing to give us their considered opinion on what is the best course of action for the club. Yes, the letter could be genuine but we'll never really know. And, besides, even if it is, then (as some have said) it could just be a play in a game of propaganda.

I'll leave you to your supposition. Personally I'm waiting for the actual announcement as there's nothing I/we can do in the meantime other than whip ourselves into a frenzy

You are quite entitled to express your opinion. Doesn't mean everyone will agree with it.

But what makes you so sure that people involved in the decision process (or whatever is going on) don't read this multi-accessible internet to get an idea of what fans are thinking? In reaching their decisions?

I'm sure they do and maybe they'll even make the same quality decisions that the Argentinian gov't did when listening to the press in the run up to the Falklands war. And, btw, I respect your right to an opinion and even to having fun, or whatever, at this hobby. Just, on this occasion, I felt the urge to say something if that's ok with you?

I think if the "Board" look at this board they will see as wide a range of conflicting ideas and hand-bagging as they seem to have at their meetings.
The difference being contributors here are willing to share their ideas.

I think if the "Board" look at this board they will see as wide a range of conflicting ideas and hand-bagging as they seem to have at their meetings.
The difference being contributors here are willing to share their ideas.

The majority of boards at the majority of sporting clubs may well read the internet to get an idea of what fans are thinking.

Only very, very rarely to they take any notice of what the fans want, though. I would be very surprised if this were on of those occasions.

Absolutely. And that was not what I was getting at. The last thing I expect the board - any board - to do is put the fans first. Indeed, I was having just this discussion this afternoon with a colleague regarding Leeds United, and what is currently going on there (and has been for the last few years).

What I had more in mind was them maybe gaining some awareness of what the fans would NOT want and might rally against, or at least how they might react to something if it happened. An example might be the fans' reaction to the prospect of administration, and who they would seek to blame?

Which brings us back to why the letter was posted on here, out of the blue - and I remain pretty convinced it IS likely to be genuine - and what the poster sought to achieve? In the absence of any guidance from the poster, I can only deduce that it was to sound out reaction and maybe seek to influence the opinions of those who have had reservations about the intentions of the incoming administration? Something we see all the time in politics, or course - even Argentinian. And fair enough if so. But that can only be pure speculation, until or unless the poster chooses to add some more explanation.

If it is a forgery its a bloody clever one. Someone has taken a hell of a lot of trouble over it and it doesn't even ask for anyone's bank details!

Its the little nuances that I like, the paragraphs beginning "Peter..." The mix of formality and fake friendliness. It just comes across as authentic. I hope it is a forgery and the forger is revealed. I'd like to congratulate them.

Just nicely patronising I thought. Must be Kaiser.

You can almost hear him speak as you read it.

I suppose also we cannot rule out the possibility that its based on a genuine letter but has been edited to change some of the meaning.

It's essentially a 'paper trail' letter should Hood go ahead and call the administrator. It's purpose is not only to give notice but to show evidence of giving notice in any future litigation. He lays down the substance of conversations which Hood would have to refute in writing within a reasonable time frame (14 days) or they would be accepted as fact by a court at a later date. If Hood doesn't respond, he has accepted CC's version of events and if he does he risks being trapped by any factual inaccuracies.

Wish I'd said that; that's exactly what that letter amounts to. I've written enough like that myself. I wonder if Hood replied, and if so what he said? If he did not reply, and did not refute Caisley's suppositions, he'll likely have weakened his position in the event of subsequent litigation IMO. FA will doubtless advise!

Would love to see the response.

Although I'd love to hear the review is completed, there's no need to sell players, Potter is staying and we're spending the full cap next year a whole lot more!!

I doubt there was a reply, since the nub of the letter is
(a) a demand that they resign (they did); and
(b) a demand they do not put the company in administration (they didn't)

On that basis, I don't readily see what scope there is for any future litigation when any of the matters raised in the letter might be relevant and unless Hood was NOT going to resign or HAD decided to go for admin anyway, I don't see much would have been gained by a reply of any susbtance, from a man who was heading out the exit door.

The fact that they did not resign immediately when demanded - this letter purports both to prove the demand AND provide the reasoning behind it? If so, could Hood be exposed if Caisley can argue that the company's financial position and options worsened as a result? Given of course that by staying on, initially at least, they secured £1/2m of donated cash which clearly saved the business from immediate administration, so Hood would presumably have a strong counter-argument?

Think that point answers itself. Even if we have only had half the truth, it seems clear that if we'd not got the £1/2m in, we'd be in admin now, so the collection of the Pledge has bought everybody breathing space. Including ironically time for CC & Co. to do their meticulous review. The stark choice seems to have been between ringing the pledgors or ringing the administrator.

Not quite sure how getting in a half a million big Brucie bonus in cash could worsen the financial position or narrow options, either!

Exactly.

The only option I can see it narrowed was the new team going for administration because of the new post-pledge moral dimension, and that would not count. And if PH can prove they were in serious discussions with potential sponsors/investors, then he'll have the argument that CC's public (as opposed to private) intervention effectively scuppered the chances, whether it did or not but especially if he has a letter someplace saying the other party/parties had decided not to proceed with the ownership and management issue unresolved?

This letter could easily have been leaked by either side?

It could, and I wouldn't bet much which.

Do you guys charge your clients for the time spent on RAB?

The only things I am waiting to hear on this subject are : we need £xxx to keep out of admin and £xxx to keep our best young bloods - so fans hands in the pockets again

Had they not stepped down and entered administration CC threatens to pursue for losses. Not sure what chance he'd have but it all builds pressure.

I can almost picture Kaiser's hand on Hood's shoulder at the same time. "Now Peter..."

No, the taxpayer. Thanks BTW.

I don't have clients. I work very long - but to an extent flexible - hours. I am sat in front of either this screen or my screen in the office working most of the day and half the night. Time I spend on here is usually to give me short breaks from working. if I spend too long then it just means I have to work even later. That is why I invariably rush my typing and hence the frequent typos.

Come the revolution, comrade...