Happy Face 29 Posted June 21, 2011 Author Share Posted June 21, 2011 Somebody better tell Mike that... “Mike knows where we should be in four or five years,” managing director said. ”We want to be challenging for Europe every season.” I think we can challenge for Europe but it will be C.L. it will be Europa league, we should be competing for a top 7 finish every season 7th spot isn't europe. Nor is 6th. Toontoon's post credit's Mike with a hard nosed insight none of us clowns that have watched the club for decades can possibly have. That being we can't threaten the top 5 as we don't have the support. Despite having the third highest attendance average in the league. But then the club are saying we can compete with the 6 teams that fight it out for those 5 places. If Mike had a clue, why doesn't he educate the fans on reality, rather than insisting we'll push for it and spend £35m+ etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 3997 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 *applauds* *Gives a knowing wink and nod of the head* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 *applauds* *Gives a knowing wink and nod of the head* Sounds more like a twitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3986 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Somebody better tell Mike that... “Mike knows where we should be in four or five years,” managing director said. ”We want to be challenging for Europe every season.” I think we can challenge for Europe but it will be C.L. it will be Europa league, we should be competing for a top 7 finish every season 7th spot isn't europe. Nor is 6th. Toontoon's post credit's Mike with a hard nosed insight none of us clowns that have watched the club for decades can possibly have. That being we can't threaten the top 5 as we don't have the support. Despite having the third highest attendance average in the league. But then the club are saying we can compete with the 6 teams that fight it out for those 5 places. If Mike had a clue, why doesn't he educate the fans on reality, rather than insisting we'll push for it and spend £35m+ etc. I think the point about the raw money that the attendance figures equate to is a fair one. I don't think anyone wants to see £1000 STs at SJP but if his figures are correct, that and possibly more is what it would take to compete on match receipts alone assuming any kind of take-up. Even then ignoring the points about cup ties which are generally true imo. I think with decent buys (not withstanding some unneccesary sales imo) we can compete at around the 6th/7th level. Given the few other clubs who probably feel the same, I don't think a cautious "top 10 every year" is that bad at the moment. Of course I want more but don't honestly feel my expectations have been lowered by Ashley - just a bit of realism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 34632 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Raw Money is my street name. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 As I said, do you think the old owners would have been able to compete in todays transfer market and if so how would it be financed?? I do consider Newcastle to be a big club I do get to some games And funnily enough, as my name suggests, I'm not a geordie. Does that mean I'm not allowed to support Newcastle? In response to your other question I started supporting Newcastle in the early 1990's when I was working up there, no doubt you will have a problem with this. Anyhow just answer that question above, without the usual bullshit,if that's possible so you know fuck all about how the club was run between the early 1960's and when the Halls and Shepherd bought it ? So you have no idea of the state the club was in when they bought it ? I thought so. No bullshit, I don't do bullshit, I'm telling you how it was, if you don't want to believe it, carry on believing whatever it is you want to do in your fantasy world. What's that got to do with the question of how they would compete in todays transfer market and moreso how it would be financed?? Enlighten me o wise one remind me what you said at the time, as I've already asked you. When is your man going to do "better than Fred" did ? Stick to the league positions, european qualification ie the facts. He's not my man and he won't as there is a massive difference in the market now, do you deny the market is vastly different now?? Also why can't you answer my question about how the old owners could compete in todays market remind me again, did you or anybody else say 5-6 years ago that you wanted rid of "Fred" because if he wasn't replaced, we would have to compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to survive ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Somebody better tell Mike that... “Mike knows where we should be in four or five years,” managing director said. ”We want to be challenging for Europe every season.” I think we can challenge for Europe but it will be C.L. it will be Europa league, we should be competing for a top 7 finish every season 7th spot isn't europe. Nor is 6th. Toontoon's post credit's Mike with a hard nosed insight none of us clowns that have watched the club for decades can possibly have. That being we can't threaten the top 5 as we don't have the support. Despite having the third highest attendance average in the league. But then the club are saying we can compete with the 6 teams that fight it out for those 5 places. If Mike had a clue, why doesn't he educate the fans on reality, rather than insisting we'll push for it and spend £35m+ etc. I think the point about the raw money that the attendance figures equate to is a fair one. I don't think anyone wants to see £1000 STs at SJP but if his figures are correct, that and possibly more is what it would take to compete on match receipts alone assuming any kind of take-up. Even then ignoring the points about cup ties which are generally true imo. I think with decent buys (not withstanding some unneccesary sales imo) we can compete at around the 6th/7th level. Given the few other clubs who probably feel the same, I don't think a cautious "top 10 every year" is that bad at the moment. Of course I want more but don't honestly feel my expectations have been lowered by Ashley - just a bit of realism. as in post number 272 : "you mean, you aren't attracted to the club like you were by the Halls and Shepherd ? " No reply ? I thought you said "I don't answer questions" etc etc..... This is the WHOLE point. You people who slate "Fred" and the "trophy signings" [that attracted you to the club] but are now backing Mike Ashleys running of the club, why don't YOU back him with your own cash anymore if you think things are so much better ? Do you not get the hypocrisy and irony in what you are saying [and that goes for those on skunkers too, including TT, and I have posted this comment in the past over there too] with no direct reply, surprise surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Why is it a criticism of people that they didn't predict Man City's Arab owners btw? I dont get that. Nobody was clairvoyant to predict that about City specifically, but it wasn't beyond comprehension that clubs would be bought up and be bankrolled. There was a time not so very long ago when you'd hear takeover rumours every other week and they were usually of the piss-money-up-the-wall variety that had the potential to skewe the entire status quo in an instant. It just turned out to be City (and Blackburn etc) but it could have been any one of a number of clubs. Portsmouth fans will tell you that It was just symptomatic of how daft football was getting, so yes in the general sense it was eminently predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3986 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Somebody better tell Mike that... “Mike knows where we should be in four or five years,” managing director said. ”We want to be challenging for Europe every season.” I think we can challenge for Europe but it will be C.L. it will be Europa league, we should be competing for a top 7 finish every season 7th spot isn't europe. Nor is 6th. Toontoon's post credit's Mike with a hard nosed insight none of us clowns that have watched the club for decades can possibly have. That being we can't threaten the top 5 as we don't have the support. Despite having the third highest attendance average in the league. But then the club are saying we can compete with the 6 teams that fight it out for those 5 places. If Mike had a clue, why doesn't he educate the fans on reality, rather than insisting we'll push for it and spend £35m+ etc. I think the point about the raw money that the attendance figures equate to is a fair one. I don't think anyone wants to see £1000 STs at SJP but if his figures are correct, that and possibly more is what it would take to compete on match receipts alone assuming any kind of take-up. Even then ignoring the points about cup ties which are generally true imo. I think with decent buys (not withstanding some unneccesary sales imo) we can compete at around the 6th/7th level. Given the few other clubs who probably feel the same, I don't think a cautious "top 10 every year" is that bad at the moment. Of course I want more but don't honestly feel my expectations have been lowered by Ashley - just a bit of realism. as in post number 272 : "you mean, you aren't attracted to the club like you were by the Halls and Shepherd ? " No reply ? I thought you said "I don't answer questions" etc etc..... This is the WHOLE point. You people who slate "Fred" and the "trophy signings" [that attracted you to the club] but are now backing Mike Ashleys running of the club, why don't YOU back him with your own cash anymore if you think things are so much better ? Do you not get the hypocrisy and irony in what you are saying [and that goes for those on skunkers too, including TT, and I have posted this comment in the past over there too] with no direct reply, surprise surprise. I got sick of telling you I started going in the 70s and went to more matches from 1980-2009 than you did so didn't bother answering as there's no fucking point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3986 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Why is it a criticism of people that they didn't predict Man City's Arab owners btw? I dont get that. Nobody was clairvoyant to predict that about City specifically, but it wasn't beyond comprehension that clubs would be bought up and be bankrolled. There was a time not so very long ago when you'd hear takeover rumours every other week and they were usually of the piss-money-up-the-wall variety that had the potential to skewe the entire status quo in an instant. It just turned out to be City (and Blackburn etc) but it could have been any one of a number of clubs. Portsmouth fans will tell you that It was just symptomatic of how daft football was getting, so yes in the general sense it was eminently predictable. Man City were bought by Shinwatra a month before Ashley bought NUFC as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Why is it a criticism of people that they didn't predict Man City's Arab owners btw? I dont get that. Nobody was clairvoyant to predict that about City specifically, but it wasn't beyond comprehension that clubs would be bought up and be bankrolled. There was a time not so very long ago when you'd hear takeover rumours every other week and they were usually of the piss-money-up-the-wall variety that had the potential to skewe the entire status quo in an instant. It just turned out to be City (and Blackburn etc) but it could have been any one of a number of clubs. Portsmouth fans will tell you that It was just symptomatic of how daft football was getting, so yes in the general sense it was eminently predictable. Man City were bought by Shinwatra a month before Ashley bought NUFC as well. Aye, and that was another crazy takeover by any standards. Plenty of money chucked about under that administration (absolutely detached from City's own revenues) before he had his assets seized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Incidentally, for completeness, I thought Ashley was going to be a 'piss-his-own-money-up-the-wall merchant' too. And he was to start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 (edited) Somebody better tell Mike that... “Mike knows where we should be in four or five years,” managing director said. ”We want to be challenging for Europe every season.” I think we can challenge for Europe but it will be C.L. it will be Europa league, we should be competing for a top 7 finish every season 7th spot isn't europe. Nor is 6th. Toontoon's post credit's Mike with a hard nosed insight none of us clowns that have watched the club for decades can possibly have. That being we can't threaten the top 5 as we don't have the support. Despite having the third highest attendance average in the league. But then the club are saying we can compete with the 6 teams that fight it out for those 5 places. If Mike had a clue, why doesn't he educate the fans on reality, rather than insisting we'll push for it and spend £35m+ etc. I think the point about the raw money that the attendance figures equate to is a fair one. I don't think anyone wants to see £1000 STs at SJP but if his figures are correct, that and possibly more is what it would take to compete on match receipts alone assuming any kind of take-up. Even then ignoring the points about cup ties which are generally true imo. I think with decent buys (not withstanding some unneccesary sales imo) we can compete at around the 6th/7th level. Given the few other clubs who probably feel the same, I don't think a cautious "top 10 every year" is that bad at the moment. Of course I want more but don't honestly feel my expectations have been lowered by Ashley - just a bit of realism. as in post number 272 : "you mean, you aren't attracted to the club like you were by the Halls and Shepherd ? " No reply ? I thought you said "I don't answer questions" etc etc..... This is the WHOLE point. You people who slate "Fred" and the "trophy signings" [that attracted you to the club] but are now backing Mike Ashleys running of the club, why don't YOU back him with your own cash anymore if you think things are so much better ? Do you not get the hypocrisy and irony in what you are saying [and that goes for those on skunkers too, including TT, and I have posted this comment in the past over there too] with no direct reply, surprise surprise. I got sick of telling you I started going in the 70s and went to more matches from 1980-2009 than you did so didn't bother answering as there's no fucking point. but - while you think Mike Ashley is doing it right, and the Halls and Shepherd got it all wrong, you aren't supporting him like you did the Halls and Shepherd ? You said it yourself, so please confirm this is indeed the case. Then think about what you are saying. Edit. Whether you saw more matches than me during the period you claim is debateable but totally decided on away games and by no means certain - as I have said a number of times, I bought my first season ticket in 1973, and travelled to home games for a number of years while living a lot further away than you do now, and that is when we were a selling club too, just like now, while you by your own admittance, have lost the attraction under this new owner that you are defending. Edited June 21, 2011 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 but - while you think Mike Ashley is doing it right, and the Halls and Shepherd got it all wrong That doesn't represent his view at all though. Quite the opposite in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 As I said, do you think the old owners would have been able to compete in todays transfer market and if so how would it be financed?? I do consider Newcastle to be a big club I do get to some games And funnily enough, as my name suggests, I'm not a geordie. Does that mean I'm not allowed to support Newcastle? In response to your other question I started supporting Newcastle in the early 1990's when I was working up there, no doubt you will have a problem with this. Anyhow just answer that question above, without the usual bullshit,if that's possible so you know fuck all about how the club was run between the early 1960's and when the Halls and Shepherd bought it ? So you have no idea of the state the club was in when they bought it ? I thought so. No bullshit, I don't do bullshit, I'm telling you how it was, if you don't want to believe it, carry on believing whatever it is you want to do in your fantasy world. What's that got to do with the question of how they would compete in todays transfer market and moreso how it would be financed?? Enlighten me o wise one remind me what you said at the time, as I've already asked you. When is your man going to do "better than Fred" did ? Stick to the league positions, european qualification ie the facts. He's not my man and he won't as there is a massive difference in the market now, do you deny the market is vastly different now?? Also why can't you answer my question about how the old owners could compete in todays market remind me again, did you or anybody else say 5-6 years ago that you wanted rid of "Fred" because if he wasn't replaced, we would have to compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to survive ? Your avoidance of answering my question speaks volumes, you know there is no way they could compete but you won't admit it as that will make you look a bigger fucking Pratt then you do already. If not tell me how they could and maybe back it up with some figures Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 As I said, do you think the old owners would have been able to compete in todays transfer market and if so how would it be financed?? I do consider Newcastle to be a big club I do get to some games And funnily enough, as my name suggests, I'm not a geordie. Does that mean I'm not allowed to support Newcastle? In response to your other question I started supporting Newcastle in the early 1990's when I was working up there, no doubt you will have a problem with this. Anyhow just answer that question above, without the usual bullshit,if that's possible so you know fuck all about how the club was run between the early 1960's and when the Halls and Shepherd bought it ? So you have no idea of the state the club was in when they bought it ? I thought so. No bullshit, I don't do bullshit, I'm telling you how it was, if you don't want to believe it, carry on believing whatever it is you want to do in your fantasy world. What's that got to do with the question of how they would compete in todays transfer market and moreso how it would be financed?? Enlighten me o wise one remind me what you said at the time, as I've already asked you. When is your man going to do "better than Fred" did ? Stick to the league positions, european qualification ie the facts. He's not my man and he won't as there is a massive difference in the market now, do you deny the market is vastly different now?? Also why can't you answer my question about how the old owners could compete in todays market remind me again, did you or anybody else say 5-6 years ago that you wanted rid of "Fred" because if he wasn't replaced, we would have to compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to survive ? Your avoidance of answering my question speaks volumes, you know there is no way they could compete but you won't admit it as that will make you look a bigger fucking Pratt then you do already. If not tell me how they could and maybe back it up with some figures please tell me why, after 4 years, Mike Ashleys transfer policy has not yet realised better results and league positions on the pitch than "Freds" - if you are so convinced it is "better" ? A quite straightforward question, don't bother with any bullshit "opinions", just give me the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Fuck me gently! this place.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 but - while you think Mike Ashley is doing it right, and the Halls and Shepherd got it all wrong That doesn't represent his view at all though. Quite the opposite in fact. point is there though Alex, if these people are so supportive of Mike Ashley, why has their attraction to attend games diminished ? Nobody said at the time they wanted rid of "Fred" it was for any other reason that they insisted "anybody would do better". Nobody said it was because Man City would be bought by a bunch of Arabs and nobody said if we didnt' get rid of Fred we would become a selling club again, like the Boltons and Blackburns etc. Why are we a selling club again ? What does that have to do with ManCity being bankrolled by sugar daddies ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 Fuck me gently! this place.... someone else is obsessed with me now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 As I said, do you think the old owners would have been able to compete in todays transfer market and if so how would it be financed?? I do consider Newcastle to be a big club I do get to some games And funnily enough, as my name suggests, I'm not a geordie. Does that mean I'm not allowed to support Newcastle? In response to your other question I started supporting Newcastle in the early 1990's when I was working up there, no doubt you will have a problem with this. Anyhow just answer that question above, without the usual bullshit,if that's possible so you know fuck all about how the club was run between the early 1960's and when the Halls and Shepherd bought it ? So you have no idea of the state the club was in when they bought it ? I thought so. No bullshit, I don't do bullshit, I'm telling you how it was, if you don't want to believe it, carry on believing whatever it is you want to do in your fantasy world. What's that got to do with the question of how they would compete in todays transfer market and moreso how it would be financed?? Enlighten me o wise one remind me what you said at the time, as I've already asked you. When is your man going to do "better than Fred" did ? Stick to the league positions, european qualification ie the facts. He's not my man and he won't as there is a massive difference in the market now, do you deny the market is vastly different now?? Also why can't you answer my question about how the old owners could compete in todays market remind me again, did you or anybody else say 5-6 years ago that you wanted rid of "Fred" because if he wasn't replaced, we would have to compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to survive ? Your avoidance of answering my question speaks volumes, you know there is no way they could compete but you won't admit it as that will make you look a bigger fucking Pratt then you do already. If not tell me how they could and maybe back it up with some figures please tell me why, after 4 years, Mike Ashleys transfer policy has not yet realised better results and league positions on the pitch than "Freds" - if you are so convinced it is "better" ? A quite straightforward question, don't bother with any bullshit "opinions", just give me the facts. Fuck me, are you mental??? I have said countless times its not better and will not give better results, ie C.L. football. You understand that you bellend?? Stop asking me the same shit when I have answered it on more than one occasion. Now answer my fucking question, how could the old owners compete in todays transfer market???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 I think people should wait and see how Mike Ashleys transfer strategy "pans out" before shouting from the rooftops how "successful" it is......... until september 1st... 2016 or whenever. As 4 years clearly isn't long enough yet... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 As I said, do you think the old owners would have been able to compete in todays transfer market and if so how would it be financed?? I do consider Newcastle to be a big club I do get to some games And funnily enough, as my name suggests, I'm not a geordie. Does that mean I'm not allowed to support Newcastle? In response to your other question I started supporting Newcastle in the early 1990's when I was working up there, no doubt you will have a problem with this. Anyhow just answer that question above, without the usual bullshit,if that's possible so you know fuck all about how the club was run between the early 1960's and when the Halls and Shepherd bought it ? So you have no idea of the state the club was in when they bought it ? I thought so. No bullshit, I don't do bullshit, I'm telling you how it was, if you don't want to believe it, carry on believing whatever it is you want to do in your fantasy world. What's that got to do with the question of how they would compete in todays transfer market and moreso how it would be financed?? Enlighten me o wise one remind me what you said at the time, as I've already asked you. When is your man going to do "better than Fred" did ? Stick to the league positions, european qualification ie the facts. He's not my man and he won't as there is a massive difference in the market now, do you deny the market is vastly different now?? Also why can't you answer my question about how the old owners could compete in todays market remind me again, did you or anybody else say 5-6 years ago that you wanted rid of "Fred" because if he wasn't replaced, we would have to compete at the levels of Bolton and Blackburn, selling our best players to survive ? Your avoidance of answering my question speaks volumes, you know there is no way they could compete but you won't admit it as that will make you look a bigger fucking Pratt then you do already. If not tell me how they could and maybe back it up with some figures please tell me why, after 4 years, Mike Ashleys transfer policy has not yet realised better results and league positions on the pitch than "Freds" - if you are so convinced it is "better" ? A quite straightforward question, don't bother with any bullshit "opinions", just give me the facts. Fuck me, are you mental??? I have said countless times its not better and will not give better results, ie C.L. football. You understand that you bellend?? Stop asking me the same shit when I have answered it on more than one occasion. Now answer my fucking question, how could the old owners compete in todays transfer market???? Mike Ashley certainly isn't competing, he's just pocketing the cash. 40m quid so far. Is this why you wanted rid of Fred ? Why are you defending selling our best players like a selling club for then ? This is what I've been saying for years ? Bellend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3986 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 but - while you think Mike Ashley is doing it right, and the Halls and Shepherd got it all wrong, you aren't supporting him like you did the Halls and Shepherd ? You said it yourself, so please confirm this is indeed the case. Then think about what you are saying. Edit. Whether you saw more matches than me during the period you claim is debateable but totally decided on away games and by no means certain - as I have said a number of times, I bought my first season ticket in 1973, and travelled to home games for a number of years while living a lot further away than you do now, and that is when we were a selling club too, just like now, while you by your own admittance, have lost the attraction under this new owner that you are defending. You need to stop putting people in baskets. If someone crticises certain elements of the previous regime it does not mean that they 1. Wanted them out, 2. Celebrated their exit or 3. Didn't enjoy every single minute of the good times. Also if someone grits their teeth and says that some elements of Ashley's decisions make sense (remember you saying paying off the mortgage was a good idea in that post CT found) it doesn't mean that overall they think he's anything other than a fat cockney cunt who will probably never see success at the club. Do you think that's possible? I give opinions on issues in the context of the times - what worked in 2001 will not work in 2011 - that's the underlying concept I think you won't admit. I've said a million times I think we should be competing at the top end but know that Ashley simply won't finance that - without going all CT I think the best we can do is try and make the best of that situation and enjoy it as much as we can. On a personal note that just means that I don't want to go to games at the moment - nothing to do with Ashley really in a major way though there's an element - but I still want to see the team play well and finish as high as possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 but - while you think Mike Ashley is doing it right, and the Halls and Shepherd got it all wrong That doesn't represent his view at all though. Quite the opposite in fact. point is there though Alex, if these people are so supportive of Mike Ashley, why has their attraction to attend games diminished ? Nobody said at the time they wanted rid of "Fred" it was for any other reason that they insisted "anybody would do better". Nobody said it was because Man City would be bought by a bunch of Arabs and nobody said if we didnt' get rid of Fred we would become a selling club again, like the Boltons and Blackburns etc. Why are we a selling club again ? What does that have to do with ManCity being bankrolled by sugar daddies ? He isn't supportive of him though. Any decent points you have get lost in false statements like that imo. But, if you're taking that line, by signing up for another 3 years that's a tacit approval on your part of the way the club is now being run (not saying it is but you can't have it all ways). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaythesouthernmag 0 Posted June 21, 2011 Share Posted June 21, 2011 It's pretty fucking simple why you are not answering my question, you can't and you know the figures don't add up. There is no way that they could compete in this market, you know it but you won't say it because all your arguments will fall apart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now