Views on Hicks and Gillett? - Tell the Press

[little dave hedgehog]

also, ben, 90% of the US-based readers won't even know about the existance of lfc, never mind hicks' and gillette's involvement. i'd be more worried about pissing off the american baseball and canadian hockey fans. those are far more likely to be touchy subjects than some british soccer thingy...

[ben23]

this is all very nice, but i'm trying to find people who actually feel strongly enough to ADMIT TO THEIR OPINIONS IN PUBLIC.

I can't quote Redrascal in a serious article. come on.

I need names.

you don't need to stick em on here, but email me at [email protected] if you're up for it.

i guess maybe there's just no huyton boys on here....

[dom9]

This is a wind up imo.

You can say that these views came from a messageboard.

[Roboklopp]

[QUOTE=Tatterdemalion;1357255]In reality they probably will get the finances right eventually - they're not mugs. But LFC has a way of doing business with dignity, which they have completely ignored. We find they manner in which they conduct themselves to be somewhat base.

I hope you write an accurate article, Ben, you have to remember that you are asking people a question about which opinions become very heated. Balance is probably the order of the day rather than sensationalism.

A lot of us on here pay a lot of money to Bloomberg for use of your terminals...[/QUOTE]

Damn right- and increasingly more so.

[Roboklopp]

This makes no sense at all

Then I rest my case.

[Chrono]

This is a wind up imo.

You can say that these views came from a messageboard.

Completely

[Darkon]

On the positive we have come closer to winning the title this year with them as owners!

[Pacman]

This is a wind up imo.

You can say that these views came from a messageboard.

[ben23]

This is a wind up imo.

You can say that these views came from a messageboard.

no you can't dom.
anonymous opinions spouted on message boards have little weight.
so serious papers and agencies quote them as little as possible.

no one has to put their neck on the line if they don't want to, but this is a chance to get your opinion to a whole load of people outside the group of liverpool fans who are all going to agree with you anyway.

you might actually persuade people.

latest story [totally unrelated, but to show not a wind up...]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aWJut7kEIU6w

[Chrono]

no you can't dom.
anonymous opinions spouted on message boards have little weight.
so serious papers and agencies quote them as little as possible.

no one has to put their neck on the line if they don't want to, but this is a chance to get your opinion to a whole load of people outside the group of liverpool fans who are all going to agree with you anyway.

you might actually persuade people.

latest story [totally unrelated, but to show not a wind up...]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aWJut7kEIU6w

What weight is my name going to give to your article? Might as well use Joe Bloggs.

[ben23]

well, we only print the truth, that's what it comes down to.

we only quote people prepared to stand up and be counted.

[Venton]

no you can't dom.
anonymous opinions spouted on message boards have little weight.
so serious papers and agencies quote them as little as possible.

no one has to put their neck on the line if they don't want to, but this is a chance to get your opinion to a whole load of people outside the group of liverpool fans who are all going to agree with you anyway.

you might actually persuade people.

latest story [totally unrelated, but to show not a wind up...]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aWJut7kEIU6w

You can't blame us for a bit of reticence. You don't seem to have written many sports related articles and the general tone of Bloomsberg is geared towards balanced financial articles rather than emotional fan debates, no?