Kmcalpin

Sam Nicholson?

I think this reflects the nature of the Executive Board, which in recent times has been almost divided. Maybe "divided" is slightly too strong a term. Maybe operated as two entities. Mintymac is right. When the time comes, a meeting or meetings should be held for members, and probably also for private shareholders. IF the Society makes a recommendation to members, it has to be careful how that is worded and not be seen to rubbish any private proposal. A fine line to tread. I'm sceptical of a "trade union" approach as I had a couple of bad personal experiences of that during my working career.

Yes, I think it would Bobby. If it ever comes to this, both proposals could be put to members with FAQs and an idiots guide for folk like me.

Normally I have no interest whatsoever in OF games, but from a selfish perspective that was a good result today. It keeps the title pot boiling and means Sevco will be desperate to beat Dundee in midweek and Ross County next Sunday.

Moses quoth "Let my teaching fall like rain and my words descend like dew, like showers on new grass, like abundant rain on tender plants." He taught Dundee a lesson all right.

Yes, his form is a bit erratic, you're right. However, he's hitting the net regulalry. I don't think we're actively planning to sell Bair, but would accept a decent offer if one came in during the next window. Thats not unlikely in my view. We have to consider that scenario, and I'm sure we are. I have no inside knowledge whatsoever but wouldn't be surprised if Miller moved on in the summer for a decent fee. Almost certainly the club has factored that into their planning.

In theory it should be a good game. We'll want to win to confirm our Premiership status and keep us in the hunt for an, albeit unlikely, top 6 slot. Hibs will want the 3 points to secure top 6, should Dundee falter. I can see it being an open encounter, which will suit us.

I get where you're coming from Sinjy, but everyone is different. Folk can show support in different ways, handle defeats in different ways, and handle disappointments in different ways. Its important not to throw the baby out with the bathwater though. Most of the names you mention can make very valid points at times, although we may not agree with how they're expressed. That said, I get Yabbas Turd's recent comment about posts that the mods delete (You and your colleagues do a good job Iain - largely unseen by many including me). Steelboy's recent post this morning is a case in point - although succint, thought provoking comments about squad deficiencies.

There's two ways to look at squad rebuilding for next season. A large amount of bodies will be departing; lack of consistency and time for new lads to settle in and gel; managerial time and effort required to plan for this; some new arrivals will tank. Most, maybe all of this is true. However, I prefer to take the opposite, more positive view. Having managed the team for a bit longer now, SK will be more aware of individuals' strengths and weaknesses. He'll have seen them in more diverse situations. He'll also have more freedom to sign his own men as so many depart. More deadwood will have been cleared. More cash will be available to him to spend how he wants (not in overall terms but through distribution of what we could call wasted money). On the Dundee matchday thread, Steelboy makes a very valid point in this respect, when he wrote "The problem with our squad is Lamie, Tierney, Maguire, McGinley, Obika, Wilkinson, Elliott and Shaw. Change them for a decent centre half and centre mid and we'd easily be top six." Some of course have already departed, but will have consumed cash in the process. Now to that list you could also add the likes of Butcher and Kelly. The latter, in particular, will be on a fair wedge. There are always contrary opinions of course, but I suspect most fans would not be apoplectic if Kelly was to move on. I think we could secure a better keeper for the same outlay or hopefully less. Then, in the middle band, there are OOC players like Mugabi and O'Donnell and Slattery who some would retain and some wouldn't. Of those OOC, the only one I'd really want to keep is McGinn. Younger prosects like Ewan Wilson - I'd also want to keep too. In short, I'm not overly bothered if "all 5", whoever they may be, reject our new offers. Some questions to be answered too. Is Nicholson considered to be a replacement for Spittal? Would he sign on again? There are also known unknowns - the likes of Miller or Bair, might move on if offers are right. SK has already said that he identified signing targets months ago, and has been working flat out on squad planning. This summer promises to be very busy and interesting for us fans. I'd like to see us bring in a new commanding keeper; strengthen central defence; and introduce some steel to midfield. .

Indeed there is. To Dundee FC - be careful what you wish for. What a comeback!

Don't panic we only need to finish above one of Ross County or St Johnstone and neither are winning at present.

Please don't worry. Although the call handlers might be overworked, Police Scotland will have instructed their officers to take no action in these cases.

Pretty much going as expected, in our game and the Ross County and St Johnstone games. No surprises so far. Hopefully we can get an equaliser in the second half. I'd be quite happy for Dundee to give us an absolute pounding in the second half so long as we score more than them.

Game is on but is the pitch playable?

This. Falkirk all over again.

This is down to the SPFL and Dundee. We are the innocent party here. Its not down to incompetence. We're simply pawns in a "bigger game". With the final pre split games fast approaching the SPFL could easily have scheduled Dundee's outstanding game against Sevco for last midweek. That would have left next midweek free for contingencies. What's the problem with that you might reasonably ask? It all seems very logical. However Sevco have a game on Sunday against guess who? Celtic no less. Therefore the SPFL had to give them a free midweek. Preferential treatment? As for Dundee, as Falkirk did years ago, they prioritised playing budget over pitch renovation. Why should we suffer? Nb. Thousands of complaints about sectarian hatred at Sunday's OF game, under the Hate Crime Act, but no action taken by Police Scotland.

100%. This has been going on for years at Dens Park and nothing has been done about it. When we had pitch problems the SPFL and media were all over us. Thats not been the case with Dundee. I simply cannot see the point of the pitch inpsection earlier in the week, except for PR purposes. The proposal to play the game on Monday at Airdrie behind closed doors is simply absurd and I'm pleased that our club appears to be opposing this. Football is a spectator sport - right? Given Dundee FC's track record and treatment of their own fans over season prices this week I simply don't trust them to come up with a sensible and fair solution.

I think that will be right, now that you explain it. Back to the original point made by several of us. Given that the Society "reps" on the Executive Board outnumber other Directors ie Jim McMahon, I would hope that the Society is taking an active part in the negotiations with external partners irrespective of how it is is dressed up. If not, it would appear that Jim McMahon is ploughing a lone furrow. Of course, the Society should be working up its own proposal in parallel. I hope in Mr MCGarry's words, that the tail isn't wagging our dog.

Just checked the annual accounts for year ended May 2023. There were four, but as we know, Andrew Wilson resigned. Maybe Graham Keyes, the company secretary is one? Graham McGarry, writing in the Herald, says that the current situation with the Society and the Executive Board is akin to the tail wagging the dog.

If we do indeed have 5 Directors on the Executive Board, who are the other two? It's a simple question and in no way breaching confidentialities. I'm aware that Andrew Wilson resigned a wee while ago.

Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought it did. There are 3 directors, two of which come from the Society. The exception is Jim McMahon. I believe there are plans afoot to increase the size of the Board

The same could be said for many aspects of life such as juries and elections but we do live in a democratic society and thank goodness for that. We're a Jock Tamson"s bairns as they say. Everyone is entitled to a say.

Yes, may be a play on words Greg. An ambiguously worded statement. To go back to basics, the club currently has 3 directors, two of whom represent the majority shareholder i.e. the Society. The third being Jim McMahon. I can't think of any privately owned club and situation where the majority shareholder is not involved in major investment negotiations. Surely Douglas Dickie and Tom Feely are acting as a 2 way conduit and not in a vacuum? Surely they are putting forward a Society view and acting in its interest in negotiations and feeding back information to the Society Board? I'd hate to think that they were taking an active part in negotiations, knowing some aspect(s) of the proposal might not be acceptable to the Society, but could not voice those concerns because they were not "acting in the Society's interest" so to speak. If not, in whose interest are they acting (the Club's ?????). I have no problem with the amount of information being released. Lilke Mintymac, I think a simple update is sufficient and regular communications every 4/6/8 weeks or whatever are fine. I'm not in favour of frequent and regular public sector style announcements simply saying nothing has happened or theres no change. Report by exception. I'm thinking of the old Monty Python airfield sketch here!

Well, as the majority shareholder, and to all intents and purposes the owner it should be. It would appear that the Club board is two tier, with Society reps being junior partners. As a Society member, I sincerely hope that our representatives, are actively involved in any negotiations with potential investors.

Whilst I don't agree with your tone, I do agree 100% with your point. This very point is also being made on P & B. I get that the Society is not the club, but it is the major shareholder and as such the owner. Surely the Society is involved in the negotiations. It must know the details. If it doesn't then serious questions need to be asked. That's not say of course that details should be divulged to members at this stage of course.