Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Amberexile wrote:As long as Stan co-operates with any investigation to determine which director or club official leaked the information in the first place, does it really matter who told Stan?

btw I don't expect there will be an investigation as sacking one person for gross misconduct of this kind would start an avalanche of dismissals when some of the people who would need to be involved are themselves serial leakers.

Paul,

Two points. One I certainly won't be assisting any investigation.

Secondly, remember information is not always deliberately leaked. The truth has a habit of coming to the surface almost by it's own accord. Remember the old adage that once two people know a secret it is only a matter of time before the whole world does.

I think we are agreeing here.

There will be no investigation.

A leak is a leak deliberate or otherwise.

Where we might disagree is that in my view, to leak accidentally (negligently) is a greater offence than doing so deliberately

No idea why certain people chose to resurrect the scandal of our managers pay. I feel that for the sake of clarity I should point out to the more cynical amongst you that I have not created Jimmy Exile as a conduit to allow me to spill even more beans.

I am now informed that Gavin Foxall negotiated a contract with Mike Flynn with a six-month severance clause. So if Mike fails to cut the mustard next season it's nearly £60,000 of our money to say goodbye.

Of course my source might be wrong, no doubt we will be told if s/he is.

Perhaps you could ask your source if the deal works both ways , i.e if MF is poached we benefit to the same amount ?
Assuming I am correct in knowing who your source is I suspect that your information is not far from the truth, however as a standard bearer for transparency perhaps you could tell the board ( this one of course!) where our information is coming from ?

"your information"

Threadbare wrote:Perhaps you could ask your source if the deal works both ways , i.e if MF is poached we benefit to the same amount ?
Assuming I am correct in knowing who your source is I suspect that your information is not far from the truth, however as a standard bearer for transparency perhaps you could tell the board ( this one of course!) where our information is coming from ?

I will not under any circumstances reveal my source(s). As I said to Daftas if you believe you know then by all means say.

As a matter of interest, how does that statement sit with your vehement argument for transparency ?.
No doubt your idea of what it means will be different to the majority on here.

Threadbare wrote:As a matter of interest, how does that statement sit with your vehement argument for transparency ?.
No doubt your idea of what it means will be different to the majority on here.

I don't know what the majority on here think, I would never be so arrogant as to presume that I did.

However Newport County directors have a fiduciary duty to Newport County shareholders. As such in my view Newport County directors have a duty to be transparent to their shareholders.

I have a duty not to disclose information about my sources without their permission. You are making a the mistake of confusing transparency on what it is your right to know and transparency on what it is not your right to know. Not easy but I will explain.

As a shareholder of Newport County I accept entirely I have no right to know how much Michael Flynn earns. I do though have a right to know how much Michael Flynn is paid by Newport County.

Now if as you say you know who my informant(s) is/are why not let everyone on this board know?

As a reply to your last sentence, why don't you ?

Stan A. Einstein wrote:No idea why certain people chose to resurrect the scandal of our managers pay. I feel that for the sake of clarity I should point out to the more cynical amongst you that I have not created Jimmy Exile as a conduit to allow me to spill even more beans.

I am now informed that Gavin Foxall negotiated a contract with Mike Flynn with a six-month severance clause. So if Mike fails to cut the mustard next season it's nearly £60,000 of our money to say goodbye.

Of course my source might be wrong, no doubt we will be told if s/he is.

Your source maybe be wrong , he may be right, however , if you would have conducted a poll on March 5th 2017 with the question,

Would the supporters and owners of Newport County happily pay Mike Flynn £60k if he, not only kept us up and stabilised the club also but took us to Elland road and Wembley the following season?

What do you think the response would be?

Alan G Bryant wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:No idea why certain people chose to resurrect the scandal of our managers pay. I feel that for the sake of clarity I should point out to the more cynical amongst you that I have not created Jimmy Exile as a conduit to allow me to spill even more beans.

I am now informed that Gavin Foxall negotiated a contract with Mike Flynn with a six-month severance clause. So if Mike fails to cut the mustard next season it's nearly £60,000 of our money to say goodbye.

Of course my source might be wrong, no doubt we will be told if s/he is.

Your source maybe be wrong , he may be right, however , if you would have conducted a poll on March 5th 2017 with the question,

Would the supporters and owners of Newport County happily pay Mike Flynn £60k if he, not only kept us up and stabilised the club also but took us to Elland road and Wembley the following season?

What do you think the response would be?

Well I guess if you and StefanKuntz voted that would be at least one vote for happy.

Edit.

Oh and you know that my source(s) are right.

Threadbare wrote:As a reply to your last sentence, why don't you ?

Why don't I what?

For the sake of transparency tell everybody, who has told you these items of "confidential" information.
Shouldn't be too difficult really, should it ?

To be honest with you I wouldn't really be that bothered who it was under normal circumstances; however, as your mantra is transparency I am interested.
Don't think that is too unreasonable, do you ?

There’s no way even the most inexperienced chairman ever would ever agree a deal for Newport county to make a manager less than 12 months into the job the most expensive paid manager in the league. I refuse to believe the rest of the board would stand for that anyway.

Threadbare wrote:For the sake of transparency tell everybody, who has told you these items of "confidential" information.
Shouldn't be too difficult really, should it ?

To be honest with you I wouldn't really be that bothered who it was under normal circumstances; however, as your mantra is transparency I am interested.
Don't think that is too unreasonable, do you ?

I don't reveal sources.

As you know the identity/identities and you think revealing him/her/them is reasonable why don't you just do it? Or were you just pretending to know?

Bush wrote:There’s no way even the most inexperienced chairman ever would ever agree a deal for Newport county to make a manager less than 12 months into the job the most expensive paid manager in the league. I refuse to believe the rest of the board would stand for that anyway.

I know where you're coming from but........

The most inexperienced chairman ever did agree such a deal. The rest of the board did stand for it. Although in fairness the newly elected representatives were presented with a fait accompli.