Re: we'd rather go under than ...
I think the key point here is whether or not the statement cited above is the genuinely held belief of those who said it, and that they really would rather have no club (and no investment) than have someone they disapprove of in charge, or rather if it's just bluff and bluster; fighting talk if you will.
If it's the former, then it will not just be them that lose their investments, but everyone else who is a shareholder. And, most importantly, there will be no Stanley.
|