Re: Finances

91
Amberexile wrote:
Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Let me see.

I wonder why the club don't answer my emails?

No. Like you they are very rude.

I know how the money is being spent?

No. I have no psychic abilities to the best of my knowledge.

I didn't answer a survey?

No. I was never asked to take part in a survey. As you said the club don't email me.

So disappointed that your new found integrity was so short lived. And your post so full of bile. What a shame.
How did I know that you didn't answer the survey? :lol:
However, you did reply to a thread on this messagboard trying to encourage people to reply to the survey at the time. The thread even thoughtfully provided a link to the survey to make it easy for us all to take part. Now admittedly your reply was another one of your rants at whoareya but you can hardly claim that you didn't know about the survey and have the opportunity to put across your views. As it seems that you were aware of the survey, a logical conclusion seems to be that, despite your constant criticisms, you did not consider providing your views to be important enough to spend the time to respond to the survey. And you talk about integrity. :roll:

So here is my issue.
The club issued a survey open to all in order to gain an accurate view.
You were aware of the survey but chose not to contribute your views and have them taken into account.
The club took the information provided by the many who could be bothered to reply to it.
The club took a long time to evaluate the responses from the many fans who responded in order to construct what they considered to be the optimum rewards and benefits scheme.
On the back of the information provided by the survey, other changes in the way the club is run were implemented, including the setting out of improved communications. These were presented at a meeting open to all which again, you did not attend.
The changes were implemented and have resulted in a threefold increase in revenue from the scheme and improved communications with the fans.
Then, having decided not to bother replying to the survey, you criticise the club for not asking the fans as you believe they could have come up with a more lucrative scheme had they done so. They did!

You had the chance to contribute, you didn't bother. In my view that leaves you with little room to complain about the outcome.
Paul,

So long as you make it clear that it is an opinion that is fine by me.

I picked you up not because you raised as a possibility that Spurs would have had to pay for Wembley thus costing Newport County money but because you were stating it as a fact. And as I said it was to your credit that you checked and posted up that your assumption was misplaced.

I fully support your right to state whatever opinion you wish to hold about me. Unpleasant and confrontational as these bilious posts of yours I will keep posting my views. You and everyone else can make of them what you will.

Re: Finances

92
To add to my post above I have to say that I am disappointed in Amberexile. I am not in the slightest bit concerned at the insults as they are easy to ignore.

However I am disappointed that the issue that I raised is deflected from. The topic is finances. My point is that 80% of County supporters are not members of the trust and that rather than be critical of those people it would serve our club better to find out why.

I have yet to see a coherent argument as to why I am wrong. But hidden in Amber's post was a very interesting question? He said 'And you wonder why the club don't answer your emails?'

Precisely. If you don't engage with those who are critical, you can hardly expect them to give you their money. And it is unfortunate that like Amberexile, Newport County fail to comprehend that your most severe critic is not your enemy. Indeed many of us would hope that our most severe critic is in fact ourselves.

Re: Finances

93
whoareya wrote:
lowandhard wrote:Agree that if any prospective buyer baulks at £5 million then we shouldn’t want them. Whoever wanted to do it then that figure should be in their pocket as small change, running a football club is an expensive business. Even then, there’s nothing stopping them getting fed up and wanting to recoup some cash when they depart for their tropical island - do we learn nothing? :shock: :shock: :shock:
I personally can't see much wrong with the involvement and subsequent departure of LS, he was probably our 'once in a lifetime' benefactor and didn't really want much back for his generosity other than reimbursement for the shares he bought in the first place. Departed with no hostility and has kept a dignified silence ever since, something that his predecessors couldn't manage........


Are there any lessons to be learned from receiving the financial backing on those terms - you can hardly call them terms really, other than the opportunity sit in boardrooms and Royal Boxes.
Yeah, the lesson learned is to invest into the infrastructure rather than just the playing squad.

Spend the money on a stadium, training facilities and excellent academy facilities and well-qualified coaches, then aim for financial sustainability with a pathway for academy products into the first team. Long term investment rather than here today gone tomorrow instant success but little longer term legacy (aside from EFL membership, which admittedly is significant, but has been maintained without that funding).

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: exile1960