Bangitintrnet wrote:

Torquay Exile wrote:

wattsville_boy wrote:don't disagree with investing money into infrastructure but the problem is how to do it. The simple answer would be to put aside a percentage of the revenue each year for future projects, such as training facilities or a stadium fund.

The problem comes when you look at the figures generated by such a policy. For example if revenue were £1million a year even 20% taken for future projects is £200,000. That's a lot of years you'd need to even build a decent training facility, let alone a new stadium.

Yes, I agree it is going to be difficult. What should have happened, and I'm sure you will agree with me when I say this, should have been looked at a long time ago. When We got back into the football league, The directors should have looked at us having a stadium. For many years now, That I can remember, we have had some good directors and some Bad directors, Including the directors that are there this very day.

If and I repeat, If any directors are reading this forum now. We are not asking you to do this straight away. All we are asking you to do is call a meeting at the riverfront like you did when you needed our help to talk to us and tell us why it isn't possible to do some of the fundraisings now or even look into it at least.
Are we asking too much of you?

You had the chance to stand as a director, and you shit out. You could have done it from Ireland, as has been proved by the board meetings during COVID.

What an unbelievable sense of entitlement you have Stan. Call a meeting at the Riverfront to discuss what exactly? That Stan believes the vast majority of clubs are wrong, and that they should join him back in the nineteen eighties.
Stan can't you see that in four days a pitiful amount of people have responded to your pointless vote?

Torquay Exile wrote:

Bangitintrnet wrote:

Torquay Exile wrote:

wattsville_boy wrote:don't disagree with investing money into infrastructure but the problem is how to do it. The simple answer would be to put aside a percentage of the revenue each year for future projects, such as training facilities or a stadium fund.

The problem comes when you look at the figures generated by such a policy. For example if revenue were £1million a year even 20% taken for future projects is £200,000. That's a lot of years you'd need to even build a decent training facility, let alone a new stadium.

Yes, I agree it is going to be difficult. What should have happened, and I'm sure you will agree with me when I say this, should have been looked at a long time ago. When We got back into the football league, The directors should have looked at us having a stadium. For many years now, That I can remember, we have had some good directors and some Bad directors, Including the directors that are there this very day.

If and I repeat, If any directors are reading this forum now. We are not asking you to do this straight away. All we are asking you to do is call a meeting at the riverfront like you did when you needed our help to talk to us and tell us why it isn't possible to do some of the fundraisings now or even look into it at least.
Are we asking too much of you?

You had the chance to stand as a director, and you shit out. You could have done it from Ireland, as has been proved by the board meetings during COVID.

What an unbelievable sense of entitlement you have Stan. Call a meeting at the Riverfront to discuss what exactly? That Stan believes the vast majority of clubs are wrong, and that they should join him back in the nineteen eighties.
Stan can't you see that in four days a pitiful amount of people have responded to your pointless vote?

You are so obsessed with Stan that you now think that I'm him. For a start, he lives in Ireland. I do not. So, unfortunately, I'm unable to answer your question as they are not my questions to answer. Sorry Stan, your questions,

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Torquay Exile wrote:

Bangitintrnet wrote:

Torquay Exile wrote:

wattsville_boy wrote:don't disagree with investing money into infrastructure but the problem is how to do it. The simple answer would be to put aside a percentage of the revenue each year for future projects, such as training facilities or a stadium fund.

The problem comes when you look at the figures generated by such a policy. For example if revenue were £1million a year even 20% taken for future projects is £200,000. That's a lot of years you'd need to even build a decent training facility, let alone a new stadium.

Yes, I agree it is going to be difficult. What should have happened, and I'm sure you will agree with me when I say this, should have been looked at a long time ago. When We got back into the football league, The directors should have looked at us having a stadium. For many years now, That I can remember, we have had some good directors and some Bad directors, Including the directors that are there this very day.

If and I repeat, If any directors are reading this forum now. We are not asking you to do this straight away. All we are asking you to do is call a meeting at the riverfront like you did when you needed our help to talk to us and tell us why it isn't possible to do some of the fundraisings now or even look into it at least.
Are we asking too much of you?

You had the chance to stand as a director, and you shit out. You could have done it from Ireland, as has been proved by the board meetings during COVID.

What an unbelievable sense of entitlement you have Stan. Call a meeting at the Riverfront to discuss what exactly? That Stan believes the vast majority of clubs are wrong, and that they should join him back in the nineteen eighties.
Stan can't you see that in four days a pitiful amount of people have responded to your pointless vote?

You are so obsessed with Stan that you now think that I'm him. For a start, he lives in Ireland. I do not. So, unfortunately, I'm unable to answer your question as they are not my questions to answer. Sorry Stan, your questions,

Sorry about Torquay.

All I can suggest is that people writing in red ink at 2-00 am are probably best ignored.

Bangitintrnet wrote:

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Bangitintrnet wrote:
Oh and I really enjoyed the game tonight Stan, it was a cracker. Thank you for asking.
I trust you enjoyed Back to the Future, at the Sligo multiplex?[/color]

I didn't go to the pictures. At seven o'clock tonight I was three quarters of the way through a six mile run. The Newport half marathon in March is being run in aid of St David's hospice in Malpas where my beloved sister died in April. Since you're obviously obsessed by me no doubt you would wish to sponsor me.

I'll be the good looking fellow in the Leitrim GAA shirt. See you there.

Thank you for your very kind offer, but no thanks.
If you had been more generous when MY beloved Newport County needed financial support perhaps I
would have had a different outlook.

Stan A. Einstein wrote:

Torquay Exile wrote:

Bangitintrnet wrote:

Torquay Exile wrote:

wattsville_boy wrote:don't disagree with investing money into infrastructure but the problem is how to do it. The simple answer would be to put aside a percentage of the revenue each year for future projects, such as training facilities or a stadium fund.

The problem comes when you look at the figures generated by such a policy. For example if revenue were £1million a year even 20% taken for future projects is £200,000. That's a lot of years you'd need to even build a decent training facility, let alone a new stadium.

Yes, I agree it is going to be difficult. What should have happened, and I'm sure you will agree with me when I say this, should have been looked at a long time ago. When We got back into the football league, The directors should have looked at us having a stadium. For many years now, That I can remember, we have had some good directors and some Bad directors, Including the directors that are there this very day.

If and I repeat, If any directors are reading this forum now. We are not asking you to do this straight away. All we are asking you to do is call a meeting at the riverfront like you did when you needed our help to talk to us and tell us why it isn't possible to do some of the fundraisings now or even look into it at least.
Are we asking too much of you?

You had the chance to stand as a director, and you shit out. You could have done it from Ireland, as has been proved by the board meetings during COVID.

What an unbelievable sense of entitlement you have Stan. Call a meeting at the Riverfront to discuss what exactly? That Stan believes the vast majority of clubs are wrong, and that they should join him back in the nineteen eighties.
Stan can't you see that in four days a pitiful amount of people have responded to your pointless vote?

You are so obsessed with Stan that you now think that I'm him. For a start, he lives in Ireland. I do not. So, unfortunately, I'm unable to answer your question as they are not my questions to answer. Sorry Stan, your questions,

Sorry about Torquay.

All I can suggest is that people writing in red ink at 2-00 am are probably best ignored.

pembsexile wrote:This has to be the most perplexing thread/poll in my time on this board. Such abuse is not healthy.

There is a final 50/50 split in those that had an opinion. The thing that completely baffles me is that 3% of voters had no opinion. You have to ask - why bother? Very odd to me.

pembsexile wrote:Yeh, come on Stan, why did you not attend this debriefing? Why did you tell me to go instead? We need answers.

excessbee wrote:I wouldn't say there has been a pathetic response to the poll. I suggested earlier that although fifty people may have voted, maybe no more than 100 members are active readers/contributors of the forum. A 50% response isn't bad, but it is no basis to proceed on behalf of a supporter base of, shall we say, 3000 supporters. It's an 'unofficial forum' and carries no weight.

Torquay Exile wrote:

excessbee wrote:I wouldn't say there has been a pathetic response to the poll. I suggested earlier that although fifty people may have voted, maybe no more than 100 members are active readers/contributors of the forum. A 50% response isn't bad, but it is no basis to proceed on behalf of a supporter base of, shall we say, 3000 supporters. It's an 'unofficial forum' and carries no weight.

May I ask you how many of those 3000 supporters do you believe are trust members?

pembsexile wrote:Yeh, come on Stan, why did you not attend this debriefing? Why did you tell me to go instead? We need answers.