rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 7:53 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 6:29 pm

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:33 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Don't recall mention of the £500k in terms of signing players, but do recall being told at the meeting that 'the bulk' of it will be required to pay our creditors.

That simply is a lie.

What was said was that some money was required for bills but the vast majority was needed to be spent on the players January budget.

Thats what we agreed to meet as trust members.

Please stop the lies.

The club published an communication update on 11th August stating any bid to takeover the club would require an investment in order to pay our creditors and cover the club's budget gap for 2023-24. No mention was made about the players Jan budget.
Subsequently the Trust members at the Sept meeting voted in favour to transfer 52% of the club shares to Jenkins in return for an investment of £500k. At that meeting I heard a Trust Board member say that 'the bulk' of that investment would go towards paying our creditors, although a number of agreed monthly payments had been made to our largest creditor in the previous months. The only reference I recall to the Jan budget was when Jenkins suggested he would look at recruiting 1 or 2 players. I certainly don't recall any mention of 'the vast majority' was needed to be spent on the players Jan budget. I'd be interested if anyone else at the meeting heard those words being used? I'll be happy to apologise if I missed that important statement.
Incidently part of Jenkin's bid summary was to maintain and indeed grow the Trust, who would act as the voice of supporters.

The budget gap was created by using all the money from the reserve set asside for the January window. That was stated a number of times before we voted to meet any expenditure that the club couldn't meet, should a takeover not take place. Shaun stated categorically that we didn't owe anything like the Argus were reporting, but were expecting a shortfall of income over expenditure as the season progressed. He was asked specifically about the element of debt, and he stated 80k to 100k was predicted to be needed.

Like others you are simply repeating what was said from the floor of the meeting not by those who were running the meeting. Its quite simply repeating lies.

The trust acting as the voice of the supporters does not suggest it will run the club in any meaningful sense. Of course the trust will be the link between the new club board and the supporters, what it doesn't require is to set it's own agenda, we need to act as one if the club and it's supporter base is to build.

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:46 pm

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 7:53 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 6:29 pm

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:33 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Don't recall mention of the £500k in terms of signing players, but do recall being told at the meeting that 'the bulk' of it will be required to pay our creditors.

That simply is a lie.

What was said was that some money was required for bills but the vast majority was needed to be spent on the players January budget.

Thats what we agreed to meet as trust members.

Please stop the lies.

The club published an communication update on 11th August stating any bid to takeover the club would require an investment in order to pay our creditors and cover the club's budget gap for 2023-24. No mention was made about the players Jan budget.
Subsequently the Trust members at the Sept meeting voted in favour to transfer 52% of the club shares to Jenkins in return for an investment of £500k. At that meeting I heard a Trust Board member say that 'the bulk' of that investment would go towards paying our creditors, although a number of agreed monthly payments had been made to our largest creditor in the previous months. The only reference I recall to the Jan budget was when Jenkins suggested he would look at recruiting 1 or 2 players. I certainly don't recall any mention of 'the vast majority' was needed to be spent on the players Jan budget. I'd be interested if anyone else at the meeting heard those words being used? I'll be happy to apologise if I missed that important statement.
Incidently part of Jenkin's bid summary was to maintain and indeed grow the Trust, who would act as the voice of supporters.

The budget gap was created by using all the money from the reserve set asside for the January window. That was stated a number of times before we voted to meet any expenditure that the club couldn't meet, should a takeover not take place. Shaun stated categorically that we didn't owe anything like the Argus were reporting, but were expecting a shortfall of income over expenditure as the season progressed. He was asked specifically about the element of debt, and he stated 80k to 100k was predicted to be needed.

Like others you are simply repeating what was said from the floor of the meeting not by those who were running the meeting. Its quite simply repeating lies.

The trust acting as the voice of the supporters does not suggest it will run the club in any meaningful sense. Of course the trust will be the link between the new club board and the supporters, what it doesn't require is to set it's own agenda, we need to act as one if the club and it's supporter base is to build.

I have repeated nothing that was said from the floor of the meeting. I have reported my recollection of some of what was said by Trust Board members and Huw Jenkins at the Sept meeting, and what is written on the club website.

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 10:55 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:46 pm

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 7:53 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 6:29 pm

OLDCROMWELLIAN wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:33 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Don't recall mention of the £500k in terms of signing players, but do recall being told at the meeting that 'the bulk' of it will be required to pay our creditors.

That simply is a lie.

What was said was that some money was required for bills but the vast majority was needed to be spent on the players January budget.

Thats what we agreed to meet as trust members.

Please stop the lies.

The club published an communication update on 11th August stating any bid to takeover the club would require an investment in order to pay our creditors and cover the club's budget gap for 2023-24. No mention was made about the players Jan budget.
Subsequently the Trust members at the Sept meeting voted in favour to transfer 52% of the club shares to Jenkins in return for an investment of £500k. At that meeting I heard a Trust Board member say that 'the bulk' of that investment would go towards paying our creditors, although a number of agreed monthly payments had been made to our largest creditor in the previous months. The only reference I recall to the Jan budget was when Jenkins suggested he would look at recruiting 1 or 2 players. I certainly don't recall any mention of 'the vast majority' was needed to be spent on the players Jan budget. I'd be interested if anyone else at the meeting heard those words being used? I'll be happy to apologise if I missed that important statement.
Incidently part of Jenkin's bid summary was to maintain and indeed grow the Trust, who would act as the voice of supporters.

The budget gap was created by using all the money from the reserve set asside for the January window. That was stated a number of times before we voted to meet any expenditure that the club couldn't meet, should a takeover not take place. Shaun stated categorically that we didn't owe anything like the Argus were reporting, but were expecting a shortfall of income over expenditure as the season progressed. He was asked specifically about the element of debt, and he stated 80k to 100k was predicted to be needed.

Like others you are simply repeating what was said from the floor of the meeting not by those who were running the meeting. Its quite simply repeating lies.

The trust acting as the voice of the supporters does not suggest it will run the club in any meaningful sense. Of course the trust will be the link between the new club board and the supporters, what it doesn't require is to set it's own agenda, we need to act as one if the club and it's supporter base is to build.

I have repeated nothing that was said from the floor of the meeting. I have reported my recollection of some of what was said by Trust Board members and Huw Jenkins at the Sept meeting, and what is written on the club website.

Colin Everett ran the meeting, aided by Shaun Johnson who took most of the financial questions. Trust members were on the floor of the meeting. Repeating what someone has said from the floor is not the same thing as being truthful about the information passed out by those running the meetings.
There was a question from the floor to Colin Everett which started with "we are £1.2 million in the red" that wasn't and never has been true, but Colin was polite and simply ignored the first part, but answered the rest of the question. That is not the same as endorsing what has been said.
At a previous meeting Shaun stated that the biggest problem that the trust had was with official communication being drowned out, and being unable to get the message across.
If trust members continue in this same manner to ignore HJ, then getting a coordinated approach to building the club I.E. Swansea, and Wrexham rather than Cardiff, then it simply isn't going to progress as it could.

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

I guess that all comes back to whether or not you believe the line about a structural deficit. If you do then it clearly needed to be bailed out in some form, if you don;t then it didn't.

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

We didn't and don't always finish in 22nd place. We are pretty much always above our financial position in the league. So above the plymsole line, not taking on water. We simply don't have, and will not have the resources that other clubs have to waste.

That's why the Trust needs to work with HJ as increasing the fan base is now more important than raising finance. So if that means reducing trust contributions to encourage new younger members, then fine.

We have had a lot of success in the last 8 years since the trust took control, from very little finance in comparison to the opposition. When we were in the last playoff final, Carlise were at the bottom of the league for 6 months. They had just sold key players to ballance their finances. The following year they went up via the playoffs.

To ignore the success that we have had in maintaining our league status against the odds, is simply to attack those who worked hard for those achievements. I am proud that by being a trust member I helped gain that success in a very small way.

My backing now moves on to HJ, simply because he has shown before that he can provide the direction and belief, that all clubs need to get the small gains that make a big difference. However it requires everyone singing from his songbook.

Amberexile wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:52 am

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

I guess that all comes back to whether or not you believe the line about a structural deficit. If you do then it clearly needed to be bailed out in some form, if you don;t then it didn't.

The structural deficit was about spending money to have more cup/league success. But as time goes on the opposition financial status changes, and it becomes increasingly difficult to put out a competitive side.

8 years ago, financially most teams were middle of the road. As GC said this season, there are 15 teams that are financially aloof from the rest. That affects availability of L2 players for us, and thus players who have baggage of some sort become those in our price range. We have always had to give opportunity to younger players from higher status teams, to see if they sink or swim, or sometimes shine. That's nothing new, but the experienced players alongside them should help them. If those experienced players are also finding their feet, it is more of a problem. We simply don't have the money to secure the experienced players that can provide a backbone of consistency.

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 7th, 2023, 10:00 am

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

We didn't and don't always finish in 22nd place. We are pretty much always above our financial position in the league. So above the plymsole line, not taking on water. We simply don't have, and will not have the resources that other clubs have to waste.

That's why the Trust needs to work with HJ as increasing the fan base is now more important than raising finance. So if that means reducing trust contributions to encourage new younger members, then fine.

We have had a lot of success in the last 8 years since the trust took control, from very little finance in comparison to the opposition. When we were in the last playoff final, Carlise were at the bottom of the league for 6 months. They had just sold key players to ballance their finances. The following year they went up via the playoffs.

To ignore the success that we have had in maintaining our league status against the odds, is simply to attack those who worked hard for those achievements. I am proud that by being a trust member I helped gain that success in a very small way.

My backing now moves on to HJ, simply because he has shown before that he can provide the direction and belief, that all clubs need to get the small gains that make a big difference. However it requires everyone singing from his songbook.

2015/16, 22nd
2016/17, 22nd (Flynny takes over at the end)
2017/18, cup 4th round, finish 11th
2018/19, cup 5th round, finish 7th
2019/20 - COVID season
2020/21, cup 3rd round, finish 5th

If you're going to talk out of your arse, at least fart in the right direction.

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 11:03 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 7th, 2023, 10:00 am

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

We didn't and don't always finish in 22nd place. We are pretty much always above our financial position in the league. So above the plymsole line, not taking on water. We simply don't have, and will not have the resources that other clubs have to waste.

That's why the Trust needs to work with HJ as increasing the fan base is now more important than raising finance. So if that means reducing trust contributions to encourage new younger members, then fine.

We have had a lot of success in the last 8 years since the trust took control, from very little finance in comparison to the opposition. When we were in the last playoff final, Carlise were at the bottom of the league for 6 months. They had just sold key players to ballance their finances. The following year they went up via the playoffs.

To ignore the success that we have had in maintaining our league status against the odds, is simply to attack those who worked hard for those achievements. I am proud that by being a trust member I helped gain that success in a very small way.

My backing now moves on to HJ, simply because he has shown before that he can provide the direction and belief, that all clubs need to get the small gains that make a big difference. However it requires everyone singing from his songbook.

2015/16, 22nd
2016/17, 22nd (Flynny takes over at the end)
2017/18, cup 4th round, finish 11th
2018/19, cup 5th round, finish 7th
2019/20 - COVID season
2020/21, cup 3rd round, finish 5th

If you're going to talk out of your arse, at least fart in the right direction.

All above what our financial position should have dictated. That is success, and obviously we got more successful after the cup money.

It was Les Scadding who put Butcher in charge, so the starting point was a low one in terms of player budget, relying on bringing kids into the team to sell on like Regan Poole. It was never going to provide instant success, or instant finance to buy a successful team.

It was the trust that backed Flynn in securing the services of players like Padraig Amond, who provided the goals for the initial cup run, which then provided the money for more success.......

To start with, I’ve no axe to grind with anyone here. My understanding was that the £500,000, provided for the purchase of the club, was to pay off existing debts and to meet short-term running costs (structural deficit). HJ did mention the possible purchase of players in the January transfer window but I took the costs associated with transfers to be separate from the purchase. Transfer dealings would be the start of HJ investing in, rather than purchasing, the club.

I could be wrong.

Kevinmoorefellover wrote: November 7th, 2023, 12:02 pm To start with, I’ve no axe to grind with anyone here. My understanding was that the £500,000, provided for the purchase of the club, was to pay off existing debts and to meet short-term running costs (structural deficit). HJ did mention the possible purchase of players in the January transfer window but I took the costs associated with transfers to be separate from the purchase. Transfer dealings would be the start of HJ investing in, rather than purchasing, the club.

I could be wrong.

If you are wrong, then we both understood the same wrong message. Seems highly unlikely to me.

Kevinmoorefellover wrote: November 7th, 2023, 12:02 pm To start with, I’ve no axe to grind with anyone here. My understanding was that the £500,000, provided for the purchase of the club, was to pay off existing debts and to meet short-term running costs (structural deficit). HJ did mention the possible purchase of players in the January transfer window but I took the costs associated with transfers to be separate from the purchase. Transfer dealings would be the start of HJ investing in, rather than purchasing, the club.

I could be wrong.

When we had the first trust meeting its purpose was clear, did we want to finance a structural debt that the club wouldn't be able to fund if a prospective purchaser wasn't found?

There was also an element of debt that would build up as the season progressed, it was stated that this was likely to be in the region of 80k to £100k.

Colin Everett had to repeatedly correct a person who was stating that the debt situation was urgent and indeed substantial. CE stated numerous times that due to the need for money in January, the bidding process had to be brought to a conclusion by the end of Sept, due to the time necessary to put everything in place. Further to that, because the trust membership had previously voted to meet the necessary funds, and if no bidders were successful, then the money had to be in place before January.

January was always the deadline, although the basic process had to take place in the autumn, in order to meet the January deadline.

HJ referred a number of times to cash flow problems, not debt, and that by investing it would relieve those problems. When any investment takes place which is over and above the agreed budget it is an amount for the lifetime of that contract, not just that particular window. It therefore becomes a reset of the budget, which the FA will have been looking at, to judge if expected income and expenditure matched reality.

Quite simply if we required large amounts of money in May, the club wouldn't exist now, its as simple as that.....

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 7th, 2023, 10:22 am

Amberexile wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:52 am

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

I guess that all comes back to whether or not you believe the line about a structural deficit. If you do then it clearly needed to be bailed out in some form, if you don;t then it didn't.

The structural deficit was about spending money to have more cup/league success. But as time goes on the opposition financial status changes, and it becomes increasingly difficult to put out a competitive side.

8 years ago, financially most teams were middle of the road. As GC said this season, there are 15 teams that are financially aloof from the rest. That affects availability of L2 players for us, and thus players who have baggage of some sort become those in our price range. We have always had to give opportunity to younger players from higher status teams, to see if they sink or swim, or sometimes shine. That's nothing new, but the experienced players alongside them should help them. If those experienced players are also finding their feet, it is more of a problem. We simply don't have the money to secure the experienced players that can provide a backbone of consistency.

It doesn't mater what the structural deficit was about. If it existed, it would eventually need filling.

Amberexile wrote: November 7th, 2023, 2:28 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 7th, 2023, 10:22 am

Amberexile wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:52 am

rncfc wrote: November 7th, 2023, 9:11 am

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 9:35 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 8:46 pm

Bangitintrnet wrote: November 6th, 2023, 5:23 pm

rncfc wrote: November 6th, 2023, 3:55 pm

Chepstow'sFine wrote: November 5th, 2023, 6:19 pm

rncfc wrote: November 5th, 2023, 3:16 pm Let's be honest, they aren't going to be too bothered about coming here with the form they're in.

Imagine it will be quite close, and they might even be slight favourites.

Are you 12? We're in League Two in the EFL. They're in the National League which is a league below us. Regardless of their form I think they might just about be bothered about playing us at home. I imagine it'll be close too but to suggest they'd be slight favourites at the bookies is beyond mental.

Not really sure what the first sentence has to do with the rest, but the point I'm making is it's not an easy game at all. They'll fancy their chances.

But as has been said elsewhere, it's as good an opportunity to progress as we could have hoped for.

All eggs in this basket for me, one win and a bit of luck and we could find ourselves being bailed out by the cups again.

We weren't bailed out by the cup runs, they provided money for the club to spend.

Likewise when HJ talks about an investment of £500k, in terms of signing players with two years contracts for experienced players who can make a difference, that's only 2 or 3 permanent signings.....

Of course we were bailed out by it. We were perennial relegation candidates before the cup runs, and promotion contenders after them.

Where are we in the league now the cup money is gone?

Without those cup runs we'd already be non league again. To suggest otherwise is fanciful.

To bail something out you have to be taking on water, we were not in debt. The cup money was not used to pay back money that had already been spent, it was used to try to attract better players, which it did. The club were still at the bottom spending wise though, and have always punched above their weight.

If you don't think continually hovering around the bottom and finishing in 22nd place constitutes "taking on water", then I'm not sure what planet you're living on.

I guess that all comes back to whether or not you believe the line about a structural deficit. If you do then it clearly needed to be bailed out in some form, if you don;t then it didn't.

The structural deficit was about spending money to have more cup/league success. But as time goes on the opposition financial status changes, and it becomes increasingly difficult to put out a competitive side.

8 years ago, financially most teams were middle of the road. As GC said this season, there are 15 teams that are financially aloof from the rest. That affects availability of L2 players for us, and thus players who have baggage of some sort become those in our price range. We have always had to give opportunity to younger players from higher status teams, to see if they sink or swim, or sometimes shine. That's nothing new, but the experienced players alongside them should help them. If those experienced players are also finding their feet, it is more of a problem. We simply don't have the money to secure the experienced players that can provide a backbone of consistency.

It doesn't mater what the structural deficit was about. If it existed, it would eventually need filling.

Which it was via the cup money, but that doesn't last forever, and with no recent cup run or player sales, the future structural deficit has to be met by the then, or future owners, or decide not to run with one.

I don't remember a single person indicating that their preferred option would be for the trust not to run with a structural deficit by seasons end...........