ludgershallsaint

Silly boy

Yep, they look like the best team in the division this season.

The most sensible analysis of the situation I have read.

I'm finding this stuff about players being unsettled a bit OTT. As Stuart Pearce once said "Players aren't really bothered as long as they have their posh motor in the club car park." Any player who signs for a club knows that the chances of the bloke signing you staying the manager are pretty slim unless it is Wenger or Ferguson.

What you're forgetting is that 08/09 ended in the Administator being called in. So we weren't running at a bit of a loss or having a bit of a cashflow problem it was absolute meltdown. I understand fully the new cost structure but still don't see that the new SFC is running as a self financing company. Our owner is putting his hand in his pocket to assist in a similar way as, say, the Jack Walker trust has at Blackburn. A few million to give the club a helping hand in terms of the players it can recruit and pay.

Agreed. Prior to last season if you wanted to pay in instalments you had to take out a credit arrangement arranged by the club. I could see the admin costs argument with this. The club would've got less than the value of the STs (finance company would take a cut) would incur the cost of sending on forms etc. However, last season the arrangement was allowing the club to take a series of payments on your debit/credit card. Little in admin costs there, it isn't as if the club doesn't regularly take card payments during a season is it? I would imagine they were faced with two options: 1. Go back to a finance arrangement. Too costly. 2. Do as last year. Too much aggravation with defaulters, TO not confident they would collect payments on time.

1. Transfer fees. 2. Wage bill up considerably.

I think most people would regard running within our means as only taking on commitments that are within our revenue streams. I think It is fairly safe to say that SFC has over the last year entered into commitments that it wouldn't have been able to if it wasn't owned by a Billionaire.

There is no way the club is running within its means.

Absolutely

As I understand it it is all about what happens if the new owners sell the ground for property development in the future. They would, obviously, get a lot more than they are paying for its use as a football stadium now. The buyers want to do something around the difference today between sports and residential values (factoring in interest etc.) if they sell. The bank want something that is more in their favour (I think based on what they actually get for it in the future). The potential buyers are not happy as they claim they would not get anything back if they invested in the ground between now and any future move. All made more difficult because there are two insolvent companies; one that owns the ground and the football club.

The 2nd one is by far the worst. Madness.

But does allow us the consolation that IF we win our last 3 it would have been good enough 7 out of the last 9. I'm assuming our GD would be better than those 76 point totals.

Weren't we? I think that was obvious. Mid to low table team needing a point or two from their last few games to be absolutely certain of staying up. They were only ever going to play in a 9 1 formation.

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/170513 The story. One name mentioned amongst a few.

I said to a mate earlier that, actually, a draw for Colchester would have been a better result. If Huddersfield beat Stockport then they will only have a slim mathematical chance by the time they play them.

If we finish on 78 I reckon with the 10 added on we'd be 2nd in the table. I wonder has the team who finished 2nd ever been less than 10 points from the last play off place?

Think we can. Let's face it their next two opponents have plenty to play for so 2 points from those two are not going to be straight forward.

I think you've overdosed on happy pills son.

****

Because jokers like you will trot out the need time to 'gel' line again.

If they are the best (your logic) and they leave we won't be stronger, will we?

My point entirely mate.

Don't like the truth? Live with it old chap, some will go.

The problem is I don't think they will, well at least some of them won't be.