Search results

I originally posted against your comment because I thought your response to Jan was more than a little disrespectful to someone who's actually trying to do some good for the club (in addition to being arrogant, poorly argued and of course inaccurate). I suppose it would probably have been...

You just took a guess - and got it so wrong as to be embarressing for most people :D And then you miss the point - by miles..... The crowds in 67/68 were way above your "guess", because the club was successful then. The crowds have fallen since because we have been unusually unsuccessful...

Where do you start to answer this? Let's just note that the one fact you quote is nonsense - 18k average attendance in 1967/68 - I have to assume that the whole thing is a wind-up.

Do we hear banging in the distance??

But season ticket sales are up on last year :D:D

Which rather begs the question - what do you consider a "realistic bid" for a business whose liabilities exceed its assets, that is losing money every month (£500k according to TF recently) and has just had a massive decrease in revenue following its relegation?

Except that some people like cats :D

I think that they need to file their stat accounts for the year to June '11 to get the embargo lifted. The article is based on the fact that they've delayed releasing an interim statement on the 6 months results to December '11, which as interim (Half year) results are not subject to Football...

You'd think so, but can't you just see Joy saying - "How many players in a soccerball team? - So why do you need any more???"

I think most people (myself included) cut SISU a lot of slack in the early days. Unfortunately (for them), over time people have judged them on their actions - particularly over the last 18 months. It can't be surprising that people read those comments and think..... Yeah, right!

I haven't had a chance to read Waggott's whole statement, so I was wondering if we've "left no stones unturned" again this year? If so, I can breathe easy at last..........

There was a time when I thought your username was just showing your sense of irony. Over the last 18 months, I've come to understand that it was a prediction.

Given his oft stated views on Hoffman, I think that it was probbly his idea of a little joke.

Hmmmmm. Perhaps you should read that to yourself before you post. Sorry to be patronising :D

If I've unerstood this correctly, CCFC say that they can't file their accounts until a deal has been agreed with the Council/Higgs re the Ricoh. If SISU were prepared to guarantee not to call in their loans and to fund any gap in finances irrespective of this potential deal, then surely the...

I'm not sure if the full details have ever been published, but my understanding was that SISU would have taken on the "normal trading creditors" but didn't take on the Directors' loans, instead having a contingency agreement on them - i.e. we pay them (or some part of them) if we get to the...

Rather depends on the value of the asset and the value of the mortgage doesn't it. If I had a house that was worth say £500k but had it as part security against a loan of £1m, I'd very happily accept your offer of £1 for the house and loan. In fact as it's you, you could have it for 50p...

So you think both were ridiculous, neither were ridiculous or it was ridiculous from Hoffman but not from SISU?

Couldn't agree more. Putting all else to one side, I've never been able to understand the (supposed) logic of not investing say £80k - £90k to get a reasonably experienced striker in on loan for the last three months of the season, when £4m p.a. of Championship revenue was at stake.

As £1 is in your opinion a "ridiculous bid", what value would you put on a company that has no assets (that have not been mortgaged), has consistently lost money and which now faces a significant decrease in revenue due to its relegation? Could you also refresh my memory as to the value SISU put...