One thing not mentioned so far, is the he shirt sponsors. They 2023/24 season saw Watson Ramsbottom solicitors sponsored the womens shirts. That in turn, led to them going on to sponsor the mens shirts las season. The amount paid to do you that, was more than 3 times, the budget the ladies team were given last year. Assuming the mens sponsorship came around, due to the womens year being considered successful, it does show, they go hand in hand, yet the opportunity has now gone. Sadly these things are overlooked.

Whoever was going to buy the club, would want a deep dive into the accounts and also the history of when the current owners bought it and what went on. This in my view is the biggest reason for them not selling, as I suspect they are scared of what that would uncover. Again, this is my opinion, but I suspect if they saw who is on the payroll and what they are doing to justify their wage, then it would give them some real explaining to do. For what it's worth, if someone came in with funds to invest and had a properly structured plan and they really got to the bottom of where the £20m really goes, they could find a way of keeping things relatively lean and probably give us a chance of returning to the premier league. Lets face it, we have had every little financial backing for the last 2 years and a bit, yet nearly made the play offs in 2 out of the last 3 seasons. if the new owners know how to read send instead of save and get a loan over the line on deadline day, without falling foul of missing deadlines by a couple of minutes, that could be all it takes.

Tell her there is loads of Claret at 1 euro per glass full.

No need to sell anyone, as there is no impediment to them funding.

It depends on who has been having a slice.

It has already been pointed out by Rudy Gestede, that we should be very grateful to our owners that we have a team to support every other week. Hard to understand how we managed without them for 135 years really.

The court ruled today to reduce the none existent impediment from 100% to 50.%.

It seems not, according to an announcement just made

Careful use of the word should, in the second one. I think a separate statement was made by Waggott with the no legal impediment line trotted out. All in all, we have been fed a load of bull.

I could be wrong, but I think the word legal was place there, to make it seem right. There is no legal impediment, but you are spot on and I have been a pains to state to other posters on here, that there is a huge impediment to them funding.

That would still mean they could send some funds, but not nothing at all. There is probably something hidden that we are not aware, where putting extra funds into a bond, is far riskier that we as fans think.

Sounds like they must have been very naughty!!!

So more legal costs for an issue that is not causing them any problems? They must think we are daft.

I suspect it has cost them to keep on making these appeals, so as you correctly say, why would they keep going back to court, paying the relevant fees and their lawyers, when there is no problem. Of course there is a problem, but they want certain people, including the fans, to accept that there isn't. I wonder why?

A clear and concise statement is required from the club, instead of the one that is current subject to interpretation. Something along the lines of: After todays court appeal, it has now been agreed that the bond required is 50% of the amount used to fund the club. The owners intend to fund £20m and are therefore prepared to out a £10m bond up to do so. This means the club can meet it's financial obligations and also have an amount to help ensure we have a squad, capable of challenging at the right end of the league. Does that not seem far better than "There is no legal impediment in the owners funding the club?

It was always very cleverly worded by Waggott and as usual just a smokescreen, to yet again, hoodwink the fans into believe that everything is okay and the wonderful owners we have, will continue to fund us. Some, of the fans, accepted the no impediment line, but some knew better and saw that there was one huge impediment and here we have it today, confirmed in court that we were yet again, lied to.

Just a thought and it dies have a cryptic message this. What about the 4,000 hole fanzine having a sub name. 4,000 Holes coming to you from a stand for Tony.

So this £20m investment per season, is looking very much like a myth, unless people from the early days, are still getting a cut.

Another brilliant video.

The problem is it’s the fans that missed out. Only seeing one of our own and a generational talent playing for the team he supports, for a very short time. Not only that, the lad didn’t want the move and had the courtesy to sign a contract, to ensure that the club got at least a half decent fee.

Just looking through the booklet that was anonymously printed back in 2016. Nothing changes.

Funny you should mention plants, when referring to this post.

When they say they never fail to sign a cheque, perhaps the meant a player form the Czech Republic, as they are failing to sign plenty of the paper variety, at the minute, in my opinion.