OldEwoodBlue

Not sure there is any link between selling Wharton and the court case being delayed. We need cash for wages. Hard cash, now. Can't see that coming from a deal to sell Wharton. Probably installments, etc. More likely the club will take out an emergency bridging loan. That is what they did last time when it was put back to October. Little choice really apart from deferring wages. Selling Wharton or whoever else is a necessity to comply with FFP. We need to get circa £11million of sales into this year's accounts - so before June 30th.

The purpose for the model is not to reinvest most of it in the team and improve. The purpose is to increase the club income making us less reliant on the owners putting money in. A move towards net zero, breaking even. So if we sell a player for 20 million. 1 million goes to buying kids for the academy. Everyone moves up a rung. 19 million goes to the running of the club.

What I mean is that the trust board now need to temper their citicism of the club and in particular Waggott. Otherwise, naturally, he will just stop engagement. If we take the fans takeover as an example. On the face of it, it seems great. But the upshot is this is the trust board doing the clubs job for them... for free. And if the trust want to do more of these, they can't fall out with Waggott. They have to remain amicable business friends. Waggott knows this. It neutralises the trust as a critical voice, much the same as the LT submissively toe the party line so as not to lose access. I did almost join the trust over Xmas until I thought about this. I like the energy of the new board. But I am firmly Venkys Out which is not the trust's public position. Otherwise they wouldn't be working closely with the club. Don't take it as criticism. You guys are doing a good job, none more than yourself. It is just my personal opinion that the MOU is hinderance to getting rid of the owners.

Amen

He has never played the game or in particular played in goal. He read a book and passed a test. So it depends on what qualifications we think are needed to be a good coach (not just to be A coach).

We just see them as coaching staff / extension of manager. Managers and players have fixed period contracts. These are full time employees (like the tea lady) and we cannot afford the £ to make them redundant.

Lets vote on this critical topic to gauge opinion. Now a realistic prospect. Some will see it as a new beginning (next Bolton) whilst some will be terrified it could be the end (next Bury). Poll above.

Due to teams below us winning at teams above us. We are closer to relegation as a result.

Positives. Pears, Tronstad, JRC

Szmodics played a training match today. Wonder why.

Pears MOTM Save earlier Comes and CATCHES it in injury time COMMANDING his box.

Play big striker down the middle. Don't cross the ball all afternoon. Genius

11 days to go. 🤣 I presume it's a digital sale and they won't be running out today wearing printed price tags.

Tear up the Memorandum of Understanding. The Trust are shackled to Waggott by it. Aka in his pocket.

Oh dear. What you should have typed is And this is the problem with our owners - zero ambition.

@Herbie6590 we should have a poll, who wants the court to say no ? I hope they say no. We can't waste more years on this shit. They need backing into a corner with no way out.

You may have stumbled on something Waggott's big club statement was... It doesn't make a difference if we make it or not

Waggott's got Brockhall in hock

Even with my bluest and whitest of blue and white glasses, I don't see Wharton is a £20m player right now. In the future maybe, add ons etc. But we can't spend those today or count them in FFP and in football sometimes they never come.

Administration... we're half way there

One thing I don't think anyone really understands (I don't). If we sell Gally for £1m next week (for example). How is it in any way possible that £1m in the bank would not be seen as available for essential running costs (not for none essential player purchases). Unless there is a one out, one in (as long as not costing more) agreement in place. I guess the paperwork is in for this round but could be a factor in the next one.

100% accurate. Couldn't be summarised any better.

I get what you are getting at but surely all of the current costs are deemed essential running costs ? Then the losses are the losses. Otherwise we would have got rid of it already. I would get shut of Suhail but in terms of the Indian court, an employees wages will be essential. I don't think there will be any negative impact on our FFP compliance (the one thing the club always trumpets). Of course I could be wrong. Just my thoughts on it.

Venkys can never cover losses under FFP. It has to be covered by income (tv, tickets, commercial, player sales).

I imagine the Reading owner was sat in the stand. Remember Rovers fans on the pitch exactly like this, shouting FOX OUT in front of the Nuttall Street Srand. Of course he was present and there was someone to hurl the frustration at. Oh if we knew then what we know now. Whilst our owners are completely absent, there is nowhere to direct such action. It would have to be a televised game abandoned to create even a ripple of attention with these cun7s.