Forum Replies Created
-
… or those aged or vulnerable ones not able to use them
The price of living in the digital world: If you don’t join in you’re dead.
Somehow, provision should be made for these people. I don’t know what that would look like in the real world, but imho it is unfair otherwise.
2 users thanked author for this post.
I’m a season ticket holder and was able to get tickets – but I bought only what I needed, not the six available. It does seem a bit excessive that approx 400 fans could wipe out the entire allocation.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Max Bell must have spent the last two years wondering where the club could be if the board hadn’t lacked ambition and gone for the cheap option.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Whether it’s down to his pre match intake of alcohol or he’s just a nasty person it’s time he addressed his anger issues.
This is so presumptuous as to be laughable.
He may have meant Butler!
1 user thanked author for this post.
Not sure Scales brings much
I thought everything about him was good except the final action of each move. In other words he’d scrap and get the ball back then give it away with a bad pass, or he’d burst past defenders into the area and then scuff his shot out for a goal kick, or he’d make an incisive run from deep and smack a 25-yard shot into the stands etc etc etc
1 user thanked author for this post.
Surely the loans are in addition to the initial investment to secure shares?
You would hope that is the case.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Scunthorpe are trying to move towards self-sustainability, and the board should be applauded for that.
The reality is the club is not there yet and is still heavily reliant on board loans to keep operating. That is not unusual in lower-league football, but it does mean the current model is still one of owner support rather than genuine financial independence. The real test is not whether directors are putting money in now, but whether the club can reduce its annual losses to the point where it can cover day-to-day costs from normal football income such as gates, sponsorship, commercial activity and football revenues without needing fresh loans every season.
As for the new director loans, the most realistic path is not immediate repayment but a slow transition: first cut the yearly deficit, then reach break-even, then build modest surpluses over time. Only once that happens can the club sensibly deal with the debt, most likely by leaving loans in place as patient funding, converting some into equity, or eventually writing some off rather than repaying them like a normal business loan. So the question for supporters is simple: is this genuinely a bridge to a sustainable future, or just another period of losses being covered by directors with the debt pushed further down the road?
Discussing this with someone just now and they asked: If these are loans, why have those Directors been given shares?
1 user thanked author for this post.
2 users thanked author for this post.
I am disgusted that a small minority of fans are so negative and continue to try and destroy and divide our fan fanbase.
Grow up. People are expressing their opinions, taking the piss, having a moan or occasionally calling things out. Nobody is trying to destroy or divide a fanbase.
3 users thanked author for this post.
