[Apollo11]

Presuming this is genuine, that’s several times now Hilton has had a pop at Simon Elliott.

[Apollo11]

I don’t want to resort to hoofball, but I would like to see something more direct than we’ve had. We lost the game for whatever reason at South Shields (that first goal was ridiculous), but I think we looked a little closer to some sort of balance between footballing styles during the first half.

The link-ups by McIlinden and Denton down the left were very promising, and they look like they could get into a bit of a groove and be productive. I was impressed with McIlinden – movement and a little bit more speed of thought.

We’re definitely lacking a striker, an ‘old fashioned’ fox in the box.

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

Will we?

No.

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

Alfreton will beat us Saturday.

Get Torpey in with Butler assistant.

That’s an extra wage, though.

[Apollo11]

sufc_not_on_tour wrote:

… that’s quite a big hotel…

Either way, you’re right!

[Apollo11]

sufc_not_on_tour wrote:

120 bed hotel on 3 floors, that’s quite a big hotel.
The company submitting the plans already own Taco Bell and Burger King.

But does ‘bed’ mean ‘bed’ or ‘space to sleep’? Does the 120 mean 120 bedrooms or sleep spaces for 120 people (therefore potentially 60 beds and therefore (you’d assume) 20 rooms per floor not 40..?

[Apollo11]

Apollo11 wrote:

Looks like there’s to be another drive-thru fast food or coffee joint, adjacent to what is currently Burger King.

… a Starbucks.

[Apollo11]

Looks like there’s to be another drive-thru fast food or coffee joint, adjacent to what is currently Burger King.

[Apollo11]

inspector wrote:

Bookies prey on people. People lose billions of pounds each year and those sums go to the bookies and their shareholders. As a generalisation, the rich get richer and …!

You could say the same about HMRC.

[Apollo11]

Has anyone UK-based out there actually been able to watch any Saturday 3pm games, using a VPN / proxy server?

[Apollo11]

I don’t agree with this. Even at their worst they don’t look like a side who don’t give a toss. It’s a team selection, tactical and onfield decision-making problem. Too much cut and not enough thrust, as they say.

[Apollo11]

Overstretched? Complacent? Ignorant?

[Apollo11]

If they’re unattached to any other club, it’s not a transfer is it?

[Apollo11]

Personally, I felt we lost out in the midfield battle against Boston in the second half and that cost us.

We are lacking some serious beef in midfield.

1 user thanked author for this post.

cassidystash

[Apollo11]

…he appears to be a diminutive poacher striker stuck in target man type body…

That’s a good way of putting it. I do think there’s a very decent player in there – but (despite being top scorer) you don’t often come away from a match with the impression that he’s turned in a really good performance.

[Apollo11]

cassidystash wrote:

Beestin and Wilson both available for his position so don’t need DSF IMO.
I’d like to keep Smith though.

Neither as good as Smith.

[Apollo11]

Absolutely a key player. Returning to his parent club would be a severe blow to our promotion chances.

[Apollo11]

Rene Artois wrote:

From a legal eagle / eager beaver site:

“Is doxing illegal?

Dependent on the circumstances , doxing may constitute an offence under a number of UK laws. It can amount to harassment, malicious communications, computer misuse offences, data protection. It may also include blackmail and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, if the consequences cause “psychological harm that involves more than mere emotions such as fear, distress or panic”.

In this case it would be considered harassment.

[Apollo11]

At least we avoided Whamageddon.

[Apollo11]

I also know that Simon Elliot has not and will not put a penny of his own money into the club, this came directly from James Moody… … I doubt Simon is taken seriously, I think he’s just there because she felt fans wanted it.

So, as I have asked before, what does he actually contribute?

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

Substantial if your talking the likes of me, but not when we’re talking about a multiple millionaire,it was hardly likely leave him down to his last million. And he wanted back what he put in. Will be interesting to see whether the ground will be owned by a separate company to the club, either way they’ll want back what they pay for it.

Perhaps Sharp presumed he could be part of any Board that Hilton put together? Perhaps Hilton refused to accommodate that. I’d suggest that the whole ‘wanting it back’ thing at that particular moment was a ploy, a way for Sharp to annoy Hilton. If not, do you think he’s still suing the club for the 150k despite being on the Board?

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

Always said St Simon and Ian not so Sharp were cheapskates.

Sharp put a substantial amount of money in. That’s not being a cheapskate.

[Apollo11]

In the end I was so desperate to get out as they were to get me out and the consortium were not interested and most refused to back it as the head of it refused to put any money of his own in. He preferred to travel 120 miles to do self promoting photo shoots at Jimmys hospital bedside and publishing them before he was back in his car. Whilst they were seeing me paying out they happily let me suffer, that’s why I stopped the finance. I publicised a move to Gainsborough and threw myself under the bus completely by banning some high profile supporters which I never would have done. It was all to show the the consortium I had out stayed my welcome and it wasn’t going to be yesterdays chip paper that everyone kept telling me it would so I stayed in a hostile environment funding it. I wanted them to think they had to step up or the club would go. (I never would have let the club go) I’m fortunate though that Michelle stepped up as the consortium didn’t.

Elliott’s proposed consortium fell apart because he actually had no money of his own so was coattailing, but plenty of ego and entitlement – and those actually with the money (including Sharpe) had little trust and ditched him to rally around modest Michelle instead. Elliott then somehow manoeuvred his way into the new set-up.

Is that what we’re supposed to read out of this? It certainly closely matches other stuff I’ve heard said.

[Apollo11]

Anonymous wrote:

This is what this site does. Spins a false story and refuse to look at he truth. I notice not one email address was provided as you do not want site of the facts, the stories you create are more entertaining I suppose. The evidence is there but he’s not wrong, look a those number, can somebody please tell me where any extra income has appeared from other than what he’s itemised. His payroll and HMRC statements are fact I have them. Il repeat you can see them.

So if this money he took is true and it’s not just hate fuelled rabble then I ask you all, where did it come from. Everything I’ve seen shows me he lost money.

Not providing email addresses doesn’t mean an aversion to facts (your version of). It just means nobody wanted to give you their email address.

[Apollo11]

Why has he sent this letter and those supporting documents to you in particular, if you don’t mind me asking?

[Apollo11]

Anonymous wrote:

I have an email from Hilton with evidence of his losses and that he did pay the tax in January. A quite informative piece on the clubs finances. It won’t allow me to paste it here for some reason but il happily forward the email if somebody provides one.

Copy and paste it?

[Apollo11]

Deereyme66 wrote:

Steve wrote:

Looking for something on the Facebook group to complain about..

Can easily be spotted through the Scunthorpe United photographers

What exactly is meant by this post? Naming and shaming via photographs on the Facebook group?

He’s suggesting that people do not really have legitimate concerns about this issue, and that they have just been going through the Facebook group actively looking for anything to complain about. Also, that the club posts photos of the crowd and people are identifiable in those – so anyone else doing the same is fair enough (ie. ‘what’s the difference?’)…

I’d say the difference is we have all accepted that the club uses photos in this manner, and have agreed to the potential of being photographed as part of the ‘contract’ effectively signed by buying a ticket.

That’s very different to a non-employee taking photographs of sections of the crowd and posting them online. You would reasonably assume that photos a fan takes at a match and posts online would be of the football – so what is the actual purpose of this person doing this and then posting on Facebook? It could be innocent (‘a bit of fun’) though it lacks good judgement and, aside from anything else, is creepy.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

The BBc reported it on the 30th of Jan and in Hiltons statement on the 19th of September

I think it was during one of the audio interviews which was posted by the club and then withdrawn, he was also adamant it had been paid.

[Apollo11]

Siderite wrote:

You’re a strange one awg. Having a go at Sharp for wanting a loan back when he had no idea he would be able to be involved with the club, but trusting that a con man was actually working well for the club.

In their own ways Swann and Hilton used Sharp’s money, Elliott used the kudos.

[Apollo11]

Awaywego wrote:

The timescale for clearing the debt with the HMRC is 3/6 months and not forgetting Swanny already had a time to pay agreement in place with the HRMC for £192,000 at the time Hilton took over so your saying the HMRC then gave Hilton a further time to pay agreement and was able to rack up another say £250,000 over the next 7 months. Really

In the early days of his tenure Hilton said he had completely cleared the HMRC debt – but a couple of months later he said it had actually been an agreement to pay in instalments. He must have paid the first to release any legal action imminent at that time – but it’s possible he then didn’t pay any of the other instalments, and continued to accrue a second HMRC debt for non-payment due for ongoing operations.

[Author]

Posts