Forum Replies Created
-
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.
You say disgraced, I say put some trousers on.
You hide behind your nik names because you spout lies and bend the truth to further your aims .
You personally attack people online then run away as soon as you see them in person.
I am disgusted that a small minority of fans are so negative and continue to try and destroy and divide our fan base.Do you even talk about football?
What should be talked about is fantastic season we are having and the chance of a return to the efl.
To be fair, and I’ve said this on here before, people on here can talk about anything connected to Scunthorpe United should they wish. It’s all-encompassing. So if it’s United it will be talked about whether the subject matter is major, like the team, the matches, the board and the behind the scenes, or whether it’s something minor, something less obvious. Absolutely anything and everything is on the table and up for debate, if there is a United connection, no matter how seemingly slight or tenuous or irrelevant that connection might seem. It is ALL Scunthorpe United.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Trying to be fair, there have been some negative comments to them previously, so I can understand them not liking Bru. It’s not always black and white and sometimes comments are disagreeable. However, that is the price we pay for being able to share an opinion. I have never understood why they cannot ignore such comments. Comments have rarely been truly defamatory and, if they have, they have been deleted.
On Facebook someone called Earl posted something about everyone should get along, and included a link to a potentially contentious thread on here. That was disingenuous and deliberately provocative, done to incite a pile-on, imho.
2 users thanked author for this post.
Links work for me.
Unity Iron seem to have a problem distinguishing between Matt Ellis and Iron Bru.
Does Matt Ellis even post on here?
One of the problematic current issues is the conflation of Iron Bru and individual users of Iron Bru.
Iron Bru is a platform, an open forum. It’s not a club, or a mindset or a set of rules – and it’s not the Matt Ellis Appreciation Society. One person’s opinion doesn’t necessarily reflect anyone else’s. It also might. Some people have very strong negative opinions on certain things, some don’t.
3 users thanked author for this post.
The matchday atmosphere at GP has never been as consistently “up” as it has been in the last two seasons – due in no small part to the drummer and his mates. Leave them alone, they’re doing a cracking job. If you don’t like it put earplugs in.
11 users thanked author for this post.
Well, at least it’s better than a drug pusher to kids.
Positivity Sherbert, you mean?
1 user thanked author for this post.
Respect to Clunan for being “a busy c**t” (as Jaap Stam put it) etc, but this season has been much more entertaining than last season because the midfield has been more attack minded.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I don’t think it’s fair to say they are as contemptuous as the previous two incumbents, but they risk losing good will, as argued. They can’t ride on the coat tails of saving the club forever without scrutiny.
For the record, I agree. I don’t think they are as contemptuous – I raised it as an extreme to generate debate. They certainly do risk losing the goodwill of some, though. Mostly those for who the effects of the Kool Aid have worn off, and who are prepared to actually stand back, look at the situation and think with some clarity (as per SODIron).
It’s the little things as well as the big (issues). The noticeable groaning and scoffing from the board at Matt Blanchard’s questions during that AGM thing – quietly out of order, imho. If anyone / anything deserves respect it’s actually Bru and Trust (especially over PD, Unity, Army and Hour)… Again, not to decry the enthusiasm or good intentions of those, but in the long game they’re not that credible, imho. They’re too close to be able to see properly, when needs be.
That’s the danger here. Not a few awkward posts on a forum. It’s the slow erosion of goodwill.
They’re like kids in front of a TV, though – unable to turn their eyes away from cartoon fans (like Positivity Dave). The loudness and brightness is cheerful and simplistic – and makes anything else seem a bit dour and drab, therefore negative.
The irony is that the club owes its survival, in part, to people who were prepared to be awkward when it mattered. Clubs do not get saved by vibes alone. They get saved by supporters who care enough to challenge, organise, question, and sometimes make themselves unpopular. If that sort of supporter is now seen as a nuisance while the hand-picked “good fans” get the nod, then the problem is not negativity. The problem is a culture that prefers applause to honesty.
You could reasonably argue that this trend also makes the current owners as contemptuous as previous incumbents, and therefore not much better.
To be a bit clearer, I’m not anti-Matt. I just mentioned it for balance – there are extremes of behaviour in all directions. Butler seems to prefer Positivity Dave-style.
1 user thanked author for this post.
