kowenicki

Big game tonight. Bury have to get something from it. Two very tough away games from their remaining 3 fixtures after tonight.

Exactly.

I prefer the boards... I much prefer them actually. The scoreboard was contentious re placing, size and cost. But it I would urge all fans to ask for a refund regardless of their opinion on the boards. These kinds of things are not for fans to fund.

I see no problem here. If the youth coaches don't rate them then tough.

See my post above yours.

Perhaps. Not sure. Now I have read it again, I agree. Interesting that tifosy had an input. Anyhow, get your cash back folks because this is a totally different outcome.

So the funds haven't been used and are still there and can be refunded. Bit silly on the timescale mind.

Bradford one is a decent size Cost about 120k I think.... Bury and that Accrington one aren't worth bothering with imo.

Looks tiny, looks cheap.... I guess it was.

Are you for real? If a WUP is approved. We would be liquidated. Aren't you on the trust?

er... the article... Bury have CCJ's, well reported... and Bolton have very very public issues.

you aren't helping discussion are you

so consult a lawyer and demand the seat.

That's true. I wasn't aware of that. So if they are being prevented from attending... kick off and demand it or report the board. Demand the seat.

I don't recall it fully. I just remember him saying most clubs are struggling and live hand to mouth or something like that. That's true.

I may not understand this correctly... The trust is a shareholder isn't it? The shareholders agreement will say what the shareholder is entitled to. The size of the shareholding could very well be an issue in that situation.

didn't read the article did you.... This is based purely on CCJ and WUP's, CVA's etc. A club can still be struggling financially and living hand to mouth without any of thosehappening.

Read that. It is making a bit of a leap for a sensational headline. It is actually based purely on CCJ registrations and WUP's. Based on that criteria then of course we are one of them as we have a live WUP as far as we know. So that's Bury, Bolton, Oldham and I don't know who else. Doesn't necessarily mean they are at risk of 'going down the pan'. It just means they have some current issues. I'd suggest the club at biggest risk is Bolton. Indeed I have no idea why they are allowed trade. They are losing £800k per month and their auditor would not sign them off as a going concern in their last accounts. They have cheated their way to promotion imo. If they hadn't/don't go up they will go into admin I reckon.

Depends what the shareholder agreement says. Most shareholder agreements would grant minority shareholders minimal rights to information and zero rights to force actions, logically and sensibly. Minority shareholders may not have a seat on the board or they may have been granted one. If there is no shareholder agreement then you fall back on Companies Act which will allow access to minutes of shareholder meetings etc. Minority shareholders (and 3% is a tiny minority) usually have limited rights to information and certainly wont usually know all about or prevent major actions. Its unrealistic to expect otherwise.

I'll just wait for a number ta.

Sigh. Where did I say it bothers me? I asked a simple question that someone may have had the answer to straight away. (voted down for this post... says it all about some of the people on this forum)

Thas ok I don't want you to speculate I want you to report if you have been told a concrete figure. So if you or someone else has recently renewed, happened to ask and was told a figure by a club official behind the glass (who has no axe to grind and won't mind being quoted)...that will do. Thanks.

Any update on numbers. Assuming over 2000 now?

Scrap it.