Pilgrims' Patter

The Forum => The B-Ark => Topic started by: wayne, york pilgrim on January 08, 2012, 07:56:48 PM

Title: finances
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on January 08, 2012, 07:56:48 PM
does anyone of you know the real state of the clubs financial situation, or any websites that you can obtain company financial reports without having to pay for them? i would like to know the real figures and what the club debt stands at.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: kingofnaves on January 08, 2012, 08:05:13 PM
PM Scouse Pilgrim or Keith Floyd! He's know more than the happy clappers on here about the state the club is in!
Keep up the good work KF!
Title: Re: finances
Post by: oxo on January 08, 2012, 10:14:21 PM
David Newton is available to speak to at every game home and away, ask him.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Johnny Pilgrim on January 08, 2012, 11:30:41 PM
does anyone of you know the real state of the clubs financial situation, or any websites that you can obtain company financial reports without having to pay for them? i would like to know the real figures and what the club debt stands at.

If you think that this information is important to you,or suspect that the people in charge of our club aren't working in BUFCSs best interests,why not seek out DN or NK at any home game.....I have always found them to be very approachable,upfront and transparent about things like this (or indeed anything else).....
Or alternatively,raise your concerns at the next Forum.....
Title: Re: finances
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on January 09, 2012, 08:14:53 AM
It appears to me that despite over 200 views on this topic and so little response, that all the posters on this forum who bang on about budgets and costings in running the club seem to have not come up with any answers reguarding the financial position of the club. Therefore I have come to the conclusion that you all have no clue and should keep your made up comments reguarding monies to yourselves unless you can back up your views with real facts.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Tash on January 09, 2012, 08:58:54 AM
You obviously don't read all the posts on here or the Boston Standard. The rent is £75,000 a year and the Chairman stated that the budget had been cut slightly from last year. When one of the applicants for the managers job applied he wanted a budget of £9,000 and was told that was too high so we can assume the budget is somewhere around £4 to £5 K. On average gates of 1100 you don't need to be Einstien to work out that the Board are funding a large short fall. Not sure what else as a fan we are supposed to know.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Dipdodah on January 09, 2012, 11:19:44 AM
You obviously don't read all the posts on here or the Boston Standard. The rent is £75,000 a year and the Chairman stated that the budget had been cut slightly from last year. When one of the applicants for the managers job applied he wanted a budget of £9,000 and was told that was too high so we can assume the budget is somewhere around £4 to £5 K. On average gates of 1100 you don't need to be Einstien to work out that the Board are funding a large short fall. Not sure what else as a fan we are supposed to know.

Is that 4-5 K a week Tash?  just being nosey :)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Tash on January 09, 2012, 12:05:35 PM
You obviously don't read all the posts on here or the Boston Standard. The rent is £75,000 a year and the Chairman stated that the budget had been cut slightly from last year. When one of the applicants for the managers job applied he wanted a budget of £9,000 and was told that was too high so we can assume the budget is somewhere around £4 to £5 K. On average gates of 1100 you don't need to be Einstien to work out that the Board are funding a large short fall. Not sure what else as a fan we are supposed to know.

Is that 4-5 K a week Tash?  just being nosey :)

I would guess it is it could even be a tadge lower.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: woad_pilgrim on January 09, 2012, 12:39:38 PM
I don't profess to know much about the clubs finances. I do know that at the fans forum DN gave a list of the losses made:

07/08 400+ K
08/09 circa 250 K
09/10 circa 210 K
10/11 circa 160 K

These are all from memory so may not be 100% accurate. Added up that's over £1M in losses over the last 4 seasons. This season it was projected that the loss would be substantially reduced again I think DN said to under 100 K, but that was based on an average gate similar to last season so will probably be the same as last season or greater...


Title: Re: finances
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on January 09, 2012, 12:53:27 PM
You obviously don't read all the posts on here or the Boston Standard. The rent is £75,000 a year and the Chairman stated that the budget had been cut slightly from last year. When one of the applicants for the managers job applied he wanted a budget of £9,000 and was told that was too high so we can assume the budget is somewhere around £4 to £5 K. On average gates of 1100 you don't need to be Einstien to work out that the Board are funding a large short fall. Not sure what else as a fan we are supposed to know.


You ASSUME THE BUDGET. You obviously know about as much as me, feck all
Title: Re: finances
Post by: wayne, york pilgrim on January 09, 2012, 12:55:56 PM
I don't profess to know much about the clubs finances. I do know that at the fans forum DN gave a list of the losses made:

07/08 400+ K
08/09 circa 250 K
09/10 circa 210 K
10/11 circa 160 K

These are all from memory so may not be 100% accurate. Added up that's over £1M in losses over the last 4 seasons. This season it was projected that the loss would be substantially reduced again I think DN said to under 100 K, but that was based on an average gate similar to last season so will probably be the same as last season or greater...





Thanks wp. Some facts with back up.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 09, 2012, 12:56:18 PM
does anyone of you know the real state of the clubs financial situation, or any websites that you can obtain company financial reports without having to pay for them? i would like to know the real figures and what the club debt stands at.

Ken,

If the accounts are sent to you can you (as .pdf files) post them up here somehow I wonder?

Thank you
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 09, 2012, 01:23:51 PM
As at 2010. Father Ted explaining to Dougal about BUFC's little problem.



What does BUFC own in terms of fixed assets?      £297,923   good   
               
What other current things does BUFC own?               

Stocks (not a sauce or gravy)                     £10,828      good   
debtors (people who owe BUFC money)      £95,913      good   
cash at bank (spondoolies in Dave's bank)   £83,876      good   
                                         Total     £190,617         
               
What debts does BUFC have                
falling due in one year? (I wonder
who is owed all this money?)         -£1,580,520             very, very bad. ouch!   
               
How much in debt is BUFC taking               
into account what it has and what it owes -£1,091,980   very bad indeed   
               
               
This is represented by what the shareholders have:               
               
Shares issued          £249,848      
Capital redemption reserve      £102      
Profit and loss reserve      -£1,341,930   Very, very bad   
               
              -£1,091,980


      
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Imp Stalker on January 09, 2012, 01:33:14 PM
but what does that mean Mark?

Does it mean that the major debtor can foreclose the club tomorrow?

How stable is the debt?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: kingofnaves on January 09, 2012, 01:38:01 PM
Many thanks Scouse Pilgrim! Atleast somebody knows what happening at the club!
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Tash on January 09, 2012, 03:41:53 PM
You obviously don't read all the posts on here or the Boston Standard. The rent is £75,000 a year and the Chairman stated that the budget had been cut slightly from last year. When one of the applicants for the managers job applied he wanted a budget of £9,000 and was told that was too high so we can assume the budget is somewhere around £4 to £5 K. On average gates of 1100 you don't need to be Einstien to work out that the Board are funding a large short fall. Not sure what else as a fan we are supposed to know.


You ASSUME THE BUDGET. You obviously know about as much as me, feck all

No you know F**K all I at least know the rent.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: nh83 on January 09, 2012, 04:47:52 PM
you dont know the true facts, the rent is not £75,000 it is £72,000 as craig singleton said on Pilgrim live.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: noughtyforties on January 09, 2012, 04:55:34 PM
At the end of the day its all conjecture......let DN and the board get on with things and let them tell us if there's any problems.......I've confidence in him and the board even if others haven't.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: green hats mate on January 09, 2012, 05:06:04 PM
Sceptics ask yourselfs where would you have been on Saturday afternoons the last four years without Newton .
Title: Re: finances
Post by: father Ted on January 09, 2012, 05:20:35 PM
 S P . . thanks for giving me a mention .. but I have NEVER  discussed actual finances of BUFC  .
   I don't know them . . or knowingly know any of the proponents .
     I am  an overview man . . not a number cruncher .
       Are U really Mark Isaac and hanging out on Merseyside ??
             regards f T
Title: Re: finances
Post by: father Ted on January 09, 2012, 10:59:02 PM
Or maybe Tony the Crane ? !
Title: Re: finances
Post by: dubai camel on January 10, 2012, 05:14:56 AM
The finances of the club ought to be a concern for us all.

The current ownership have done an excellent job in steadying the ship and plugging the leaks. If I continue with the nautical theme, the ship however does not have a port to call home and having hit the iceberg once we still have those has outstanding debts to pay. All this has to be resolved.

Are the Chestnuts going to keep paying out to keep us afloat, with falling attendances the burden that falls upon them may increase not decrease as they had hoped.

How much will relocation cost? Is it self financing or are the owners willing to finance the move?

Perhaps under DN we have become too complacent and expect him to solve all the problems.
Perhaps the task is greater than he originally thought or expected .....?
Assuming there is still a £1 million debt from the Lavaflow days, how is that to be repaid, on top of financing a new ground?

It will soon be March - otherwise known as the silly season on Patter - or perhaps 'satire' is reality?!

Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ferret on January 10, 2012, 08:25:57 AM
A little simile. I recently paid for my youngest to do a masters degree. Technically, he owes me money. I have no desire or requirement for that money to be repaid at any time in the future. However, if he won the lottery next week...then I might expect a repayment.

If we'd gone on a good cup run and drawn Man U away in the third round, would anyone begrudge anyone who had invested heavily in our club to recoup a little. By treating such as loans that can be written off rather than donations, it doesn't shut the door on such events.

Disclaimer: I'm not an accountant or claim to know any facts about the BUFC accounts.......just applying a bit of common sense.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Mickey Nuttells Hair on January 10, 2012, 09:29:21 AM
.......just applying a bit of common sense.

Well you can pack that in for a start!
Title: Re: finances
Post by: londonpilgrim on January 10, 2012, 10:53:03 AM
I have copies of the Boston United Football Club Ltd and Lavaflow Ltd accounts if anyone's interested.

The debt isn't owed to Lavaflow, but the debt each year does seem to increase by roughly the loss we made the previous year. Presumably these are therefore Chairman's loans...? I know Nigel Doughty has the same accounting methods at Forest but doesn't expect the loan to be repayed.

Obviously the financial situation is always going to be a concern when we are reliant upon two good men to keep us afloat, but I think we can trust that the Chestnut's are doing their best to keep the club on the straight and narrow.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Bostonshire on January 10, 2012, 11:28:35 AM
I have copies of the Boston United Football Club Ltd and Lavaflow Ltd accounts if anyone's interested.

The debt isn't owed to Lavaflow, but the debt each year does seem to increase by roughly the loss we made the previous year. Presumably these are therefore Chairman's loans...? I know Nigel Doughty has the same accounting methods at Forest but doesn't expect the loan to be repayed.

Obviously the financial situation is always going to be a concern when we are reliant upon two good men to keep us afloat, but I think we can trust that the Chestnut's are doing their best to keep the club on the straight and narrow.

The debt increase is smaller every year, This would add up to it been chairman,s loans to bridge the short fall each season, As a Bufc fan we have to be happy for to things.

1, He has been willing to do this for the past 3 or 4 season
2, Throu there hard work the amount as been less each year.
 
Now the down side.

Blind eye to finance or not but there is still a amount and im guessing there will be again this season.
While this is happening one as to think how long will it happen for.
Not much longer i feel,

I watch my wife's Buisness accounts very (Due to me financing the set up and early running of it). We have already made a loss in wich i have covered out my pocket.
We have set out a 3 year plan to bring the buisness to break even at a min or we will be shutting it down.
I fear a similer plan is in place a boston united.

Title: Re: finances
Post by: dubai camel on January 10, 2012, 12:01:24 PM
Good points Bostonshire.

The club's financial position is precarious, no doubt about, both in the short term and longer term.

No one would begrudge the owners taking whatever they can from the club, be it from a cup run or any other source of income, if damage to the team is limited.

My fear is that I see no real end to the problems, short term or long term - decreasing gates even by 100 is not a healthy situation and everyone has their financial limits. Can we expect the Chestnuts to continue to bail out the cub, with no prospect of break even in sight and huge outlay to sustain the club in the longer term?

Title: Re: finances
Post by: qwerty on January 10, 2012, 12:19:38 PM
My fear is that I see no real end to the problems

As with all debt, it is never 'repaid' just transferred, so you answered the problem with your previous statement. You just need to rearrange the words a little.

Assuming there is still a debt, how is that to be repaid, on top of financing a new ground?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 10, 2012, 01:44:49 PM
A little simile. I recently paid for my youngest to do a masters degree. Technically, he owes me money. I have no desire or requirement for that money to be repaid at any time in the future. However, if he won the lottery next week...then I might expect a repayment.


Pleased to see you may have an academic in the family. Suggest you make it quite clear with a contract about what is expected and not expected regarding repayment. Suggest you also agree a future land deal too so you can buy your youngest's first property at a huge discount.  Could all end in tears otherwise.  :rudolph
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ferret on January 10, 2012, 04:37:34 PM
A little simile. I recently paid for my youngest to do a masters degree. Technically, he owes me money. I have no desire or requirement for that money to be repaid at any time in the future. However, if he won the lottery next week...then I might expect a repayment.


Pleased to see you may have an academic in the family. Suggest you make it quite clear with a contract about what is expected and not expected regarding repayment. Suggest you also agree a future land deal too so you can buy your youngest's first property at a huge discount.  Could all end in tears otherwise.  :rudolph

(http://rlv.zcache.com/king_of_the_loony_bin_tshirt-p235485199961066280zvh3u_400.jpg)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Louth Pilgrim on January 11, 2012, 12:38:20 AM
I'm curious to know what happened with you two.
From reading the forums over many years I know that you used to travel to games together on the train along with a fine wine. You had some hospitality at the New England and a photo taken with big Jason in your suits.
Where did it all go wrong?
I recall Rooster suddenly emerging in a flurry of emails, Mark asking all the right questions of the Evans gang, but then suddenly starting to annoy folk with his postings. There are ways of asking a Sir Cookie a question ... the recent posting wasn't it. As we know it's difficult enough getting volunteers to sit on committees.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Shoddys Lane on January 11, 2012, 09:30:17 AM
If the finances are so dire, why were the floodlights still on 10-50 pm? Unless of course there was extra training. Seems a waste of electricity, after all, every little helps.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Bostonshire on January 11, 2012, 10:32:24 AM
If the finances are so dire, why were the floodlights still on 10-50 pm? Unless of course there was extra training. Seems a waste of electricity, after all, every little helps.

Have to agree with this remark, Same on sat. Why are they on till 6+ Most clubs have there flood lights within 20 min of the games ending.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: kingofnaves on January 11, 2012, 02:12:51 PM
I believe it's Health and Safety reasons! Apparently JB is scared of the dark :-\
Title: Re: finances
Post by: threenil on January 11, 2012, 02:32:28 PM
It's for the action replays
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Bostonshire on January 11, 2012, 03:42:56 PM
It's for the action replays

Should be of by 5 then on a sat and 9.45 on a weeknight as there aint that many
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Lord Cutler Knobhead on January 11, 2012, 06:28:23 PM
If the finances are so dire, why were the floodlights still on 10-50 pm? Unless of course there was extra training. Seems a waste of electricity, after all, every little helps.

Leon was crawling around looking for his first touch.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: York Street Pilgrim on January 11, 2012, 07:22:45 PM
If the finances are so dire, why were the floodlights still on 10-50 pm? Unless of course there was extra training. Seems a waste of electricity, after all, every little helps.

Maybe we carried on playing after Bishop's Stortford left the pitch. But we still wouldn't have scored.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 12, 2012, 12:58:35 PM
Obviously the financial situation is always going to be a concern when we are reliant upon two good men to keep us afloat, but I think we can trust that the Chestnut's are doing their best to keep the club on the straight and narrow.


Two good men? Afloat?  How is plungeing the club into yet more debt a good thing?  BUFC is living beyond its means and has been doing for every year of tenure under the chesNUTS.  These two are no better than Sotnick and Rodwell and still have the same intentions i.e. getting their grubby little hands on Tattershall Road.

Set a budget that can realistically be covered by income (and not loans from property developers).

It will all end in tears ::)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: oxo on January 12, 2012, 03:35:34 PM
Is this the first chink in your armour of why you have returned after such a long period away? Could it be that you have been ordered by your brotherhood to attempt to turn the fans against David and Neil? It is common knowledge they have been looking at possible sites for a new stadium, could it possibly be that you and yours fear you will not benefit financially from such a move, indeed, is it possible you could actually lose out. I think the people of Boston realise that the days when individuals or groups of people had the power to veto what happens in the town are long gone.
Comparing David and Neil to those others is contemptable.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: BostonGoals on January 12, 2012, 04:09:24 PM


Two good men? Afloat?  How is plungeing the club into yet more debt a good thing?  BUFC is living beyond its means and has been doing for every year of tenure under the chesNUTS.  These two are no better than Sotnick and Rodwell and still have the same intentions i.e. getting their grubby little hands on Tattershall Road.

Set a budget that can realistically be covered by income (and not loans from property developers).

It will all end in tears ::)


What a load of shite

Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ed Kandi on January 12, 2012, 06:04:13 PM
Obviously the financial situation is always going to be a concern when we are reliant upon two good men to keep us afloat, but I think we can trust that the Chestnut's are doing their best to keep the club on the straight and narrow.


Two good men? Afloat?  How is plungeing the club into yet more debt a good thing?  BUFC is living beyond its means and has been doing for every year of tenure under the chesNUTS.  These two are no better than Sotnick and Rodwell and still have the same intentions i.e. getting their grubby little hands on Tattershall Road.

Set a budget that can realistically be covered by income (and not loans from property developers).

It will all end in tears ::)


I think the Chestnuts have good intentions for BUFC even if it does mean loaning the club money.
I doubt if many people have got much back after 'loaning' money to football clubs at this level.
There is obviously a limit to how long they can continue to underwrite this shortfall for. 
They probably wouldn't be able to continue if the much talked about double-dip recession really starts to kick-in, the construction industry is usually the first to feel the pinch, and they wouldn't be selling many properties.  :-\
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Gus on January 12, 2012, 06:58:39 PM
And, of course, who were the local mafiosa rumoured to veto any development coming to the town what might jeopordise their own interests?

Who else but the Isaac clan.  Well, well!!!!!

Is the great Scouse chef concerned that any new club headquarters and expected development associated with it could very easily affect said families interests?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: father Ted on January 12, 2012, 07:04:04 PM
 Can Someone enlighten me as to who the Isaacs are ??
       Think  I may have been told by aged relative in the  the dim and distant  past ..but I've forgotten .
                     f T
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ken Fox on January 12, 2012, 07:13:11 PM
Can Someone enlighten me as to who the Isaacs are ??

There's a few mentioned in the History of Oldrids:

http://www.oldrids.co.uk/en-gb/Pages-Customer-Services/about_us/ (http://www.oldrids.co.uk/en-gb/Pages-Customer-Services/about_us/)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Keith_Floyd on January 12, 2012, 07:43:03 PM
The reality is we have a Chairman with no affinity with our club, could a lifelong Lincoln City fan really love Boston United? Maybe as much as our previous Chairmen, rugby fan Des Wood and Portsmouth fan Jon Sotnick.

I'm very suspicious of property developers, its all about land deals especially the bigger picture of Tattershall Road. £££££

Title: Re: finances
Post by: Adam on January 12, 2012, 08:11:51 PM
As stated by DN and NK a long, long time ago, the idea that they are going through all this just to get hold of a bit of land for Chestnut Homes is ridiculous. I'm sure that there'd be much more efficient ways for them to get hold of Tattershall Road, given that, as I remember, the only sort of claim to that land associated with BUFC is some tenuous option that another company (Sportsfund?) has. Moreover, they've pointed out that Chestnut Homes has access to plenty of other, much easier sites to build on, and I guess even if those sites fetch slightly lower house prices, they probably don't have the disadvantage of having to sink millions of pounds and countless hours into a bankrupt football club first.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Myleftfoot on January 12, 2012, 08:14:41 PM
Nice post Adam  :)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Myleftfoot on January 12, 2012, 08:18:30 PM
Any one else have a view?   ;)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Keith_Floyd on January 12, 2012, 08:30:09 PM
As stated by DN and NK a long, long time ago, the idea that they are going through all this just to get hold of a bit of land for Chestnut Homes is ridiculous. I'm sure that there'd be much more efficient ways for them to get hold of Tattershall Road, given that, as I remember, the only sort of claim to that land associated with BUFC is some tenuous option that another company (Sportsfund?) has. Moreover, they've pointed out that Chestnut Homes has access to plenty of other, much easier sites to build on, and I guess even if those sites fetch slightly lower house prices, they probably don't have the disadvantage of having to sink millions of pounds and countless hours into a bankrupt football club first.

Who owns Sportsfund!
The devil will be in the detail, but only the delusional think the Chestnuts will sink millions of pounds into our football club!
I'm sure their countless hours will be rewarded  ;)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Myleftfoot on January 12, 2012, 08:37:16 PM
As stated by DN and NK a long, long time ago, the idea that they are going through all this just to get hold of a bit of land for Chestnut Homes is ridiculous. I'm sure that there'd be much more efficient ways for them to get hold of Tattershall Road, given that, as I remember, the only sort of claim to that land associated with BUFC is some tenuous option that another company (Sportsfund?) has. Moreover, they've pointed out that Chestnut Homes has access to plenty of other, much easier sites to build on, and I guess even if those sites fetch slightly lower house prices, they probably don't have the disadvantage of having to sink millions of pounds and countless hours into a bankrupt football club first.

Who owns Sportsfund!
The devil will be in the detail, but only the delusional think the Chestnuts will sink millions of pounds into our football club!
I'm sure their countless hours will be rewarded  ;)




It's difficult to work out, I think.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: father Ted on January 12, 2012, 08:41:53 PM
If any of the Isaacs ARE  floating around on here (under nom-de -plumes)  maybe they could say if they still own the property on Willoughby Rd ?
  They held a lot of functions there for the locals in the 1950s 60s . . so the aged relative tells me .
                Or p / m  me .
                                       f T
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Mr Tickle on January 12, 2012, 08:46:10 PM
What is so special about tattershall Rd anyway?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Tash on January 12, 2012, 08:57:55 PM


Who owns Sportsfund!
The devil will be in the detail, but only the delusional think the Chestnuts will sink millions of pounds into our football club!
I'm sure their countless hours will be rewarded  ;)


And prey tell why shoudln't they get some of their dosh back if they do a land deal and BUFC get a new ground out of it.

Surely if you buy a football club you buy the existing debt, ie-: you pay the clubs debters so you become the one who owes the debt and also the one who is owed the debt. Then as I see it you have 3 options.

1. You do a land deal build a new ground take the money that is owed to you and either give or sell the club debt free.

2. You keep the club and hope to turn round its finances so you can get at least some of your cash back.

3.You sell the club to another Roman Abramovich.

I suppose what I am saying is we should thank our lucky stars that David and Neil(a BUFC supporter by the way) came forward after that eventfull Fathers day meeting. I certainly didn't see our two key board warriors Vino and the scouse kid offering any pearls of wisdom.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Gus on January 13, 2012, 11:56:39 AM
I notice the delightful Rooster/K.F./Scouser has preferred to ignore my earlier posting about the local mafiosa which must confirm everyones suspicions that he has an ulterior motive for the vitriol he is aiming at the Chestnuts and the club.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ferret on January 13, 2012, 12:55:36 PM
I think "Keith" might be a champagne giving sidekick rather than the chief Oldrids share price protector :-$
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Tipps End Pilgrim on January 13, 2012, 01:14:13 PM
I'm curious to know what happened with you two.
From reading the forums over many years I know that you used to travel to games together on the train along with a fine wine. You had some hospitality at the New England and a photo taken with big Jason in your suits.
Where did it all go wrong?
I recall Rooster suddenly emerging in a flurry of emails, Mark asking all the right questions of the Evans gang, but then suddenly starting to annoy folk with his postings. There are ways of asking a Sir Cookie a question ... the recent posting wasn't it. As we know it's difficult enough getting volunteers to sit on committees.


Good point Louth. I can't exactly remember what the fall out was about. Guys ? It's a shame as Boston doesn't have a massive fan base as it is.

DL

Title: Re: finances
Post by: Old Pilgrim on January 13, 2012, 02:14:44 PM
I notice the delightful Rooster/K.F./Scouser has preferred to ignore my earlier posting about the local mafiosa which must confirm everyones suspicions that he has an ulterior motive for the vitriol he is aiming at the Chestnuts and the club.

Yeah! Some of us have long memories don't we Gus?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Gus on January 14, 2012, 05:37:39 PM
Gone a bit quiet, O.P., don't you think?

Do you think I have hit a raw nerve?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ferret on January 14, 2012, 07:44:02 PM
S.P. not at the game today.....only 4 miles to support the lads....hope your "mattress" arrived on time :-D
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 14, 2012, 08:19:22 PM
Just remind us all Gus who did not turn up to meet the MP for South Holland when the criminals were running the club.  :-*
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Gus on January 15, 2012, 12:07:49 PM
I have been waiting for you to come up with that load of bollox.

As you, and others know, I was trying to involve a London based syndicate in taking over the club (subsequently knocked on the head by Rodwell who refused to talk to them as he was trying to line his pockets by dealing with a Leeds property developer who was later sent to prison).

Your invitation to meet the MP was only made on the morning of your meeting and at the time I wasn't a member of The Trust.

Because of a possible conflict of interest, plus the fact that I had been warned what a tosser you are (since confirmed ten-fold), I decided to stay clear.

At no point during any conversation with you did I say that I definately would turn up.

Now go back to your drunken stupor and stop rambling.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Keith_Floyd on January 15, 2012, 02:16:43 PM
Gus, a little disrespectful there. Fact is a BUFC Trust would never exist without Scouse Pilgrim!
The time, effort and finances he put in to get the trust up and running should be applauded.
3 of us met the MP that day and it was a successful meeting.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Ed Kandi on January 15, 2012, 11:43:03 PM
So what went wrong?  ???
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Artemis on January 16, 2012, 01:01:03 AM
It seems obvious to me that the attacks on those running Boston United now, by SP/KF is to protect the businesses within the town.

Far from "ending in tears" as he puts it, remaining at York Street will end in tears, due to the high rent and the number of years left on the lease running down, so a move to an alternative site is needed.   That will also mean that Boston United can start to generate cash from the new ground which isn't possible at York Street.

Will Oldrids lose business on a Saturday?   -  quite possibly and that I believe is the real reason for the attacks on the Directors of Boston United.
Title: Re: finances
Post by: dubai camel on January 16, 2012, 04:55:43 AM
Financially BUFC is in a mess.

Fortunately the current owners have absorbed the operating debt, but with the potential continuing decline in attendance income will be below forecast and the objective of breaking even this season will not be achieved.

Unfortunately long term the picture is even bleaker with no ground. The assumption that a new ground will appear from nowhere and with it cash generation, is just that - an assumption.

A serious amount of cash is needed for such a project and as the last lot found its not as easy as it might seem. Whilst the Chestnuts are in the business of land development, this a large and expensive project - can we expect them to finance such a move? Are they willing to underwrite the costs? Are they able to finance such a project?
Their stated aim was to hand the club over to the 'fans'? Or do they mean hand the team over to the 'fans' whilst retaining the stadium asset and leasing it back to the club?

Lots to look forward to over the next couple of years?
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 16, 2012, 01:24:51 PM
I have been waiting for you to come up with that load of bollox.
As you, and others know, I was trying to involve a London based syndicate in taking over the club (subsequently knocked on the head by Rodwell who refused to talk to them as he was trying to line his pockets by dealing with a Leeds property developer who was later sent to prison).
Your invitation to meet the MP was only made on the morning of your meeting and at the time I wasn't a member of The Trust.
Because of a possible conflict of interest, plus the fact that I had been warned what a tosser you are (since confirmed ten-fold), I decided to stay clear.
At no point during any conversation with you did I say that I definately would turn up.Now go back to your drunken stupor and stop rambling.

You having a bad day Gussie-poohs? Let's face it I was glad when you did not turn up. We needed reliable people. We know who you were working for and why you tried to ingratiate yourself with those who exposed the likes of Rodwell, Evans and Sotnick.
On the other matter: What have you got against against alcoholics anyway? Was your father one and did he give you a hard time? Did this result in under-achievement academically? May be that's it?  :bunny
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Gus on January 16, 2012, 02:04:07 PM
When you get to my age, every day is a good day.

Just to wake up in the morning is a bonus.

And, for your information, my departed father was certainly not an alcoholic, although I do remember him having the odd bottle of IPA at Christmas.  As for abuse, verbal only.

Under-achieved?  Well, old Sid Ricketts did put on my final report at BGS that I had got a lot out of school but not as much out of the classroom as he would have liked!

Since then I have graduated from the UCL with an honours degree.

UCL is the University of Country Life which means I am well able to spot cnuts like you from a mile off!

Title: Re: finances
Post by: Old Pilgrim on January 17, 2012, 09:45:20 AM

Seconded Gus!!
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Scouse Pilgrim on January 24, 2012, 01:21:30 PM

And, for your information, my departed father was certainly not an alcoholic, although I do remember him having the odd bottle of IPA at Christmas.  As for abuse, verbal only.


It must be genetic  ::)
Title: Re: finances
Post by: Old Pilgrim on January 24, 2012, 04:23:48 PM

And, for your information, my departed father was certainly not an alcoholic, although I do remember him having the odd bottle of IPA at Christmas.  As for abuse, verbal only.


It must be genetic  ::)

What's your excuse?