I'm in the know

[Piemonte]

Damn, I'm out of "Mystery Men" quotes now. Who'd have thought you could post several pointless replies based on quotes from one movie. It's easier than thinking for myself, note to self: must do it more often

I'm glad to see you have a plan for the future.

Unlike the STFC board. We'll be in the conference this time next year

[Batch]

I want to beleive.
The Truth is out there.

[Boeta]

You are highly perceptive mattboy.

By repeating the same things over and over again and inferring that I know what I'm on about eventually someone (Boeta?) will believe me

what i believe about the club has not influenced by stfcbart, ive got more reliable sources

its interesting that although articulating it in different ways reg and bart speak very similar things about those running the club.

[Piemonte]

blah blah blah,  souces, sauces, sausages.

I made a pact with myself not to believe anything anyone says who has "sources" after the power leaving debacle. You either have the balls to say where you hear things or people are not going to believe anything you say.  And I'm not even pro-board (is anyone?) I just prefer to at least keep a semi open mind about things.

My point was you seemed to have turned into a "mini bart" Boeta. you make points without backing them up

[herthab]

Did someone mention sausages?

Mmmmmm!

[Reg Smeeton]

Mike Diamandis killed it and fed it to trust stfc representitives in sandwich form.

The swine

 Greeks are very partial to a bit of calamari...... :chunder:

[Reg Smeeton]

You are highly perceptive mattboy.

By repeating the same things over and over again and inferring that I know what I'm on about eventually someone (Boeta?) will believe me

what i believe about the club has not influenced by stfcbart, ive got more reliable sources

its interesting that although articulating it in different ways reg and bart speak very similar things about those running the club.

   I'm no accountant, but there does seem to be so many things about the currrent regime that make no sense.

  For example in the 97 accounts, the net debt seemed to be 3,507,201 pound, and the annual loss was given as 662,907 pounds.

  7 years later we seem to have a higher annual loss more or less tripled the debt and got ourselves relegated two divisions, this being based on delayed figures which the auditor refuses to sign off.....surely it can't be only a few of us who feel this situation neeeds an explanation.

[spacey]

you make points without backing them up

That's fine talk coming from you! Where's your proof that my arse was interfered with in such a brutal fashion? Anyway we don't have bum rape in Cirencester, it's far too posh. We have bottom soirees, all the wealthy and important people take part. They asked me to attend but I have no desire to mix with the upper class.
 
Boeta's a cricket man so is more likely to be involved with ball tampering than pounding away on some chaps arse.

[Piemonte]

you make points without backing them up

 We have bottom soirees, all the wealthy and important people take part. .

 

[spacey]

..actually the way they go on about ball tampering you'd think it was a bigger crime than murder, I think they should just allow it. They should also allow drugs to be used in all sports. I'd much rather see some drugged up Canadian pelting round a track at 100 mph with his eyes popping out than some god bothering bellend hop, skipping and jumping around in a drug free 'la di da look at me I'm so fit and healthy' way.


Anyway fuck off Piemonte you flouncing big gobshite midget tosspiece, your mother cooks socks in Hull.

[Simon Pieman]

You are highly perceptive mattboy.

By repeating the same things over and over again and inferring that I know what I'm on about eventually someone (Boeta?) will believe me

what i believe about the club has not influenced by stfcbart, ive got more reliable sources

its interesting that although articulating it in different ways reg and bart speak very similar things about those running the club.

   I'm no accountant, but there does seem to be so many things about the currrent regime that make no sense.

  For example in the 97 accounts, the net debt seemed to be 3,507,201 pound, and the annual loss was given as 662,907 pounds.

  7 years later we seem to have a higher annual loss more or less tripled the debt and got ourselves relegated two divisions, this being based on delayed figures which the auditor refuses to sign off.....surely it can't be only a few of us who feel this situation neeeds an explanation.

I think the problem is in the last decade we haven't been very stabe ly managed which is maybe evident from the qualified reports the auditors have given more often than not. The problems evidently stem from before the current board's time but like Reg says, why the accounts haven't been finalised is very serious and worse.

[Reg Smeeton]

The point I'm trying to make should may be be prefaced by the fact that in 97, we had SSW and Willie Carson on the Board as well as a number of other "independents"

  Although the club was not run that well back then, compared to now it was a model of good housekeeping and openness with the fans and shareholders.

  All the available evidence points to the problems stemming from a Board which just has placepersons from Newbury, and no significant figurehead, with decisions being taken by an unaccountable "advisor"

  However you wish to view it, while this is the set up at the head of the club, all the evidence suggests we'll continue to rack up debt, make no progress off the pitch and  to struggle on it.

[STFC Bart]

I know we havent always agreed in the past Reg but i totally agree with everything you say

Someone has some explaining to do....

[yeo]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v365/robus1971/bart.png

[ron dodgers]

I think if the club started to become successful I'd have to find a crapper club to watch - hmmm Newport County that'll do