[Westbars Spireite]

h again, on 03 March 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

And therein lies the problem. The outgoings bill has to be cut - it's about the only thing everybody from the top down agrees on. The trouble starts when you have to pin down the details. AC has got rid of the only person that he could lose without anybody getting upset - all the cuts from now on are going to hurt somebody, and people are going to squeal.
Reduce ground maintenance costs by using outside contractors: charge a charity for the stewarding when you've lent them the ground. Nasty businesses, both of them, part of a crack-down on spending, not something to endear the management to the fans, but probably a taste of what's to come.
To be fair, people can't lambast the club for losing money all the time, and then crib because things are cut that happen to be part of the organisation they like. Yes, we'd like a youth set-up, but is it cost-effective? Damn near impossible to tell, but it hasn't made a lot of money in the past, and any really good youngsters are likely to be poached by bigger clubs anyway; but if it did turn up a new Kev Davies it would have paid for itself several times over. Difficult decisions, but in the end it comes down to money - carry on over-spending and we won't just lose the youth set-up, we'll lose CFC.
It's going to be a rocky ride, but if you're critical of the way money has been squandered in the past, as we all are, we have to be constructive in suggesting where cuts can properly be made, and not just have yet another go at the management for trying to get costs under control. The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing, but it won't be an easy ride, and people are going to be upset.

You've not been known for you criticism of the of the way that money has been 'squandered' have you? Perhaps I missed it.

Do you mind if we talk about Chris Turner a little more? Are you surprised that someone so mentally agile as to be able to 'run rings' around intelligent people has found himself in this position?

[Wooden Spoon]

h again said:

1488568693[/url]' post='1286053']
It's going to be a rocky ride, but if you're critical of the way money has been squandered in the past, as we all are, we have to be constructive in suggesting where cuts can properly be made, and not just have yet another go at the management for trying to get costs under control. The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing, but it won't be an easy ride, and people are going to be upset.

(http://www.thecfss.c...topic=53014&hl=) <br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">post #319: 'Well, since he (Turner) took over he's managed to sign an outstanding manager from right out of the blue, he's completely revolutionised the clubs non-playing structure, he's acquired a scouting and youth training set-up second to none at this level and some way above (the DS?!),
and done it all without increasing the debt to anything unmanageable or even significantly higher

That's a quick list off the top of my head - you can probably think of many other improvements.
I don't attribute the current success to any one individual, but at the side of all that the pages of whingeing about ticket sales and a clerical error in player registration is irrelevant. By any measure that I can see we're a successful business - it doesn't come through luck.' <br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">post #344: 'As for all the other points, which are probably even more important in the long term, it's all CEO territory - the club has been completely re-vamped, not just in personnel but in its outlook.
Change doesn't just happen, it has to be driven through against obstacles, and that's the CEO's job. But the basic question has to be - is the club successful at this moment and in comparison with similar businesses? Well, it looks pretty successful to me, in fact it looks to have the infrastructure of a Championship outfit, quite apart from the football credentials, which transformation I'm sure was in CT's brief from the start. So successful club - credit to the CEO <br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">Then of course last year it was:

'The CEO has run rings around all the high flying accountants once again' and 'To say CT is totally incompetent at finance he's doing a good job of keeping you all in the dark'.<br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;"><br style="color: rgb(28, 40, 55); font-size: 13px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto;">

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

h again, on 03 March 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

And therein lies the problem. The outgoings bill has to be cut - it's about the only thing everybody from the top down agrees on. The trouble starts when you have to pin down the details. AC has got rid of the only person that he could lose without anybody getting upset - all the cuts from now on are going to hurt somebody, and people are going to squeal.
Reduce ground maintenance costs by using outside contractors: charge a charity for the stewarding when you've lent them the ground. Nasty businesses, both of them, part of a crack-down on spending, not something to endear the management to the fans, but probably a taste of what's to come.
To be fair, people can't lambast the club for losing money all the time, and then crib because things are cut that happen to be part of the organisation they like. Yes, we'd like a youth set-up, but is it cost-effective? Damn near impossible to tell, but it hasn't made a lot of money in the past, and any really good youngsters are likely to be poached by bigger clubs anyway; but if it did turn up a new Kev Davies it would have paid for itself several times over. Difficult decisions, but in the end it comes down to money - carry on over-spending and we won't just lose the youth set-up, we'll lose CFC.
It's going to be a rocky ride, but if you're critical of the way money has been squandered in the past, as we all are, we have to be constructive in suggesting where cuts can properly be made, and not just have yet another go at the management for trying to get costs under control. The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing, but it won't be an easy ride, and people are going to be upset.

First, there's no evidence that hiring a new stadium contractor was a cost cutting exercise. Indeed the so-called justification emerging at the time was that it had more to do with shortcomings on Ant Haywood's part.

Then the two thousand pound charge for stewarding Ernie's charity game - which 'Bob's Board' members raised overnight, by the way - had nothing to do with cost cutting. It was a lack of communication between the Club and Moss family.

And the key issue you so bewilderingly brush aside with your ludicrous 'The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing' is why costs were allowed to spiral in the first place? As has been repeatedly exposed by those pursuing remarkable sleuth work, non-football overheads have gone through the roof with no realistic explanation why. Other than what the plethora of revelations they've uncovered over the last year or more strongly suggest, of course. 'Proper business management'? Didn't you tell us Allen's millions meant he knew exactly what he was doing - the same Dave Allen who so casually walked away from the Club last November? Didn't you tell us how successful his CEO was - the one supposedly 'running rings 'round' and 'keeping all us high flying accountants in the dark'? Didn't you tell us the legitimate questions posed to Ashley Carson on such topics were the 'hysterics of a baying mob'?

You speak of 'losing CFC'. However whilst many on here have been warning of that for a long, long time, our concerns being confirmed by the Club recently being declared all but bankrupt, you were pompously dubbing us a bunch of know-nothing conspiracy theorists.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 03 March 2017 - 08:43 PM

[Wooden Spoon]

MDCCCLXVI said:

1488572532[/url]' post='1286069']

And the key issue you so bewilderingly brush aside with your ludicrous 'The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing' is why costs were allowed to spiral in the first place? As has been repeatedly exposed by those pursuing remarkable sleuth work, non-football overheads have gone through the roof with no realistic explanation why. Other than what the plethora of revelations they've uncovered over the last year or more strongly suggest, of course. 'Proper business management'?

Didn't you tell us Allen's millions meant he knew exactly what he was doing - the same Dave Allen who so casually walked away from the Club last November? Didn't you tell us how successful his CEO was - the one supposedly 'running rings 'round' and 'keeping all us high flying accountants in the dark'? Didn't you tell us the legitimate questions posed to Ashley Carson on such issues were the 'hysterics of a baying mob'?

You speak of 'losing CFC'. However whilst many on here have been warning of that for a long, long time, our concerns being confirmed by the Club recently being declared all but bankrupt, you were pompously dubbing us a bunch of know-nothing conspiracy theorists.

Don't forget the silly old fool say the accounts were "meaningless historical documents"

[Somerset Spireite]

h again, on 03 March 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

And therein lies the problem. The outgoings bill has to be cut - it's about the only thing everybody from the top down agrees on. The trouble starts when you have to pin down the details. AC has got rid of the only person that he could lose without anybody getting upset - all the cuts from now on are going to hurt somebody, and people are going to squeal.
Reduce ground maintenance costs by using outside contractors: charge a charity for the stewarding when you've lent them the ground. Nasty businesses, both of them, part of a crack-down on spending, not something to endear the management to the fans, but probably a taste of what's to come.
To be fair, people can't lambast the club for losing money all the time, and then crib because things are cut that happen to be part of the organisation they like. Yes, we'd like a youth set-up, but is it cost-effective? Damn near impossible to tell, but it hasn't made a lot of money in the past, and any really good youngsters are likely to be poached by bigger clubs anyway; but if it did turn up a new Kev Davies it would have paid for itself several times over. Difficult decisions, but in the end it comes down to money - carry on over-spending and we won't just lose the youth set-up, we'll lose CFC.
It's going to be a rocky ride, but if you're critical of the way money has been squandered in the past, as we all are, we have to be constructive in suggesting where cuts can properly be made, and not just have yet another go at the management for trying to get costs under control. The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing, but it won't be an easy ride, and people are going to be upset.

With the greatest respect, whilst the regime remains in place how on earth can "the past" be irrelevant? It is THE most relevant thing BECAUSE the money's gone (and continues to go)!

Or maybe that's just me.

This post has been edited by Somerset Spireite: 03 March 2017 - 08:49 PM

[fishini]

a kick in the balls, on 03 March 2017 - 08:37 PM, said:

Don't forget the silly old fool say the accounts were "meaningless historical documents"

He will deny ever saying it. However he is so very good at lying

[Mr Mercury]

h again, on 03 March 2017 - 07:18 PM, said:

And therein lies the problem. The outgoings bill has to be cut - it's about the only thing everybody from the top down agrees on. The trouble starts when you have to pin down the details. AC has got rid of the only person that he could lose without anybody getting upset - all the cuts from now on are going to hurt somebody, and people are going to squeal.
Reduce ground maintenance costs by using outside contractors: charge a charity for the stewarding when you've lent them the ground. Nasty businesses, both of them, part of a crack-down on spending, not something to endear the management to the fans, but probably a taste of what's to come.
To be fair, people can't lambast the club for losing money all the time, and then crib because things are cut that happen to be part of the organisation they like. Yes, we'd like a youth set-up, but is it cost-effective? Damn near impossible to tell, but it hasn't made a lot of money in the past, and any really good youngsters are likely to be poached by bigger clubs anyway; but if it did turn up a new Kev Davies it would have paid for itself several times over. Difficult decisions, but in the end it comes down to money - carry on over-spending and we won't just lose the youth set-up, we'll lose CFC.
It's going to be a rocky ride, but if you're critical of the way money has been squandered in the past, as we all are, we have to be constructive in suggesting where cuts can properly be made, and not just have yet another go at the management for trying to get costs under control. The past is irrelevant, the money's gone, we hope some proper business management can get things back on a sound footing, but it won't be an easy ride, and people are going to be upset.

Thankfully the line "the past is irrelevant " isn't holding much water on the "questionable enterprise" thread.
And to be honest I've never heard the same line used as an adequate defence in any court of law...you IDIOT.

[Wooden Spoon]

Mr Mercury, on 03 March 2017 - 10:55 PM, said:

Thankfully the line "the past is irrelevant " isn't holding much water on the "questionable enterprise" thread.
And to be honest I've never heard the same line used as an adequate defence in any court of law...you IDIOT.

Don't forget this is the man who has said -


We can stay at saltergate and build facilities and car parking under the main stand.

No one will ever want to buy CFC



CFSS should reject any sponsorship or involvement from renewable energy companies



Global warming and the "hockey stick" carbon % graphic and atmospheric % levels are also a myth.



It takes more carbon to produce solar panels than the equivalent reduction in power produced over the panels life time.



The league tables lie.



Reported a message board user to the moderators and then denied doing so



the term "a couple" referred to infinite amounts and not numerical small numbers



Predicted that During the middle of the credit crunch crisis that inflation would rocket past 6%



That investments at this time returning 5% or less were worthless



That the recently departed CEO had overseen a total off field root and branch overhaul that had greatly benefitted the club


Said within the last 2 years that CFC was a successful business who's losses and cost base has not increased



That this was down to the CEO,



That the CEO had in the last 12 months run rings around so called bobs boards experts, and that the CEO wasn't I I incompetent and had kept these people in the dark.


Sure, there will be " court jester jems" I have missed, but why anyone takes the clown seriously or treats him with anything other than contempt escapes me


Laugh at him, redicule him. But don't engage him expecting anything other than nonsense

[Stoptalkingbol]

a kick in the balls, on 04 March 2017 - 02:28 AM, said:

Don't forget this is the man who has said -


We can stay at saltergate and build facilities and car parking under the main stand.

No one will ever want to buy CFC



CFSS should reject any sponsorship or involvement from renewable energy companies



Global warming and the "hockey stick" carbon % graphic and atmospheric % levels are also a myth.



It takes more carbon to produce solar panels than the equivalent reduction in power produced over the panels life time.



The league tables lie.



Reported a message board user to the moderators and then denied doing so



the term "a couple" referred to infinite amounts and not numerical small numbers



Predicted that During the middle of the credit crunch crisis that inflation would rocket past 6%



That investments at this time returning 5% or less were worthless



That the recently departed CEO had overseen a total off field root and branch overhaul that had greatly benefitted the club


Said within the last 2 years that CFC was a successful business who's losses and cost base has not increased



That this was down to the CEO,



That the CEO had in the last 12 months run rings around so called bobs boards experts, and that the CEO wasn't I I incompetent and had kept these people in the dark.


Sure, there will be " court jester jems" I have missed, but why anyone takes the clown seriously or treats him with anything other than contempt escapes me


Laugh at him, redicule him. But don't engage him expecting anything other than nonsense

Vintage Mick.

[Goku]

The man has no shame.

[Tha Knows...]

Harlequin Again - still running rings round the lot of ya 😆

[RGS]

Live blog - follow today's game with images, updates, opinion etc

http://www.derbyshir...indon-1-8421325

[RGS]

Pictures - Mitchell's big moment and wild scenes that followed

http://www.derbyshir...round-1-8421517

Match report

http://www.derbyshir...-time-1-8421446

[whittman]

RGS, on 04 March 2017 - 05:44 PM, said:

Pictures - Mitchell's big moment and wild scenes that followed

http://www.derbyshir...round-1-8421517

Match report

http://www.derbyshir...-time-1-8421446

Great action photos

They certainly capture the moment

[RGS]

Fair play to Caldwell - I laughed aloud at one of these lines

http://www.derbyshir...fight-1-8421588

[RGS]

FBT IA still slightly losing money, Sutcliffe still involved

http://www.derbyshir...china-1-8423464

[Mr Mercury]

RGS, on 06 March 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:

FBT IA still slightly losing money, Sutcliffe still involved

http://www.derbyshir...china-1-8423464

" if i was his age and gone through some of the things he has I'd have walked a long way away from it. "
I bet the folk owed thousands of pounds wish he'd walked a long way from it years ago!

[Siberian Spireite]

RGS, on 06 March 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:

FBT IA still slightly losing money, Sutcliffe still involved

http://www.derbyshir...china-1-8423464

Pretty much confirms that the Academy exists to squeeze a few quid from the parents of kids on the whiff of a dream of a career in football. Just that now the net is extending further so as kids in Asia can be exploited too.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

RGS, on 06 March 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:

FBT IA still slightly losing money, Sutcliffe still involved

http://www.derbyshir...china-1-8423464

Graham,

An article from 13/12/16, which contradicts some of Hegarty's comments in the article today.

https://www.google.c...d-1-8287434/amp

This post has been edited by freelander2: 06 March 2017 - 12:42 PM

[calvin plummers socks]

"Huge interest from China"
My ar*e

I'm sure there are thousands of Chinese kids dying to do a Btec level 3 Sport and have the chance to watch Town for free