[Mr Mercury]

 Blue5, on 11 October 2019 - 09:44 AM, said:

I fully understand how you can form those opinions based on the above. However, assuming that you have not been involved with Dave Allen, the consortium or have knowledge of what was offered, if indeed any offer was ever actually made, how can you form the following opinions?

1) I hate to pi## on your dreams but we could be playing 2 tiers below where we are now and they (referring to the consortium) still wouldn't be able to afford to run the club.

2) Once again the words millionaires and two bob spring to mind (referring to the consortium).

3) Sorry but Dave Allen isn't always wrong, when he said tyre kickers he hit the nail on the head.

DA might think that nobody in the area could possibly have as much money as him and oldtimer seems to be of the opinion that the consortium are ten bob millionaires simply because they won't pay way over the odds.

[gordon_brittas]

Is Oldtimer one of Dave Allen’s many stooges?

[dim view]

 Blue5, on 11 October 2019 - 09:44 AM, said:

1) I hate to pi## on your dreams but we could be playing 2 tiers below where we are now and they (referring to the consortium) still wouldn't be able to afford to run the club.

I was CFSS Secretary when BH issued his (very gentlemanly) ultimatum to us.

It was that CFSS must hand control over to him and his directors otherwise they would reluctantly walk away. At that time they had a relatively substantial combined pot (summat over £300k of their own money from memory, maybe a bit more) to invest and they said that would keep us afloat with very careful management.

So, that was the amount needed 20 years ago to run the club, bearing in mind it excluded any costs for acquisition 'cos there wern't any.

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

 DEATH, on 10 October 2019 - 09:26 AM, said:

Macclesfield ,won the league with a budget of less than £500k. Barrow are in the playoffs based on gates of little more than 1200. There is no reason why CFC with gates of 4000 can’t be successful, if the club was managed properly.

Both rely heavily on volunteers. It kicks off big time on here every time vomit breeding is mentioned.

[mr. smith]

 Ernie Ernie Ernie, on 11 October 2019 - 10:27 AM, said:

Both rely heavily on volunteers. It kicks off big time on here every time vomit breeding is mentioned.

& volunteering

[Blue5]

 mr. smith, on 11 October 2019 - 10:30 AM, said:

& volunteering

Brilliant!

[Paul Fisher]

Vomit breeding

Had a right heavy session the other night, best expect a few custody battles then.

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

 mr. smith, on 11 October 2019 - 10:30 AM, said:

& volunteering

😂😂😂

I’m sure I’d not had that much ale to spell it that wrongly

[Blue5]

 mr. smith, on 11 October 2019 - 10:30 AM, said:

& volunteering

Brilliant!

[semi130497]

 philtooleycfss, on 08 October 2019 - 10:53 AM, said:

Hello again, it’s been some time since I’ve been on here! I think we were readying ourselves for a play-off game to potentially move into level two for the first time since 1951.

The reason I’m posting again is simple, the club I love and have volunteered at for 42 years is dying. That’s not a position that I ever envisaged when we were being entertained by Paul Cook’s superb side, and whilst at that time I could see that we were more likely to have bad times rather than great times, a second straight relegation battle in the National League did not feature in any of my nightmare scenarios back then.

Our club (that’s OUR CLUB) has been run into the ground and trust in the governance and management capabilities is at an all-time low and continues to fall week by week. Crowds have plummeted after four years of declining results and many decisions, on and off the field, have baffled the majority.

That said, all I want to do at this stage is ask a question, aimed at fans that have been loyal regulars but now don’t come as often or even not at all.

The question is, if the club were to be wholly taken over by a consortium of genuine local supporters, would you consider returning on a more regular basis even if the immediate prospect of a significant upturn in results was not forthcoming?

If your answer is ‘yes’ the response is easy, but please add any comments that could help potential bidders formulate their plans.

If your answer is ‘no’ please say what would need to be implemented to encourage you to return.

I’m asking the question in good faith to potentially help out real and genuine interest in the club’s future wellbeing to enable pragmatic decisions and predictions to be made by a number of people who genuinely have an interest in getting the club back on track and returning to being a vital and respected part of the community once more.

Thanks in advance for any input, it will all be useful.

I’m off to AFC Fylde now (make a turn at Preston, seems ominous), I fear there will not be many there in Blue!!

Phil

I will support any fans owned consortium and will start going to matches again even if we are bottom

[Phil V 72]

 Ernie Ernie Ernie, on 11 October 2019 - 10:27 AM, said:

Both rely heavily on volunteers. It kicks off big time on here every time vomit breeding is mentioned.

Not meant as a snarky question, but why do you think that is, and how could we/a new owner rectify this so that volunteers would feel comfortable coming forward?

[jack'smyboy]

 Phil V 72, on 11 October 2019 - 11:48 AM, said:

Not meant as a snarky question, but why do you think that is, and how could we/a new owner rectify this so that volunteers would feel comfortable coming forward?

Exactly.

Back in the Paul Cook days the pitch needed to be cleared twice in two days to get the match on. Plenty of us turned up to help, some of us on both days.

New owners, I'll respond to a rallying call if I'm free. Anyone who gets DA and his cronies away from the club had got my help.

[Sammy Spireite]

 jack, on 11 October 2019 - 01:16 PM, said:

Exactly.

Back in the Paul Cook days the pitch needed to be cleared twice in two days to get the match on. Plenty of us turned up to help, some of us on both days.

New owners, I'll respond to a rallying call if I'm free. Anyone who gets DA and his cronies away from the club had got my help.

I guess any volunteering would go beyoind the odd pitch clearing exercise, certainly from the outset of any new ownership.

I'm sure there are many tasks, both on match days and non-match days which would need covering, certainly short-term, to aid any news owners 'keep the lights on' so to speak.

I'd be happy to offer in any way I can, around my current commitments (work, family etc)

[Wooden Spoon]

 Ernie Ernie Ernie, on 11 October 2019 - 10:27 AM, said:

Both rely heavily on volunteers. It kicks off big time on here every time vomit breeding is mentioned.

I assume you mean volunteering?



You see after Brown lots of people volunteered to help CFC, why do you think there is an allergic reaction to volunteers helping Carson? don’t you think that would change with there departure?

[Ernie Ernie Ernie]

 Phil V 72, on 11 October 2019 - 11:48 AM, said:

Not meant as a snarky question, but why do you think that is, and how could we/a new owner rectify this so that volunteers would feel comfortable coming forward?

Jobs have been cut and volunteers have come forward and if they can get folks to do jobs for free then it all cuts costs and helps to try and make us sustainable. I suspect volunteering will be acceptable with new owners

[fishini]

 dim view, on 08 October 2019 - 07:00 PM, said:

It's wildly premature I know, but I for one would like Steve Coe to stay.

Your reasons are ?

[Mr Mercury]

 fishini, on 11 October 2019 - 06:26 PM, said:

Your reasons are ?

I think Dim replied earlier in the thread so that he could be made to answer specific questions.

[fishini]

 Mr Mercury, on 11 October 2019 - 06:31 PM, said:

I think Dim replied earlier in the thread so that he could be made to answer specific questions.

ok

[Wooden Spoon]

 dim view, on 11 October 2019 - 10:24 AM, said:

I was CFSS Secretary when BH issued his (very gentlemanly) ultimatum to us.

It was that CFSS must hand control over to him and his directors otherwise they would reluctantly walk away. At that time they had a relatively substantial combined pot (summat over £300k of their own money from memory, maybe a bit more) to invest and they said that would keep us afloat with very careful management.

So, that was the amount needed 20 years ago to run the club, bearing in mind it excluded any costs for acquisition 'cos there wern't any.

Was that a one off injection of funding? What sort of players wage bill did CFC have at the time?

[dim view]

 DEATH, on 12 October 2019 - 03:30 AM, said:

Was that a one off injection of funding? What sort of players wage bill did CFC have at the time?

I'd describe it as a stabilizing block of cash to enable seamless trading, underpinning all the other income streams. It's difficult to remember details and I'd be interested to know if anybody has kept minutes.