I that case, Galt, why don’t you put in £1.6m right now? You said you’d want something in return for your investment, and you’d get exactly that - the immense satisfaction that you will have kept the financial ruin of a club supported and loved by thousands of fans and members/owners alike for at least another year. Surely the warm glow you’d get would be sufficient return on your investment, and you would be showered with so many thanks and positive remarks that your self confessed reputation for selfishness and greediness would quickly evaporate… ☺️😇👌👏

Pete I have one in my surname and don't see why I should drop it!

In 2024 we made an Operating Loss of £739K even after allowing for the rather exceptional £3.25m+ of gains on player transfers. My prediction for the 2025 year is an Operating Loss of at least £1.6m. I suspect I might even be being a bit too positive in this prediction.

It's great not having the political stuff 👍

Kite - if you come back down the steps the same way, look to your left when you get to the Board Inn, and you’ll see a cafe called Caedmon’s Rest - my sister in law used to own and run it with her husband, it was a great little place, although the accommodation above was teeny tiny… 🤪😬🍦

Kite - hardly any political posts on here now, which is good to see, but it’s fine if the odd one slips through (although it won’t be from me, because I’m sticking pretty well to my promise/agreement…). Thankfully most are recognising the benefit of avoiding the topic 🥳👏

OI, I haven't encountered it (yet) but Meta AI says it does !

RK - is the "Don't step on the dolphins" sign still there in Whitby?

Anyway, Whitby is nice albeit the weather is Meh. If you get the chance, go on the north Yorkshire railway.

RK - Just shoot the pedants. They're the only ones bothered about it.

Whoever replaces Reeves (the Chancellor, not the player), will inherent the same economic problems that have been in place since Covid/Brexit, slow economic growth + high sovereign debt = you either cut public spending or/and raise taxes

The apostrophe abuse in it's was due to autocorrect

The DTB, well it's spokesman on here, refuses to say whether we have set a deficit budget this year (almost certainly) and, if so, what is the net op loss. Moreover, how we plug this deficit - one off gains like player sales, cup income, or just c/forward another annual loss to add to our cumulative losses

nicander - in some ways it is a matter of due diligence. Someone buying a majority stake would have done it and would know what the issues were, which of course might mean there were no offers. Very few of the 7,000 (half of whom were effectively co-opted) have done due diligence. I'll admit to not thinking about it seriously till the last 12 months because I hoped, and still have some hope, that we could balance the books. I am now tending towards the conclusion that the fan ownership model won't work because we don't seem to be able and willing to cover the systemic loss. NIck W is right, I don't see a way of changing the model but I would like a clear debate about it.

Rachel from accounts days are numbered. [Link]

Most companies trading these days have a product to sell whether it be a vape or a EV car. While their products are successful they might well be in profit. Those companies are also investing in their next offering to move the business forward. As a football club we must offer success on the field to encourage our supporters to remain loyal. Obviously a lot of fans will continue to pay for their seats whether we are winning or not, though we cannot stand still must invest in our future,. Being a division one club with a modern stadium to sustain its time for substantial outside investment to be sought.

I regarded it as becoming really necessary to sell control once the full costs of building (and only part finishing) the white elephant became obvious. At that point, the fan ownership model started to creak quite loudly and that situation is only getting worse season by season, as the costs of league football escalate. Particularly with L1 membership really bringing that home.

One wealthy individual owner or an outdated & misguided collective I&PS. Its a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. I'm not in favour of either and I definitely don't want anyone whether it be lots of Meadows or one single Sugar Daddy or Fairy Godmother to subsidise my hobby. I really wish our club was fan owned but unfortunately only 5% of it is. TBK: You haven't even asked the suppressed 5000+ true fan owners whether they will invest further through a Rights Issue. What are you scared off? Could it be that popular fan owned capitalism succeeds?

Also, I don’t think that someone who doesn’t care about fan ownership and therefore isn’t personally willing to fund the club and its losses is “selfish”- they are just the same as supporters of basically every other football club (and indeed every other business)

Ultimately there is little point debating the ownership model- if we can’t make the fan-owned model sustainable (still awaiting a plan for that) then in a couple of years we will be in administration and will either collapse or end up with a single owner by default. The third alternative is to explore selling control while we are in a position of relative strength (ie not in administration) and able to control the process?to a degree, but we are clearly not going to go that route.

Apologies, yes you're right. What I mean is they are selfish if they expect someone else to pay for their enjoyment. Obviously everyone has different means and the cost of living crisis has affected everyone's.

TBK - I'm sure you don't mean this, but I would certainly argue that people who cannot afford to contribute any more to the club than they do are not in any way selfish.

JG - it's a very fair point that expansion (assuming a level of demand) is the one potential game-changer, and our planning permission to do so is prob our most attractive asset to an investor or buyer.

nicander, it's possible (probable more likely) that we would make less with a single wealthy owner as our (almost) unique selling point would be lost. We're back to my main bugbear that we are stuck between people who like fan-ownership but do not (or cannot) contribute financially like "normal" owners do and those who dislike fan ownership but want their fun to be paid for by some illusory and incredibly philanthropic individual who probably doesn't exist. They're both equally selfish IMO. Perhaps our modern cultural of selfishness is really to blame?

JG - you might be surprised to learn there are some people around our club who do not seem able to understand the word costs?