If you got all the intellectuals that ever lived , jordan Peterstone, Einstein, aristotle etc in a room with the shaymen and categorical proved everything they said was false they would still say the same thing they have been for years . It's quite interesting that they've watched a video of clayton answering direct questions actually encouraged it and they've still managed to change the narrative to how he's just another Tony Abbott.

You can't educate pork.

Of KD does buy the Shay and rents we’re rearranged and we paid less Town would never know. Unlike now when they constantly aske the council for information under the FIA of the shay is privately owned they will not be able to get that information

If that's the case that's worth a little chuckle , although I could see a scenario where bubba and barry hodgson go undercover as ken davys chauffeurs to see if they could extract any information that way .

Or they could kidnap him and interrogate him gestapo style ' heir davy are you charging those wretched squatters lower rent ? Those snivelling leeches think they have the moral high ground , well the sst will report back to heir hoddie our fuhrer and you will suffer the consequences of his wrath , we marched to the town hall and we will march again , we will fight them on the beaches , we will fight them in George's square in the piece hall , we will get tom scargill to write propaganda in the courier and hoddie will print them off ten years later the sad bald man ...

Hilarious

I'll write it down on a leaflet if you want , but unfortunately there will be a postage charge.

Even more hilarious

As said before, the working parties had the best intentions given that, at the time, there wasnt any other option on the table. Whether you like/dislike me, Hoddie or the others involved it wasnt a popularity contest and was simply about securing the stadium long-term for Fax and FCHT.

Regardless of the council decision, Ill remain resolute that private ownership is the worst option, even if the KD option does bring immediate benefits. To me, these benefits dont provide the longer term securities the clubs, or more importantly, the supporters should want. The owners of both clubs may welcome the immediate benefits, but when the private ownership potentially goes wrong, they most likely wont be around and its the supporters who will suffer.

I can still see potential spanners in the works. The ACV, the Football League feedback/guidance on pitch usage (three teams), the pitch grant, timescales, etc.

So would you say as a representative of the sst you have both clubs best interests at heart?

Id say everyone involved with the working group has. All our discussions have been about what we view as being in the best interests of both clubs. What benefit would there have been in having any bias towards either of the clubs?

Quote Bubba="Bubba"Id say everyone involved with the working group has. All our discussions have been about what we view as being in the best interests of both clubs. What benefit would there have been in having any bias towards either of the clubs?'" Would you say during this discussion with tax experts you have the best interests of the rugby club at heart ? https://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/thre ... ny.427790/

Quote Bubba="Bubba"Id say everyone involved with the working group has. All our discussions have been about what we view as being in the best interests of both clubs. What benefit would there have been in having any bias towards either of the clubs?'" Would you say during this discussion with tax experts you have the best interests of the rugby club at heart ? https://www.ukbusinessforums.co.uk/thre ... ny.427790/

You dont think it reasonable to want to understand the position of the rugby club and its immediate future and potential impact it would have on the stadium?

Bubba.

You keep mentioning you have the best interests of BOTH clubs yet within the same timescale of the only offer being on the table you joined a business group forum asking questions involving HMRC serving winding up partitions against dormant companies and you named Fax as the club.

Your motive became clear when you openly commented on your local rugby club and among other things you stated that they weren't paying the rent when at that time your own FOI’s showed they were up to date as per the latest agreed schedule with CMBC and the club, a blatant lie or a memory lapse?

You also stated the club were trying to buy the ground but how was this truthful with your claim that your group were the only ones with an offer on the table?

Based on your words and actions how can anyone have trust in your group or believe a word you say.

As previously stated the spanner in the works concerning the EFL 3 teams rule is a football issue and not a rugby one yet when Clayton said what Davy had said before that it was Bosomworth and FC Town prerogative to resolve with the EFL and not the RFL.

They were simply stating the truth and showing some respect for FC Town in not interfering or commenting on a matter that fell under their control and yet they got the usual insults thrown at them from the FC Town group.

By repeated words and by actions over a decades timescale the FC Town group are only concerned about themselves and any claim otherwise is a smokescreen.

We all get and share the same what if concerns and risks but as before it’s the council who are wanting to sell and it’s the council who will make the decision not the clubs so don’t try and blame the rugby club if something goes wrong in the future for what the council decides to do in March when neither club have any real say in the matter.