Sounds fair to me. I'm hoping to make the next Bullbuilder meeting to give my thoughts on the highlights (sorry the last wire one never happened by the way folks, technical problems) so if I do I'll hand over cash then if thats ok Mark? If I can't make that I'll paypal it.

I might have to chip in for Bullseye by the looks of it. Again.

If 1st December is cut off for that, shall we say that's the deadline for voting for who we sponsor too?

Reminder to anyone who hasn't voted, just send me a PM with the name of the player (or players if voting for twins) that you would prefer to sponsor (as mentioned earlier in thread).

Votes received so far from:

1. Wigan Bull
3. Mission
5. Bradford Badger
9. Mat
10. Bully Boxer
11. Tigertot
14. Bicesterbull
15. Cookie
16. redeverready
19. yougengis
25. Ewwennorfolk
32. DILLIGAF
36. Leeanne (Mat's missus)
40. beefy1
42. Game On
50. Childofthenorthern
59. Flip Flop
62. Tristram
69. Mobull
72. Little Miss Cookie
73. Cookie Jnr

Considering the article on the T&A website, are the spare funds (if there are any) going to be donated to Bullbuilder?

I'd be happy with that, and we know it's going to be put to good use!

I was hoping there'd be agreement on this, does anyone object if the excess funds go towards the BullBuilder appeal?

Excess to Bullbuilder is fine with me.

Fine by me too

Excess to bullbuilder makes sense to me.

This is fine by me as well - TBH I wouldn't think there will be any objections to that.

Just out of interest do you have a feel for the costs involved with sponsorship?
Last time I think we hit around the £1k mark with perhaps £700(ish) going to sponsoring the twins and the balance for the hospitality day.
I am a bit reluctant to cast a vote at the moment because I think we should have an idea of the pricing first - best bang for the buck and all that. It may be better looking to sponsor a combination of players once price/availability is known.
I guess I am just being cautious, and probably irrational, that we are not limiting our options.

If the sponsorship costs are similar to last time ~£750 that would leave almost the same (73 people x £20 thisrl. Benefits every young player which was how we started looking at sponsorship anyway.

Indeed a very worthy cause.
At the risk of making myself more unpopular, if that is possible, I thought these were two different initiatives.
The cause you have linked to is an infrastructure development whilst player sponsorship, in my opinion, is something entirely different. Of course they (infrastructure and sponsorship) both benefit the players but often in different ways.
As I have said previously, I have no problem with the excess being passed over to Bullbuilder but I think we should look to maximise player sponsorship possibilities first. Using your example above if we sponsored the twins at a cost around £750 then we may be able to additionally sponsor another young player for another, say, £400. This would mean another young player gets the benefit of feeling that he isn't overlooked and the balance of around £300 gets passed to Bullbuilder - still a tidy sum.
To be honest this is one for the majority to decide and I don't mind which way it goes.

You are correct that this is a different initiative and BullBuilder are not linked to the sponsorship. If however spare funds are available [iafter[/i sponsoring whoever the collective decide to sponsor, it would seem an appropriate use of those funds.

any funds leftover to bullbuilder is fine with me.

If Rangi Chase wins the voting, as looks likely, I suggest the remainder goes to a young Bulls player.