Should you feel the urge, by all means feel free to trawl through my posts. I would highlight that I revealed some months ago the situation regarding the VAT bill (of which their are further revelations) along with the RFL loan (which wasn't a SKY money advance, far from it).

Similarly, I will question the views of those who I believe to be contributing absolute untruths if I deem it necessary and indeed contributes to debate. I don't need a blessing or pathway to make that deduction.

Given that Coulby cannot differentiate between a projection and a budget, or a drawdown and a loan, and seems to know nothing of the mechanics of cash flow management, I certainly look forward, with great trepidation, to his plan.

Pinko, preparing profit and loss accounts is a much simpler ballgame than financial management of a business. Reading between the lines Hood and Bennett have in the circumstances managed the cash flow well. The problem in the last few years is that there has been no reserves (other than players to sell) to deal with any unexpected payments/outflows. As they say, profit is an opinion, cash flow is a fact. Which also points to a degree of inconsistency in Hoods defence: he states that the profit for 2011 was £250K, but if that is so then that should have turned up as cash, and yet the pledge and more sponsorship funds are required, despite that profit. I suspect he is getting that figure into the public domain before history is re-written by the victors. And it also points to some inconsistency somewhere in all the figures, or as Adey calls it, the black hole.

The net result of Coulby and Hoods public debate is as Juliebull says, boring, because if that is the worst that Coulby can rake up, then the bulls must be far better off than a lot of other businesses that quite sensibly get on with dealing with their problems quietly.

Given Coubly's attempt to deflect Peter Hood's rebuttal in the T&A, he mentions that they're only looking at the last 2 years. So sorry Mr Coubly, but you need to go back to when the previous chairman stepped down in order to give a full and frank account of how the BoD under Hood have performed.

As they're not doing that, they are IMO, wasting everyone's time in an attempt to get people onside for when they go "We're all doomed!! Doomed I tell ya!!! Only administration can save us now!!!!!" Which is what has been coming since Caisley manoeuvred himself and his cronies back into power.

Please read the thread and you will see i have posted.

Yes Roofaldo, and its interesting to see that Coulby is much more circumspect in his comments, generalisations that Hood cannot shoot down. I would hope he means the last two years in detail, previous years less detail. And looking at the tone of his comments, what chance now that the club made a profit of £250k in 2011?

GB, just a suggestion, your contributions seem to get obscured by the volume of your mainly argumentum ad hominem postings, balance the two up and perhaps your star will shine a bit brighter.

I speculate Coulby said two years because he ceased to be a director in August 2010. Up to then, of course, he will or should have been fully aware of the situation. He sold most of his shareholding to either Hood or Bennett in 2011 IIRC.

All a matter of public record, incidentally.

Point taken, especially since you tend to make more logical and objective points than some. However, when I read (with increasing frequency) genuine inaccuracies, it is worth addressing, with a little reality. It may not prove popular in this forum colosseum, the rhetoric alone suggests so, but I'll live with that. I've no truc with disagreements or contrary opinion, it's the very essence of a debate; what concerns me as I say, are absolute untruths.

As for Hood and Coulby, stepping off the PR gas, might be a cute way forward; fans have little desire to see the showboating, just action.

Fair comment and perhaps there is a little too much vitriol involved at times; I've no issue with passion, it's the very essence of humanity.

As for who reads these forums, I'm quite sure we would be very surprised if we knew who read them

For me the constant bickering is getting tedious. You mention debating above, for me you don't debate, you attack the person not the argument. Maybe you're a little too fixated with the person posting the points as opposed to the points themselves.

As somebody else mentioned above I also read the posts with interest but they're beggining to verge on personal attacks, I'm all for a passionate debate but lets debate the issues and leave the other stuff out.

Both Adeybull and yourself give your interpretation of the issues, Adeybull is very open with who is and why/how he has some of his knowledge, yourself less so. I think as adults we can read the differing views and make our own minds up who we want to believe if anybody.

Can we skip all the censorious nonsense please? It's a forum which already has moderators and rules. If you find the threads boring or tedious go somewhere else.

If you genuinely feel the rules are being broken, report it. If, as I suspect, a poster you like is being challenged, post your views in support. That's what this is here for!

Who's censoring? I think all that's being asked for is that points are put across without the constant bickering and point scoring.

Thanks for suspecting but as I said I enjoy reading both arguments and don't favour any poster, I've disagreed with Adeybull on here before and probably will again. In terms of posting my views that's what I did and are doing again now...although you'll forgive me for not going somewhere else just because of one thread, if we we all did that I'm sure this Forum would die.