Mild

So no one wants to tell us about the super dooper share offer.

No wakey poster wants to comment on the club insisting that no one will go during this season and now 4/5 have gone with no replacements.

Some poor souls want to pretend getting rid of so many players with a third of the season to go is 'normal'.

never mind

Still obsessed I see.
When we know any info regarding the share offer we will be sure to tell you, however we havent been informed of anything yet, simply put (for your obsessed self) we don't have any info from the club about it yet.

Everything else has been explained to you.

Carry on with your sad obsession.

Well, you'd have to assume take-up hasn't been that high, and also assume the reason is £100 is a lot of money to just 'throw away' on shares in a company which is unlikely to ever pay dividends etc. It's a vanity thing, nothing more, and I guess the price was too high for many. (I got mine when the minimum to purchase was £25 - back end of the 2001 season....)

If you think a few posts every blue moon is an obssession you are clearly uneducated.

Very funny that a club announce 'no player movments' and now there have been loads.e

never mind

This seems the most likely explanation.

The most likely explanation of several players out / non in as we get to the business end of the season is desperate cost cutting. I do not recall a club with play off aspirations releasing so many players. Including a 'hasty' transfer to Leeds!

Several posters have pointed out that the players that have moved on/gone on loan were either not in the first team or were not playing well and hadn't for some time re Rooney. If we were that financially strapped and had been hawking all our players round SL, as I believe you claimed god knows how many pages ago, then wouldn't we be off loading high earners for whom we could claim at least a half decent fee? Maybe the credit crunch is biting a bit at wakey and the club is cost cutting but if it is then it seems to be doing it in a sensible way which is not affecting the first team or our youth set up in anyway.

As to the share issue I said from the start that the minimum purchase of £100 would put many off and I think that has turned out to be true. You would assume that it hasn't done very well as there has been no statement from the club. That said I hardly think this is a sign that we are in the financial mire.

Quote ="Marsdengiant"This seems the most likely explanation. The most likely explanation of several players out / non in as we get to the business end of the season is desperate cost cutting. I do not recall a club with play off aspirations releasing so many players. Including a 'hasty' transfer to Leeds!'" maybe this could help , enjoy as this is the only poster that really gives a damn profile.php?mo ... le&u=41007

Quote ="Marsdengiant"This seems the most likely explanation. The most likely explanation of several players out / non in as we get to the business end of the season is desperate cost cutting. I do not recall a club with play off aspirations releasing so many players. Including a 'hasty' transfer to Leeds!'" maybe this could help , enjoy as this is the only poster that really gives a damn profile.php?mo ... le&u=41007

I might be wrong, but I can't remember the club ever announcing the fact where not going to let any players go, during the season??

dont confuse it with numbers like 30 , it only has two hands for the 10 count.

Marsden is the oracle of all that is trinity

Marsden still obsessed I see.

Is this really interesting enough to anyone other then a disturbingly obsessed Huddersfield fan to warrant it still been on the VT?

Some of you appear a tad perturbed.

Many at the 'Hear no evil' stadium get agitated when the shares offer is questioned. Others are oblivious to how unusual it is to release so many players at the business end of the season - maybe they are very new to RL?

If fans want to ignore JKs original comments or Ted's in the WE...so be it. If you want to pretend that the dramatic fall in gates is not influencing finances...go ahead. You can also ignore the naming rights and share sales schemes. You can pretend that players were not touted around - but no one would pay silly transfer fees. Likewise you can ignore the fact that said players will move on despite wakey offering them big bucks to stay (now that others have been shifted).

The need for the uneducated to characterise a few posts as obsessive is disappointing, but no surprise.

So that's a no then

You don't like Wakey much do you, MG?

Not perturbed, just don’t understand how something not relevant to the club they claim to support could mater so much to someone so much.

I don’t see any signs of financial dimes in any of the ‘facts’ you point out.

You have managed to ignore all replies to your last post and then just repeated the same thing you've been repeating for what seems like forever, well done.

Obsessed. You do realise you are making yourself appear to be some sort of 'Loony tune' don't you?

Getting back to the point and thus ignoring the cow from Hudderfield I think what Kear meant is obvious to all but the brain dead and those looking to fabricate an issue.

For now we have the financial stability to remain as we are, a top eight club in reasonable condition but IMO not able to push to the next level.

Should we get the stadium we will be in a stronger position financially with a guaranteed future in SL.

You know the obvious advantages that come with a new stadium - not rocket science is it.

Do your own research sweetie.

Am I? Oh dear. Back to topic?

Nicely put Vasty. I did s at the 'cow from Huddersfield' bit.

You just missed the obsessed part.

Back to topic.

Players being off loaded during the season and not replaced will certainly help support the finances. Players the club wanted to stay are off. apparently this is a good sign.



If gates are substantially down when things are going well on the field then any deterioration in performance in 2010 could have dire repurcussions. Maybe it will all be sunny.



Also investing in a stadium for a team whose gates fall when they do well is questionable. maybe investors find falling gates attractive