Switch it off and lets watch the test card

Time to let this one rest now. Lets hope lessons have been learned and procedures and the correct people are being put in place to ensure there is no repeat. Move on and get behind them, the future is still bright!

I do understand that, and I feel the same way.
My point is simply that the emotional stake is only for you not the club.

How I interpret a stake is that you have something invested in the club but also something that has value to the club.
There is no value to the club apart from attracting others with you.

Same with Bren2k point about charity. There is a different level of scrutiny in the charitable organisation because they gain by being a charity, financially and legally. The rules are different if you prove yourself to be a charity so you have extra power as if you prove any wrong doing you have the government and especially the tax man on your side. For a sporting club,if it is run badly you only have a customer's power. You can withdraw your custom and of course if everybody did it you would have implied power to change things but it is only implied. If the sporting club decided they didn't like it they could just run the club into the ground and end it all. A charity can't do that. The level of scrutiny is different and the effect of bad management is felt further.

Like I said, I understand what you are saying and I do feel the same way.
What I disagree with (and it appears I am on my own) is that supporters feel they have more power because they are stakeholders but I feel they are simply customers with a strong opinion about the company they are purchasing from. Of course all sporting clubs are like this and they are very different to other businesses but I would say they are closer to an old cinema or hotel that people love. People have strong opinions but unless you buy it, you have no power just fond memories.
A supporters trust, with a real role on the board is the only supporter power really.

Obviously Bren if you have done a thesis on this you have thought about this much more deeply than I have. Its just my opinion but I'm open to changing it. I just don't quite see it the same way you do.

Just to close on this I think the resons and explanation on YR last night were clear as to why this petition was brought by HMRC and also the process of bringing a petition

What was said?

I think you're better off sticking your stake next to a tree in your garden!

No, not that one.....

Its like beating beating some think thats already dead can we move on and lock this topic...

In brief, the club made a PAYE payment for a given month for what they believed was the due amount. However, a few months later, HMRC returned asking for a different amount, and explaining that the club had not paid what was owed in that specific month. At this point the club were completely unaware of the error, immediately cleared the outstanding amount and the matter was closed. Unfortunately, HMRC said that because of the way these matters work, by default it would have to clear their lawyers in the form of a winding up petition, and when it did that would be the end of it. The club were also made aware that because this was very much a none event, it may well be the case that the details would not enter the public realm, hence the reason why they didn't put out a statement prior to its release. Because they were as surprised as anyone that it had been released.

In the time between the club paying the original amount and being told that they had underpaid, there had been regular monthly meetings with HMRC (which are in place as a result of our past) of which nothing was said regarding this issue. The club had no notification of this underpayment until HMRC appeared on the doorstep.

As a result of this, and to avoid it ever happening again, Elston added that whenever the club now make a payment to HMRC, they follow it up with an email the day after to ensure that the required amount has been paid. He also explained that the club have no outstanding debts.

Now, if James Elston had come out and said that last Saturday we would not now have a 25 page thread on this matter loaded with conspiracy theory and conjecture. The details were not particularly sensitive, it appears a very straight forward error, and one which seems to be the fault of HMRC. It is very much as Elston and Glover stated last Friday, paid and a none issue.

I wouldn't be too sure about that, it was like Christmas morning for some when the new 'broke'.

I'm not entirely sure what is so sensitive about any of that explanation.

At least we now know why the club didn't forewarn supporters of the issue.

Summed up nicely in the one paragraph. Doesn't make sense as to how this was too sensitive that they could tell the ST but no-one else early in the week, but then go on a radio station available worldwide on the internet to explain it.

Perhaps the sensitive bit has not been mentioned.

Can we now leave this and move on. We have a bright future, exciting things are happening on and off the field, lets look forward and put this to bed once and for all.

Why even bother with the word "perhaps"? Comments like this make you as big a culprit of anyone on this thread for muck stirring. Dropping hints like this in one breathe, then the next telling people to move on is hypocritical in the extreme.

I tend to agree if what was said last night had been said a week ago, would have potentially nipped this in the bud.

Not seen any further comment from AdeyBull or BigAlf so presume they don't have any plausible explanation as to why what JE has said is not correct, cos I'm sure we would have heard from them by now