This may sound stupid but does anyone other than the club earn anything from the wildcat dolls appearances etc?

Despite how potentially damaging i know supporters walking away from the club is, i feel that keeping JE in a job is equally as disastrous.

Why are the Dolls in such sharp focus? I understood that their community work was self-financing and it can't be denied that they bring a lot of young people and their families into contact with the club.



I think there are probably bigger fish to fry, don't you?

What if its the same fish?

I agree. There may be reason for cost cutting at this level one day but this isn't where the issue is.

Living the dream!!

As I said earlier, change is a process - it's even more disastrous to start recklessly sacking people and end up with a hefty award against you for unfair dismissal - look at Shudds for a salutary tale about that kind of behaviour.



I think people need to cool their jets a bit and give MC time to get his ducks in a row; as it stands, the individual in question has been removed from the front line; I suspect that will be phase 1 of operation clear-out.

That isnt my point, i am not suggesting that they should be cut, that would be awful!!







I am asking is the wildcat dolls (brand) not part of the club and therefore do all monies for events, apearances etc all benefit the club individually or are they a private entity owned by an individual or individuals tied to the club in any other capacity? that is all.

Ok, good clarification.

Of course I personally don't know....

We've ben going through change for the last three years and look how we've ended up; back to square 1.

Without being critical of MC (i don't envy his task at all, and wish him the best) i here a lot of people raising concerns over JE still being involved in the club at any level.

BTW Operation 1 sounds like a potential claim for constructive dismissal, which is also not good.

ok would the owners care to offer us a sweetner to vacate early to enable them to start buiding and we could play our home games at oakwell next season?.

(Hatfield Tiger done a nice job clarifying Under capitalisation

)



Also I agree with your view on Elston.





However The shudds salutary tale will cost them round about the same amount as our undercapitalisation sum.

Ken Davy didn't even blink when he took that blow and yet a similar amount could take us under. This shows that

SL is really a financial competition thinly disguised as a sporting contest. Sadly if you don't have the assets there is

no point in taking part.

Don't know. If he had to operate a turnstile on match day I am sure a lot of folk would pay to go through it

Sadly, all pro sport is about the size of the owners wallet (slightly off-set by crowd numbers & merchandise sales etc)