Been to the last two of these and asked questions both times but not going tonight as you just get politician's answers and anything talked about isn't acted upon anyway. Plus there'll be unimportant questions (as above) about stuff like someone who didn't get a free hot chocolate last night.
1) Have we got a new lady (American) in a senior role and what is that role? 2) Are we becoming Americanised? * *q2 is tongue in cheek
Can't make it as I'm off to the theatre. If I had been going I'd have been keen to ask around the club finances. Something along the lines of. 'It was explained that further equity was put into the club with the share offerings to steady the ship. What financial position have the current board got to, especially given the last transfer window activity. Are there likely to be more share offerings to raise capital in the future or are we back on an evenish keel? Taking all that intoo consideration, do we have a decent transfer warchest for the Jan transfer window?' Maybe someone could kindly ask. Thanks in advance if so.
What do those that make the relevant decisions feel we get out of the loan market? We seem to do OK with where we place our loanees, but is that down to our ability or the loaning clubs ability to spot our raw, young talent? We don't seem to do as well with the players we bring in. Are Slonina and Craig really that far superior to what we already have (or had, in the case of Smith) at the club, that it was worth jeopardising our own youngsters progression. Is there a clause that says either must play a % of games, can either be sent back early?
Reads like absolute b0llocks to me. The kinda thing someone just makes up using photoshop. Either that, or it's a case of giving a junior role a ridiculously important sounding title, which is quite common in Corporateland...and Wetherspoons.