Stockwood interview: debt to be cleared early

I thought I heard Jason say "Paul has his eye on a permanent...." before being cut off inadvertently by Matt Dean. So perhaps the Dallas rumour does have some legs, although I suspect that one came almost entirely from the club posting the video of him assisting our winner at the London Stadium.

was there a subtle little dig at JSF in there from Jason? He was talking about the huge increase in wages McAtee will get by joining Luton. Said it was something they couldn't match and it wasn't like in the past when it was only a couple of hundred quid that would make the difference.....

Quoted from aldi_01

May be Fenty needed the money to pay HMRC the cash he owes them?

For information

https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01940180/filing-history

Quoted from DB

Jason said they might have got more but the loan back clinched the deal. It's nice to know that money is no longer the be-all at Town and the future of the team and club are. Building firm foundations I seem to recall Jason said some time ago.

We seem to have struck gold with Jason and Andrew as owners. They make some blunders along the way but their hearts are in the right place.

Or it could be saving a couple of hundred thousand pounds on a replacement.

Quoted from arryarryarry

Or it could be saving a couple of hundred thousand pounds on a replacement.

so it's not  a good bit of business then?

not good that McAtee has got his future sorted out in an amicable manner , and is happy to continue to play for us for the next 9 months?

not good that we've got a good proportion of the fee up front, which will help our cashflow and will have been a factor in being able to pay Fenty off early?

not good that we seem to have got a good start to a relationship with Luton?

not good that we have got a good deal for a player who otherwise would have left for naff all in the summer?


and how do you know when we won't be signing anyone else? what it does mean, with Mcatee staying, is that we won't be held to ransom by a selling club who knows we've got money and are desperate for a replacement. We can take our time , maybe even to the extent of starting conversations with players for next summer.

or perhaps you'd like us to spend £200,000 on a modern day Murray Jones or Jimmy Gilligan, just to fill a number 9 shirt

Quoted from aldi_01

Therein lies the issue…he doesn’t pay HMRC what they’re owed, honest John doesn’t seem to think he has to…

Paying tax is for poor people, rich people have ways around it. Probably why he gave his personal accountant a position on the board for free to rant at fans for daring to question how things are run in what will always go down as the weirdest fans forum ever.

Quoted from forza ivano

so it's not  a good bit of business then?

not good that McAtee has got his future sorted out in an amicable manner , and is happy to continue to play for us for the next 9 months?

not good that we've got a good proportion of the fee up front, which will help our cashflow and will have been a factor in being able to pay Fenty off early?

not good that we seem to have got a good start to a relationship with Luton?

not good that we have got a good deal for a player who otherwise would have left for naff all in the summer?


and how do you know when we won't be signing anyone else? what it does mean, with Mcatee staying, is that we won't be held to ransom by a selling club who knows we've got money and are desperate for a replacement. We can take our time , maybe even to the extent of starting conversations with players for next summer.

or perhaps you'd like us to spend £200,000 on a modern day Murray Jones or Jimmy Gilligan, just to fill a number 9 shirt

Erm.................where did I say "not good" quite the opposite, I would have said it was very good business to sell him but keep him for the year.

As per my point, if he had just left we would have had to spend a significant amount on a replacement. Yes I know we are probably looking for another striker but letting him go would have meant we would likely have had to buy two more goal scorers.

Quoted from arryarryarry

Erm.................where did I say "not good" quite the opposite, I would have said it was very good business to sell him but keep him for the year.

As per my point, if he had just left we would have had to spend a significant amount on a replacement. Yes I know we are probably looking for another striker but letting him go would have meant we would likely have had to buy two more goal scorers.

Not often I agree with you arry but I do on this.

DB said it's nice to know that money isn't the be all, but as you pointed out, it's always about the money and the fact we haven't got to go out and spend it on a replacement in fees and wages is a good thing.

Quoted from arryarryarry

Erm.................where did I say "not good" quite the opposite, I would have said it was very good business to sell him but keep him for the year.

As per my point, if he had just left we would have had to spend a significant amount on a replacement. Yes I know we are probably looking for another striker but letting him go would have meant we would likely have had to buy two more goal scorers.

dunno if it's just me , but your post certainly didn't read like that. More like a dig that we haven't gone out and spent money on a striker

Quoted from forza ivano

was there a subtle little dig at JSF in there from Jason? He was talking about the huge increase in wages McAtee will get by joining Luton. Said it was something they couldn't match and it wasn't like in the past when it was only a couple of hundred quid that would make the difference.....

I also took that comment as a cheeky dig, and raised a glass to Jason, very good 👍