The Hotel End
March 29, 2024, 09:04:56 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Arcade Downloads Gallery Links Staff List Calendar Login Register Chat  

New Trust statement on club finances

Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ... 41   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: New Trust statement on club finances  (Read 35380 times)
0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9314



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Windows User Mobile User Spammer 25 Posts in one day
« Reply #620 on: July 25, 2021, 20:19:08 pm »

Twát. Try saying something relevant.
Haha love it when I hit a raw nerve, your really not very clever are you?
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
singcobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3162



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Level 6 Avatar Linux User
« Reply #621 on: July 25, 2021, 20:20:36 pm »

Haha love it when I hit a raw nerve, your really not very clever are you?

No, you as usual have no answer to a question asked of you. Basically you are a twát. If you had a brain you would be dangerous.
Report Spam   Logged
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9314



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Windows User Mobile User Spammer 25 Posts in one day
« Reply #622 on: July 25, 2021, 20:25:55 pm »

No, you as usual have no answer to a question asked of you. Basically you are a twát. If you had a brain you would be dangerous.
What question asked of me? it’s unlike you to ask questions, you think you know everything better, typical millennial, woke and think the world owes them a living.
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
singcobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3162



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Level 6 Avatar Linux User
« Reply #623 on: July 25, 2021, 20:32:13 pm »

What question asked of me? it’s unlike you to ask questions, you think you know everything better, typical millennial, woke and think the world owes them a living.

You really are a complete twat. All you can do is say that anyone who goes against your opinion is a happy clapper, in bed with KT or hates The Trust. Best thing you can do is hide your head in shame, as the owners of the club have put in 6.8 million to keep it running. How many of the ficticous "other intersted parties" could have done that.
Report Spam   Logged
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9314



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Windows User Mobile User Spammer 25 Posts in one day
« Reply #624 on: July 25, 2021, 20:38:08 pm »

You really are a complete twat. All you can do is say that anyone who goes against your opinion is a happy clapper, in bed with KT or hates The Trust. Best thing you can do is hide your head in shame, as the owners of the club have put in 6.8 million to keep it running. How many of the ficticous "other intersted parties" could have done that.
It strike me that at some point in your life you were starved of oxygen.
Let’s see what happens.
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4640



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Spammer 25 Posts in one day Avatar Search
« Reply #625 on: July 25, 2021, 23:54:00 pm »

It still frustrates me a that people are annoyed about criticism of the Trust being a priority for some. As a body that is representative of the support base and its members the Trust is supposed to be something you can do something about. Therefore if you would like a strong effective Trust of some influence or you feel the Trust is to some extent failing you as a member then you should be able to openly discuss this. Further more in light of the Trusts commitment to transparency, one would expect this to be encouraged. Alternatively kicking the sh1t out of the owners directly on here whilst therapeutic is a fairly pointless exercise. Therefore you could argue that trying to influence the approach of the Trust in theory should be the most realistic way of instigating change. In light of this wouldn’t it make more sense to try and persuade or pressure the Trust than the ownership. At least that way you have a chance, no matter how small of achieving something.
My personal view is that if the Trust had the proven significant majority of the support base backing its decision making, it would be infinitely more powerful than it is now. That is what has motivated any criticism I have levelled at the Trust in the past. As a member this is both my right and should in theory be encouraged. Frankly any attempt to suppress opinion or criticise this activity is both not best practice and slightly confusing IMO. It’s also a bit sinister at times and definitely counterproductive. To repeat, the Trust is only likely to achieve anything of worth with the owners if it obtains the proven majority support of its membership and the wider support base. My view is that it’s focus in the first instance should be to get it, also IMO obviously. In summary concentrate on what you can change and ignore what you can’t. I would suggest this is why some focus more on the Trust than the ownership. Hope this clears up any confusion or mystery attached to this conundrum for some?
« Last Edit: July 26, 2021, 00:24:33 am by Melbourne Cobbler » Report Spam   Logged

Not a real supporter but unelected chair of the Northampton Town Honorary Supporters Club. (Please note: any opinions given may not necessarily be shared by proper supporters. In incidents of conflict the views of real supporters shall take precedence).
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4640



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Spammer 25 Posts in one day Avatar Search
« Reply #626 on: July 26, 2021, 00:22:45 am »

Surely 6.8 million in debt is exactly how NOT to run a business. This can only end badly.
Depends on a few things Soggy, the source and consequence of the debt followed by the time frame and amount of return on investment. Dependant on the answers it might be exactly how to run it and may end very well. The first 2 are not an issue, the third is a concern and the fourth is unknown from where I’m sitting. But then access to the full picture is limited and I am a bit dim so can you elaborate on your thoughts please?
« Last Edit: July 26, 2021, 06:12:51 am by Melbourne Cobbler » Report Spam   Logged

Not a real supporter but unelected chair of the Northampton Town Honorary Supporters Club. (Please note: any opinions given may not necessarily be shared by proper supporters. In incidents of conflict the views of real supporters shall take precedence).
guest3338
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #627 on: July 26, 2021, 08:13:07 am »

Depends on a few things Soggy, the source and consequence of the debt followed by the time frame and amount of return on investment. Dependant on the answers it might be exactly how to run it and may end very well. The first 2 are not an issue, the third is a concern and the fourth is unknown from where I’m sitting. But then access to the full picture is limited and I am a bit dim so can you elaborate on your thoughts please?
Can you explain to me why the consequence of the (any) debt is not an issue Melbourne in the business sense because I  struggle with this.
My brain stretches as far as understanding that if the club had no debt to speak of having been run prudently in the knowledge that it has no real assets to speak of there would likely be suitors out there willing to buy it off the current owners at a realistic price and that these suitors could range from anyone between a local estate agent and his mates to Sheikh Mansour, but because the current owners have run up a debt of 6 million on day to day costs when it was demonstrated by Cardoza that this need not be the case and that this debt to the current owners needs to be repaid to them before they are willing to sell even the Sheikh might think twice.
How can building up a debt in the name of day to day running costs which purchases nothing permanent be exactly how to run anything, ever? I only understand the business practice that involves speculating to accumulate by building something that has a permanency and a guaranteed return, no matter how small. I this case that would be stuff like the infrastructure of stands and boxes etc.
If you wanted to hold the council, the people of Northampton, the fans, and anyone else interested in the welfare of the club to ransom in the pursuit of a land deal which would make you millions richer, i do however absolutely understand the logic in building up an apparent massively unsustainable debt that can get passed off as 'necessary for running costs' in order to win a very high stakes game of poker. The slight of hand that some seem to be suggesting now being that actually no real personal debt has been accrued by the owners.
How to get from a promise of 4 million ring-fenced to complete the stand with no attaching clauses to where we are now. Is this what some people are having trouble with, I wonder?
Report Spam   Logged
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4640



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Spammer 25 Posts in one day Avatar Search
« Reply #628 on: July 26, 2021, 08:38:34 am »

Can you explain to me why the consequence of the (any) debt is not an issue Melbourne in the business sense because I  struggle with this.
My brain stretches as far as understanding that if the club had no debt to speak of having been run prudently in the knowledge that it has no real assets to speak of there would likely be suitors out there willing to buy it off the current owners at a realistic price and that these suitors could range from anyone between a local estate agent and his mates to Sheikh Mansour, but because the current owners have run up a debt of 6 million on day to day costs when it was demonstrated by Cardoza that this need not be the case and that this debt to the current owners needs to be repaid to them before they are willing to sell even the Sheikh might think twice.
How can building up a debt in the name of day to day running costs which purchases nothing permanent be exactly how to run anything, ever? I only understand the business practice that involves speculating to accumulate by building something that has a permanency and a guaranteed return, no matter how small. I this case that would be stuff like the infrastructure of stands and boxes etc.
If you wanted to hold the council, the people of Northampton, the fans, and anyone else interested in the welfare of the club to ransom in the pursuit of a land deal which would make you millions richer, i do however absolutely understand the logic in building up an apparent massively unsustainable debt that can get passed off as 'necessary for running costs' in order to win a very high stakes game of poker. The slight of hand that some seem to be suggesting now being that actually no real personal debt has been accrued by the owners.
How to get from a promise of 4 million ring-fenced to complete the stand with no attaching clauses to where we are now. Is this what some people are having trouble with, I wonder?

As an example CJ when we started our business over here I put in my own money in the form of a loan. If the business does well I get my money back. If it doesn’t I’ve done my money and that’s it. If I borrow the money from a bank, they can pull the plug if they feel it’s appropriate and I have little control over that. I would have also probably have put up collateral against the loan so the bank will use that to recoup its money. Therefore under a directors loan you retain full control over what’s going on with the finance of that loan, when getting a loan from an institution you hand an element of control over to them where they get to choose when to pull the plug and what assets to sell as a result often at significant consequence. Also if you are putting up assets from another business as security and that goes belly up they may pull the plug on the business that used the loan even though that may be doing well. Often directors loans are nothing more than a g@mb1e that you get your money back with no mechanism for recovering your money if things go wrong, if that makes sense?
« Last Edit: July 26, 2021, 08:40:10 am by Melbourne Cobbler » Report Spam   Logged

Not a real supporter but unelected chair of the Northampton Town Honorary Supporters Club. (Please note: any opinions given may not necessarily be shared by proper supporters. In incidents of conflict the views of real supporters shall take precedence).
guest3359
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #629 on: July 26, 2021, 08:40:38 am »

You seem to spend a whole lot of time and energy criticising the Trust and its supporters on this site but remarkably little time criticising the club's owners.  The owners are the story and it's quite a story.

If you had seen proof of payment what difference would it make to your view? Not a lot I suggest. I am sure you will continue with your Trust bashing. You are a sad case.

Digging this out from a few days ago and not directed at Upton Way especially but this for me lies at the heart of the problem, and I'm repeating myself again.
Without full evidence its going to be open to interpretation and opinion.
IF the Trust had full evidence of wrongdoing they should have presented it in full, not to the fans but to the relevant authorities. The fact they haven't implies two things....
1. They don't have any evidence of wrong doing
2. They just don't like the way the owners have conducted their business.

I've only seen from the Trust maybe about a third of the story. They received £6m (cant remember the exact figure) for selling the shares. What I haven't seen, and the bit they is open to interpretation is following the breakdown how much profit, or loss, did our owners make. Because it sure as sh1t isnt £6m (in my opinion, see interpretation). So what is it...?
How much did they pay in legal fees when it broke down to ensure the rebuy of shares we legitimate. What was the agreed buy back rate, what taxes, fees, bank rates did they incur? etc etc
Report Spam   Logged
claretparrot
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 598


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Combination Topic Starter
« Reply #630 on: July 26, 2021, 08:49:32 am »

Can you explain to me why the consequence of the (any) debt is not an issue Melbourne in the business sense because I  struggle with this.
My brain stretches as far as understanding that if the club had no debt to speak of having been run prudently in the knowledge that it has no real assets to speak of there would likely be suitors out there willing to buy it off the current owners at a realistic price and that these suitors could range from anyone between a local estate agent and his mates to Sheikh Mansour, but because the current owners have run up a debt of 6 million on day to day costs when it was demonstrated by Cardoza that this need not be the case and that this debt to the current owners needs to be repaid to them before they are willing to sell even the Sheikh might think twice.
How can building up a debt in the name of day to day running costs which purchases nothing permanent be exactly how to run anything, ever? I only understand the business practice that involves speculating to accumulate by building something that has a permanency and a guaranteed return, no matter how small. I this case that would be stuff like the infrastructure of stands and boxes etc.
If you wanted to hold the council, the people of Northampton, the fans, and anyone else interested in the welfare of the club to ransom in the pursuit of a land deal which would make you millions richer, i do however absolutely understand the logic in building up an apparent massively unsustainable debt that can get passed off as 'necessary for running costs' in order to win a very high stakes game of poker. The slight of hand that some seem to be suggesting now being that actually no real personal debt has been accrued by the owners.
How to get from a promise of 4 million ring-fenced to complete the stand with no attaching clauses to where we are now. Is this what some people are having trouble with, I wonder?


It's a fair (if longwinded  Wink) challenge, CJ.

To frame it another way, though... do you think the club could have shaved, on average, close to £1m per year off its cash outflows and still be where it is now? I don't claim to know the answer, but I do know that's a big old gap to bridge with efficiency savings.

Edit: it is worth noting that the club was in significant debt during the Cardoza era, including before the council loan was drawn down. In fact, at June 2012 the net liabilities were c.£7.6m so greater than the latest set of accounts. Cardoza used to talk about getting close to breaking even, but the club weren't publicly issuing a P&L for most (or all, cba to check!) of his time at the helm.
« Last Edit: July 26, 2021, 08:57:58 am by claretparrot » Report Spam   Logged
claretparrot
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 598


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Combination Topic Starter
« Reply #631 on: July 26, 2021, 08:52:07 am »

If you had seen proof of payment what difference would it make to your view? Not a lot I suggest. I am sure you will continue with your Trust bashing. You are a sad case.

I can only speak for myself (although I don't think I'm alone), but it would make a very significant difference.
Report Spam   Logged
singcobb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3162



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Level 6 Avatar Linux User
« Reply #632 on: July 26, 2021, 09:29:40 am »

It strike me that at some point in your life you were starved of oxygen.
Let’s see what happens.

Yet again complete failure to answer a question. Thank you for proving my statement about you as correct.
Report Spam   Logged
Melbourne Cobbler
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 4640



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Spammer 25 Posts in one day Avatar Search
« Reply #633 on: July 26, 2021, 09:40:19 am »

It's a fair (if longwinded  Wink) challenge, CJ.

To frame it another way, though... do you think the club could have shaved, on average, close to £1m per year off its cash outflows and still be where it is now? I don't claim to know the answer, but I do know that's a big old gap to bridge with efficiency savings.

Edit: it is worth noting that the club was in significant debt during the Cardoza era, including before the council loan was drawn down. In fact, at June 2012 the net liabilities were c.£7.6m so greater than the latest set of accounts. Cardoza used to talk about getting close to breaking even, but the club weren't publicly issuing a P&L for most (or all, cba to check!) of his time at the helm.
I would also ask what the average ratio of losses to turnover there is for Div 1/2 clubs to truly evaluate if the owners are over/under performing in terms of their financial management. All I am seeing is subjective opinion at the moment. Any one want to have a crack?
Report Spam   Logged

Not a real supporter but unelected chair of the Northampton Town Honorary Supporters Club. (Please note: any opinions given may not necessarily be shared by proper supporters. In incidents of conflict the views of real supporters shall take precedence).
Carton Lid
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1819


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Third year Anniversary Level 5 Apple User
« Reply #634 on: July 26, 2021, 11:03:31 am »

MC Hammer seems to be ITK so maybe he could answer the questions I posted a few days ago but got no reply. They are as follows:

 Question 1, have KT, DB or NTFC denied that what the Trust said about the Chinese money was true ?
 Question 2, the Trust have took a lot of stick for declining a Zoom meeting, which I personally think was a mistake, but KT has got off scot free for declining to provide written answers, aren't his actions exactly the same ? At least the Trust declined his offer, he didn't even reply to the Trust. What are people's opinion on this ?
 Question 3, Re the East Stand, NTFC said on 25th June 2021 "We are positive about the direction we are heading and felt confident enough that a few months ago we were able to commission these conceptual images to show both the council, supporters and stakeholders what we are trying to achieve with the East Stand". It is a know fact that the plans displayed at the Open Evening are over 5 years old, so isn't that statement a little misleading ?
 Question 4, Re the "Hatchet job" alleged in the leaked letter , isn't it likely that these papers that ran the story, got in touch with the Trust for a comment on the story, rather than the Trust ringing them and asking them to run the story ? This is the Mail and the Athletic we are talking about, not the Chron, where, I've heard that NTFC have been known to mention withdrawal of co-operation if some stories are run.
Report Spam   Logged
BackOfTheNet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5885


View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Search Level 6 Combination
« Reply #635 on: July 26, 2021, 11:15:55 am »

I saw this the other day but bit my tongue because I knew I'd be accused of leaping to defend KT's honour again, but it's this sort of post that irks me a bit. So, as it's been repeated...

MC Hammer seems to be ITK so maybe he could answer the questions I posted a few days ago but got no reply. They are as follows:

 Question 1, have KT, DB or NTFC denied that what the Trust said about the Chinese money was true ?
No. But then nor have the Trust denied that they went to the press with bad intent. It cuts both ways, but sometimes it's better to say nothing than get involved in a petty spat.
 Question 2, the Trust have took a lot of stick for declining a Zoom meeting, which I personally think was a mistake, but KT has got off scot free for declining to provide written answers, aren't his actions exactly the same ? At least the Trust declined his offer, he didn't even reply to the Trust. What are people's opinion on this ?
Presumably he did reply to the Trust, or how else did he offer the Zoom meeting that they refused?
 Question 3, Re the East Stand, NTFC said on 25th June 2021 "We are positive about the direction we are heading and felt confident enough that a few months ago we were able to commission these conceptual images to show both the council, supporters and stakeholders what we are trying to achieve with the East Stand". It is a know fact that the plans displayed at the Open Evening are over 5 years old, so isn't that statement a little misleading ?
No idea. Do we definitely "know" they are over 5 years old? That's a genuine question by the way, I haven't seen where that has been proven beyond the odd person saying they look the same as ones that other people saw years ago.
 Question 4, Re the "Hatchet job" alleged in the leaked letter , isn't it likely that these papers that ran the story, got in touch with the Trust for a comment on the story, rather than the Trust ringing them and asking them to run the story ? This is the Mail and the Athletic we are talking about, not the Chron, where, I've heard that NTFC have been known to mention withdrawal of co-operation if some stories are run.
Utter supposition.
Report Spam   Logged

The Hotelend Grand National* Sweepstake Champion 2020
guest3338
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #636 on: July 26, 2021, 11:30:01 am »

As an example CJ when we started our business over here I put in my own money in the form of a loan. If the business does well I get my money back. If it doesn’t I’ve done my money and that’s it. If I borrow the money from a bank, they can pull the plug if they feel it’s appropriate and I have little control over that. I would have also probably have put up collateral against the loan so the bank will use that to recoup its money. Therefore under a directors loan you retain full control over what’s going on with the finance of that loan, when getting a loan from an institution you hand an element of control over to them where they get to choose when to pull the plug and what assets to sell as a result often at significant consequence. Also if you are putting up assets from another business as security and that goes belly up they may pull the plug on the business that used the loan even though that may be doing well. Often directors loans are nothing more than a g@mb1e that you get your money back with no mechanism for recovering your money if things go wrong, if that makes sense?
Thanks Melbourne, I do understand the mechanisms you describe but that wasn't really my point.
Report Spam   Logged
guest168
Guest

Badges: (View All)
« Reply #637 on: July 26, 2021, 11:41:02 am »

Hi Melly, Just had a look and it's a mine field. Some clubs don't issue P&L's, most don't list fixed assets in the millions, like we do. Some have had cup runs or players sales to turn losses to profits etc

Accounts only show a small piece of the picture, it is there if you look hard enough but you also need to look at the business itself, what the trend is, what's coming up around the corner etc.

Generally we all know that most football clubs are badly run and are either:

1. the plaything of their owners, who eventually write off their losses and sail off into the sunset.  - usually for PR purposes, to raise their or their company profile
2. there as they love the club / community,
3. because they want to control the assets within the football club (usually land), and the higher you go up the leagues the more money you lose. (perhaps why we are in L2  Grin)

The worse one for me is the 3. They are there just for their own benefit.  With all honesty, which one are our owners?

Supporters of 1 & 2 can and will go through periods of success and heartache but at least something is happening

The issue for me has always been the potential of NTFC, big catchment area, the history, lack of big, big clubs nearby, central location within the country, 25 acres of land, - all more than enough to support a modest Championship club. At least with 1 & 2 there is a chance this might happen.

Report Spam   Logged
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9314



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Windows User Mobile User Spammer 25 Posts in one day
« Reply #638 on: July 26, 2021, 11:44:04 am »

Yet again complete failure to answer a question. Thank you for proving my statement about you as correct.
Keep calling me a twàt says a whole lot more about you than me pal.
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
Manwork04
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9314



View Profile
Badges: (View All)
Windows User Mobile User Spammer 25 Posts in one day
« Reply #639 on: July 26, 2021, 11:44:44 am »

Digging this out from a few days ago and not directed at Upton Way especially but this for me lies at the heart of the problem, and I'm repeating myself again.
Without full evidence its going to be open to interpretation and opinion.
IF the Trust had full evidence of wrongdoing they should have presented it in full, not to the fans but to the relevant authorities. The fact they haven't implies two things....
1. They don't have any evidence of wrong doing
2. They just don't like the way the owners have conducted their business.

I've only seen from the Trust maybe about a third of the story. They received £6m (cant remember the exact figure) for selling the shares. What I haven't seen, and the bit they is open to interpretation is following the breakdown how much profit, or loss, did our owners make. Because it sure as sh1t isnt £6m (in my opinion, see interpretation). So what is it...?
How much did they pay in legal fees when it broke down to ensure the rebuy of shares we legitimate. What was the agreed buy back rate, what taxes, fees, bank rates did they incur? etc etc
How do you know that they haven’t?
Report Spam   Logged

Rule Britannia
Pages: 1 ... 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 [32] 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 ... 41   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Parental guidance is urged as this messageboard may not be suitable for all persons especially those under the age of 16 as the forums may contain words, phrases and expressions not considered appropriate for a younger audience so please express caution. If any posts in the forums offend you, please let us know and we will look at them and if we agree with your complaint, we will remove them. You are personally responsible and potentially liable for the contents of your posting and may be sued should your posting contain content of a defamatory or other illegal nature. Every message posted leaves a traceable IP number. We check the forums at various times of the day and remove offending posts. Other supporters are welcome but abusive or silly posts will be removed and the offenders potentially barred from future access to the site. We advise that you never reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example: telephone number, home address or email address), and please do not include postal addresses of any kind. This messageboard is not endorsed or in any way affiliated with Northampton Town FC. All postings on this board become copyright of The Hotel End & may not be reproduced without the permission of the board administrator. By signing up to this message board you agree to this. The Hotel End cannot be held liable for the actions or postings of its members. The Hotel End reserve the right to edit, delete, move or close any thread for any reason. The Hotel End may disclose user information to government authorities at their discretion or when required by law. The Hotel End may also disclose user information when The Hotel End has reason to believe that someone is causing injury to or interference with its rights or property, other The Hotel End users, or anyone else that could be harmed by such activities. By registering for The Hotel End, you agree to indemnify The Hotel End its representatives, and agents, and hold them harmless from any and all claims (including claims for legal fees) which may arise from your participation on the The Hotel End. You also agree that The Hotel End is not responsible for the materials posted by users of The Hotel End. In addition, you grant The Hotel End and its affiliates, worldwide, royalty-free perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display any message or content posted on The Hotel End and/or e-mail sent by you to The Hotel End (in whole or in part). The Hotel End reserves the right to make the rules up as it goes along. Thank you - The Hotel End I love Quidco
Bookmark this site!
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Privacy Policy