Declined to Comment

Is Jeff back?

I’d suggest that given we aren’t involved at either end we’ve probably voted to finish. I don’t know why we don’t just come out and tell what we did, it doesn’t matter either way.

The club have said they’re making a statement on Monday. I’m guessing they don’t want to pre-empt that.


Given the quoted cost for each club to perform weekly testing it’s no surprise League Two has packed it in, suspect it was a near unanimous decision.

Maybe the authorities could have covered those costs in the name of ‘sporting integrity’, but there isn’t enough TV revenue on the line at our level to make it worth their while.

Apart from the play-offs, of course, which is why they’re still on the table…

1 Like

Maybe if the premier league clubs each donated what they spend on one players wages for one week,into a fund to help lower league clubs out,things would look a little brighter.


Agree with your sentiments. The Premier League should pay for the tests out of their vast incomes…if they are allowed to play for their TV income it should be conditional on the money being shared across the 4 divisions to enable the game to thrive again.

Our fans will be the first to hear the clubs ‘comment’ and rightly so.


I’m sure the club will be working through what it means for us. There will be supporter questions such as the issue of potential refunds. There will be player issues around contracts, retained/released type stuff and some relatively mundane but important administrative tasks.

As stated elsewhere, now we know that as a business we will have zero income from football for a while, it would be lovely to break the silence on the rent issue. I won’t be holding my breath.

1 Like

What is there to say that’s not already been said?

If Pomlett has not already approached Bonser for a rent reduction, he’s not the man I thought he was.

I believe it’s the government’s responsibility to test everyone at no cost. Testing should be mandatory before people are allowed to socialize again.
Our government is managing this crisis, they want all the praise went things go right but are nor willing to own it when something goes wrong. Asking citizens to pay for testing is irresponsible and insulting.
I understand the need to get people back to work, but at what cost, especially if the virus with venom!

1 Like

As my pal just said to me Bonser will come along and ‘save the day’ being the superfan that he is. Whilst behind the scenes capitalising the rent arrears and charging us interest on it forever and and a day.

As I posted not long ago, following recent pension legislation, it may not be that simple for our number one fan to give a rent holiday as Suffolk Life hold the lease on behalf of him and his brother.

However, being the kind, generous caring person that he is, there is nothing to stop him making a weekly donation, equal to the rent, to the club. After all, as he says, he is our number one fan.


There is only one thing bonzo excels at being the number one at :smile:

I cannot find anything to support that Pedagogue. My understanding is that as the owner of the land, it is his decision as it is with any other commercial landlord to agree a rent holiday / reduction in rental terms. It is happening all over in the current climate.

The Trust (rather than the club, strangely) released a statement to this effect no so long ago. Either way, as Pedagogue says, it doesn’t stop JB from gifting the club the value of the rent payments during these difficult times.

It doesn’t work that way Simon. The rent is going into the SIPP. When the Bonsers draw down it is taxed at their marginal rate, therefore 40% or 45% would go to HMRC.

What did the trust say?

I’m not claiming to have any knowledge of how the Pension Fund works. I’m simply stating that the Trust has previously (May 2019) released a statement on the same lines as what Pedagogue has said, which is the closest thing we have to an official explanation regarding rent breaks etc:

Thanks for that Simon.
Looking at the date of the post, Bonser was still the owner of the club at that time (?), and therefore had a conflict of interest, whereas now it would be a genuine landlord/tenant agreement.

Surely Curtis Banks (Suffolk Life) have a responsibility to The Bonsers to ensure that they protect their investment. Club goes bust = no rent.

1 Like