| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" 22:42 - Dec 14 with 28714 views | Chiswickjack4 |
Another home game, another banner in the East Stand with a message to the Americans.
I very much hope the club take their time on deciding on new/additional investment.
The value of our club is going to go through the roof once the new TV deal is announced in March... |  | | |  |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 11:00 - Dec 16 with 1654 views | Dewi1jack |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 08:49 - Dec 15 by shandyjack |
These banners are embarrassing and they don't speak for every fan |
Did you explain to the person(s) who had the banner you found it embarrassing?
Did you ask them why they are flying the banner?
Are you explaining to others who you were with, the possible outcome of a share sale to our club?
Or are you burying your head in the sand, hoping that the worst feared outcomes won't happen?
I don't think anyone would begrudge any of our board of directors, ensuring the future monetary well being of their families. But...
let's have some honesty from them, because whoever sells their shares is going to lose all respect from an awful lot of fans if the feeling is they've sold the club down the river.
As others have said, our lower league cousins, who are still waiting for Uncle Vinny to wipe out OVER £100 MILLION OF DEBT,are apathetic about fighting for their club.
They let everything happen without a fight, debt, colour changes, club being a joke etc. Now they're trying to organise another demonstration- bit late IMHO
Portsmouth, Blackburn and a quite a few others let takeovers happen as well. I don't fancy our club being like any of them.
If very few people know this may happen/ be happening here, then there could be trouble ahead, possibly worse than the Petty/ Silver Shield era- there's certainly a helluva lot more money to be made by 'investors'/ share holders/ sharks or whatever you want to call them.
Inoffensive banners seem a pretty good way of trying to get a message through to many. |  |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| (No subject) on 11:07 - Dec 16 with 1641 views | budegan |
| (No subject) on 10:47 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
There is only one way; the club could borrow money on whatever terms they can get from ordinary commercial sources, and buy back the shares belonging to those that want out.
However, by the sounds of things that is at least 30% of the shares, and at a value of £100million for 100% of the club would require borrowing of a cool £30million.
How many in favour of that? |
Ah, perhaps naively I presumed that the shareholders in question were only looking for a "few" million, not figures of that scale! So not as straightforward as I'd imagined.
Thanks for the clear and quick response though. |  | | |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 11:08 - Dec 16 with 1639 views | JackSomething |
At the moment, a lot of what we're talking about is conjecture. I'm assuming that when/if an offer is formally made and presented to the Trust, we won't have a particularly long time to consider it, so any action on our part would need to be organised quickly.
I'm curious that if a march was organised in protest at the proposed deal, how many of our fans would attend? Our fanbase has obviously swelled significantly since the last time a similar event was organised, but the pessimistic side of me says that people are far more likely to get involved when the situation is obviously dire (as it was then). Now I get the feeling that with us sitting comfortably in the Premier League, the more 'casual' fans will wonder what all the fuss is about.
I hope I'm wrong of course. Even if I'm right, I'm optimistic that we have a strong core of fans who'd be out there in a heartbeat. |  |
| You know, Hobbes, some days even my lucky rocket ship underpants don't help. |
| |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 11:09 - Dec 16 with 1636 views | Uxbridge |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 08:59 - Dec 16 by Phil_S |
Is it the house? |
Yes. Yes it is. Anyway, must dash. Off to the shops to buy some food and let Sainsbury's give me £20 on top. |  |
| |
| (No subject) on 11:20 - Dec 16 with 1605 views | Shaky |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 11:00 - Dec 16 by Dewi1jack |
Did you explain to the person(s) who had the banner you found it embarrassing?
Did you ask them why they are flying the banner?
Are you explaining to others who you were with, the possible outcome of a share sale to our club?
Or are you burying your head in the sand, hoping that the worst feared outcomes won't happen?
I don't think anyone would begrudge any of our board of directors, ensuring the future monetary well being of their families. But...
let's have some honesty from them, because whoever sells their shares is going to lose all respect from an awful lot of fans if the feeling is they've sold the club down the river.
As others have said, our lower league cousins, who are still waiting for Uncle Vinny to wipe out OVER £100 MILLION OF DEBT,are apathetic about fighting for their club.
They let everything happen without a fight, debt, colour changes, club being a joke etc. Now they're trying to organise another demonstration- bit late IMHO
Portsmouth, Blackburn and a quite a few others let takeovers happen as well. I don't fancy our club being like any of them.
If very few people know this may happen/ be happening here, then there could be trouble ahead, possibly worse than the Petty/ Silver Shield era- there's certainly a helluva lot more money to be made by 'investors'/ share holders/ sharks or whatever you want to call them.
Inoffensive banners seem a pretty good way of trying to get a message through to many. |
The reality is there is a spectrum of possible outcomes resulting from the potential investment ranging from the truly dismal to something potentially even better than the current situation.
If the Trust play their cards right they can end up in a position of genuine influence, whereas many would argue that they are today weak, marginalised and ineffectual in terms of wielding real influence on the club's decisions.
That could all change and the Trust and by extension the voice of the fans could become significantly more important.
And to be clear I am not saying that is going to happen, merely that is is certainly a possibility. Assuming obviously that we bear in mind the tenet you don't ask you don't get. |  |
| |
| (No subject) on 11:36 - Dec 16 with 1574 views | Parlay |
| (No subject) on 11:20 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
The reality is there is a spectrum of possible outcomes resulting from the potential investment ranging from the truly dismal to something potentially even better than the current situation.
If the Trust play their cards right they can end up in a position of genuine influence, whereas many would argue that they are today weak, marginalised and ineffectual in terms of wielding real influence on the club's decisions.
That could all change and the Trust and by extension the voice of the fans could become significantly more important.
And to be clear I am not saying that is going to happen, merely that is is certainly a possibility. Assuming obviously that we bear in mind the tenet you don't ask you don't get. |
I think people still have Roman Abramovic in their heads when they think of a billionaire owner. Its truly maddening.
I think Chelsea and Man City aside, there have been no amazingly positive take-overs of foreign billionaires in Britain. Nearly always does it end up very bad indeed, the worst being those down the road.
It reminds me of a casino where the odds are stacked so against you, it really is silly to play there, but the past stories of the odd win and people become pinch drunk on unrealistic dreams to the point they risk far more than they ever should on it.
I will never gamble my club on a needle in a haystacks chance that this American fella just wants to throw all his money at the club for fun and not ask for it back when he leaves rather than of course, do what is most likely as squeeze this club for everything he can.
I hope any fans backing it will be quickly and vociferously shouted down. |  |
| |
| (No subject) on 11:38 - Dec 16 with 1574 views | dobjack2 |
| (No subject) on 11:20 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
The reality is there is a spectrum of possible outcomes resulting from the potential investment ranging from the truly dismal to something potentially even better than the current situation.
If the Trust play their cards right they can end up in a position of genuine influence, whereas many would argue that they are today weak, marginalised and ineffectual in terms of wielding real influence on the club's decisions.
That could all change and the Trust and by extension the voice of the fans could become significantly more important.
And to be clear I am not saying that is going to happen, merely that is is certainly a possibility. Assuming obviously that we bear in mind the tenet you don't ask you don't get. |
Indeed there are.
However as you have posted one of the more likely scenarios is for them to stick around for a few years with a view to making the business more profitable and selling on to someone else for a profit. There would be no control about who bought off them.
In another scenario if the business did not become more profitable a fire sale of assets to get their money back could ensue.
The concern is that people who know plenty about making $ but feck all about football, let alone our club, are looking to get involved. There are people who have followed this club for many years. They remember what it took to get rid if bad owners when there was comparatively little money required to do this. With the money involved now we would have as much chance of shedding a bad owner as cardiff have of getting rid of VT. Not saying VT is a bad owner but he is not universally loved.
A lot of people have thought that football is an easy way to make money. They have invariably been wrong and ended up losing substantial amounts or destroying clubs along the way.
Man utd have been saddled with owner debt and many would argue that servicing that debt and owner dividends has prevented them from being more successful in attracting players. | | | |
| (No subject) on 11:47 - Dec 16 with 1562 views | Parlay |
| (No subject) on 10:34 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
You don't know what you are talking about.
Venture capital /private equity investors look to build value in the company over time, and then sell the whole thing on for a profit after maybe 5-10 years.
They will be expecting to invest in the club and playing staff in order to do that, not siphon off every spare penny. |
I know exactly what I'm talking about. It was me who called exactly what Vincent Tan was doing, even his float on the stock exchange i called within weeks of his takeover.
If they buy the club for £100m then 5 years of paying themselves £20 million then they have paid for it and have a Premier League football club to sell should they wish to, or carry on creaming the profits.
That is far less risky, far less cash hungry and far more profitable way of owning a football club for personal gain. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| (No subject) on 11:50 - Dec 16 with 1556 views | Shaky |
| (No subject) on 11:38 - Dec 16 by dobjack2 |
Indeed there are.
However as you have posted one of the more likely scenarios is for them to stick around for a few years with a view to making the business more profitable and selling on to someone else for a profit. There would be no control about who bought off them.
In another scenario if the business did not become more profitable a fire sale of assets to get their money back could ensue.
The concern is that people who know plenty about making $ but feck all about football, let alone our club, are looking to get involved. There are people who have followed this club for many years. They remember what it took to get rid if bad owners when there was comparatively little money required to do this. With the money involved now we would have as much chance of shedding a bad owner as cardiff have of getting rid of VT. Not saying VT is a bad owner but he is not universally loved.
A lot of people have thought that football is an easy way to make money. They have invariably been wrong and ended up losing substantial amounts or destroying clubs along the way.
Man utd have been saddled with owner debt and many would argue that servicing that debt and owner dividends has prevented them from being more successful in attracting players. |
Many things in your post I disagree with, but you are right that the identity of a future owner is a concern.
But first of all that is always true. The dichotomy of a football club is that the fans consider it theirs, whereas in reality it isn't. Over time shares will always pass from hand to hand so you have to deal with it on a regular basis.
Except in this specific instance there is a chance for the Trust to permanently deal with it, by putting in place protections into the company statutes securing their influence in perpetuity, assuming they are able to negotiate it.
I believe if the potential investor is the **right** investor, they will understand the importance of having the fans onside and generally airing their opinions, also in terms of building the value of their investment.
On the other hand tf they don't, they are probably not the right people. That's the way I see it anyway. | |
| |
| (No subject) on 11:56 - Dec 16 with 1544 views | Shaky |
| (No subject) on 11:47 - Dec 16 by Parlay |
I know exactly what I'm talking about. It was me who called exactly what Vincent Tan was doing, even his float on the stock exchange i called within weeks of his takeover.
If they buy the club for £100m then 5 years of paying themselves £20 million then they have paid for it and have a Premier League football club to sell should they wish to, or carry on creaming the profits.
That is far less risky, far less cash hungry and far more profitable way of owning a football club for personal gain. |
Yup, because that approach turned out to be a spectacular success for Messrs Hicks and Gillet at Liverpool.
As for what you "called exactly" in connection with Tan's investment in Cardiff I have no clue, but let me ask you this; do you believe you possess the gift of prophecy? | |
| |
| (No subject) on 12:18 - Dec 16 with 1513 views | dobjack2 |
| (No subject) on 11:50 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
Many things in your post I disagree with, but you are right that the identity of a future owner is a concern.
But first of all that is always true. The dichotomy of a football club is that the fans consider it theirs, whereas in reality it isn't. Over time shares will always pass from hand to hand so you have to deal with it on a regular basis.
Except in this specific instance there is a chance for the Trust to permanently deal with it, by putting in place protections into the company statutes securing their influence in perpetuity, assuming they are able to negotiate it.
I believe if the potential investor is the **right** investor, they will understand the importance of having the fans onside and generally airing their opinions, also in terms of building the value of their investment.
On the other hand tf they don't, they are probably not the right people. That's the way I see it anyway. |
No problem disagreeing, it would be a boring world if we all agreed about everything.
The difference with the swans is that a fans campaign led to local people buying out a bad owner and to the fans themselves having a stake in the club via the trust.
Many fans believed this club to be different as it was fan owned. The reality of the situation, which has been pointed out by posters over the last year or so, is that the club is not fan owned.
The shareholders, apart from the trust, can sell their shares for personal gain.
The history of the club through the bad times is what makes a lot of people very wary about outsiders buying in, especially outsiders who will clearly be intent on making a profit from the club.
On the point that we agree on even if the Americans come in and are seen to be good owners, they are not necessarily people who will be in it long term. They will look to sell on at the best time for themselves. Who they sell onto would also be outside our control. [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 12:27]
| | | |
| (No subject) on 12:33 - Dec 16 with 1488 views | Shaky |
| (No subject) on 12:18 - Dec 16 by dobjack2 |
No problem disagreeing, it would be a boring world if we all agreed about everything.
The difference with the swans is that a fans campaign led to local people buying out a bad owner and to the fans themselves having a stake in the club via the trust.
Many fans believed this club to be different as it was fan owned. The reality of the situation, which has been pointed out by posters over the last year or so, is that the club is not fan owned.
The shareholders, apart from the trust, can sell their shares for personal gain.
The history of the club through the bad times is what makes a lot of people very wary about outsiders buying in, especially outsiders who will clearly be intent on making a profit from the club.
On the point that we agree on even if the Americans come in and are seen to be good owners, they are not necessarily people who will be in it long term. They will look to sell on at the best time for themselves. Who they sell onto would also be outside our control. [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 12:27]
|
I understand the concerns completely.
However, as I see it if this investment is going ahead now is the time to negotiate the best deal possible, and for the Trust to prove its worth.
The time to fight comes if the deal once known turns out to be shit. | |
| |
| (No subject) on 12:46 - Dec 16 with 1464 views | Dewi1jack |
| (No subject) on 11:38 - Dec 16 by dobjack2 |
Indeed there are.
However as you have posted one of the more likely scenarios is for them to stick around for a few years with a view to making the business more profitable and selling on to someone else for a profit. There would be no control about who bought off them.
In another scenario if the business did not become more profitable a fire sale of assets to get their money back could ensue.
The concern is that people who know plenty about making $ but feck all about football, let alone our club, are looking to get involved. There are people who have followed this club for many years. They remember what it took to get rid if bad owners when there was comparatively little money required to do this. With the money involved now we would have as much chance of shedding a bad owner as cardiff have of getting rid of VT. Not saying VT is a bad owner but he is not universally loved.
A lot of people have thought that football is an easy way to make money. They have invariably been wrong and ended up losing substantial amounts or destroying clubs along the way.
Man utd have been saddled with owner debt and many would argue that servicing that debt and owner dividends has prevented them from being more successful in attracting players. |
This.
"A lot of people have thought that football is an easy way to make money. They have invariably been wrong and ended up losing substantial amounts or destroying clubs along the way."
Reminds me of the saying
"The two best days of owning a boat are the day you buy it and the day you sell it."
As the other saying goes though, "Be prepared."
And with the help (or hindrance) of many, should our worst nightmares about the club start to appear, we at least will be ready to start a fight back | |
| If you wake up breathing, thats a good start to your day and you'll make many thousands of people envious. |
| |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 12:47 - Dec 16 with 1464 views | londonlisa2001 |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 00:11 - Dec 16 by jackforever |
So a few shareholders will make millions and the club will have new owners with no interest in the club or city. Could be the beginning of the end. We a turning over almost 100,000,000 if that's not enough to run a football club in swansea then feck it what's the point. These aren't malcolm struel/ doug sharpe days.
However if the board can explain WHY this would be good for the club and the city then I'm all ears. But a statement saying investment is crucial for the development of the club isn't good enough. We need facts not sound bites by people who stand to win the lottery |
excellent post.
I love that - "if £100m a year isn't enough to run a football club in Swansea then what's the point."
You have just said everything that needs to be said about the greed in football in one sentence. | | | |
| (No subject) on 12:51 - Dec 16 with 1458 views | Shaky |
| (No subject) on 11:36 - Dec 16 by Parlay |
I think people still have Roman Abramovic in their heads when they think of a billionaire owner. Its truly maddening.
I think Chelsea and Man City aside, there have been no amazingly positive take-overs of foreign billionaires in Britain. Nearly always does it end up very bad indeed, the worst being those down the road.
It reminds me of a casino where the odds are stacked so against you, it really is silly to play there, but the past stories of the odd win and people become pinch drunk on unrealistic dreams to the point they risk far more than they ever should on it.
I will never gamble my club on a needle in a haystacks chance that this American fella just wants to throw all his money at the club for fun and not ask for it back when he leaves rather than of course, do what is most likely as squeeze this club for everything he can.
I hope any fans backing it will be quickly and vociferously shouted down. |
Sorry, I didn't see you post there earlier.
"I think Chelsea and Man City aside, there have been no amazingly positive take-overs of foreign billionaires in Britain."
I agree with that, but on the other hand I think the FSG investment in Liverpool has to be considered a success so far, certainly judging by the reaction of the fans.
OK, the performance on-field has been dire this season, but I doubt anybody blames FSG for that.
Despite the fact that their fans hold no shares whatsoever, supporters groups have been consulted extensively about key decisions and plenty of money has been made available on- and off-field.
IF the protections for the Trust were right, I would be very happy with an investor like that coming in. | |
| |
| (No subject) on 13:05 - Dec 16 with 1426 views | londonlisa2001 |
| (No subject) on 12:51 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
Sorry, I didn't see you post there earlier.
"I think Chelsea and Man City aside, there have been no amazingly positive take-overs of foreign billionaires in Britain."
I agree with that, but on the other hand I think the FSG investment in Liverpool has to be considered a success so far, certainly judging by the reaction of the fans.
OK, the performance on-field has been dire this season, but I doubt anybody blames FSG for that.
Despite the fact that their fans hold no shares whatsoever, supporters groups have been consulted extensively about key decisions and plenty of money has been made available on- and off-field.
IF the protections for the Trust were right, I would be very happy with an investor like that coming in. |
and how do you propose that we spot them?
And it may be the case that your view is different to those that remember what happened before and the statements that were made at that time by the people that own the club currently about what would and wouldn't ever be allowed to happen in the future.
When they made those statements, of course, they did so without realising that they may one day stand to make millions.
Perhaps what should have been said by some of them, rather than "we'll never allow the club to fall into the hands of people that don't care about the club but only about making money" or words to that effect was "we'll never allow the club to fall into the hands of people that don't care about the club but only about making money, UNLESS those people offer us a shed load and make us personally wealthy beyond our wildest dreams in which case, whatever" | | | |
| (No subject) on 13:14 - Dec 16 with 1409 views | shandyjack |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 11:00 - Dec 16 by Dewi1jack |
Did you explain to the person(s) who had the banner you found it embarrassing?
Did you ask them why they are flying the banner?
Are you explaining to others who you were with, the possible outcome of a share sale to our club?
Or are you burying your head in the sand, hoping that the worst feared outcomes won't happen?
I don't think anyone would begrudge any of our board of directors, ensuring the future monetary well being of their families. But...
let's have some honesty from them, because whoever sells their shares is going to lose all respect from an awful lot of fans if the feeling is they've sold the club down the river.
As others have said, our lower league cousins, who are still waiting for Uncle Vinny to wipe out OVER £100 MILLION OF DEBT,are apathetic about fighting for their club.
They let everything happen without a fight, debt, colour changes, club being a joke etc. Now they're trying to organise another demonstration- bit late IMHO
Portsmouth, Blackburn and a quite a few others let takeovers happen as well. I don't fancy our club being like any of them.
If very few people know this may happen/ be happening here, then there could be trouble ahead, possibly worse than the Petty/ Silver Shield era- there's certainly a helluva lot more money to be made by 'investors'/ share holders/ sharks or whatever you want to call them.
Inoffensive banners seem a pretty good way of trying to get a message through to many. |
didn't see the banner till it was posted on twitter. I have made my feelings perfectly clear,
if people want these new players they so desperately crave (two new full backs etc) ,want to expand the stadium and also keep up our off field growth then this money doesn't grow on trees. Outside investment is a must if we are to push on as a club. If we want to stagnate and stay as we are (which i'd be more than happy with) then we don't get investment.
There are a lot of people inside the club who have more knowledge than anyone on here on the workings and turn over inide the club and will do what they feel is a must to push on. All the doom stories help no one.
Remember we are talking investment not a takeover [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 13:20]
|  |
| |
| (No subject) on 13:17 - Dec 16 with 1403 views | jackonicko |
| (No subject) on 11:50 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
Many things in your post I disagree with, but you are right that the identity of a future owner is a concern.
But first of all that is always true. The dichotomy of a football club is that the fans consider it theirs, whereas in reality it isn't. Over time shares will always pass from hand to hand so you have to deal with it on a regular basis.
Except in this specific instance there is a chance for the Trust to permanently deal with it, by putting in place protections into the company statutes securing their influence in perpetuity, assuming they are able to negotiate it.
I believe if the potential investor is the **right** investor, they will understand the importance of having the fans onside and generally airing their opinions, also in terms of building the value of their investment.
On the other hand tf they don't, they are probably not the right people. That's the way I see it anyway. |
Whilst there are many posts you make, Shaky, that I disagree with - this one is absolutely spot on.
EDIT - the only thing I would add is that it is also incumbent on the sellers of shares to also exert their influence in the transaction to ensure that the proper protections are in place, before they exit. [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 13:31]
|  | | |
| (No subject) on 13:19 - Dec 16 with 1394 views | Parlay |
| (No subject) on 11:56 - Dec 16 by Shaky |
Yup, because that approach turned out to be a spectacular success for Messrs Hicks and Gillet at Liverpool.
As for what you "called exactly" in connection with Tan's investment in Cardiff I have no clue, but let me ask you this; do you believe you possess the gift of prophecy? |
Nothing to do with prophecy, its about common sense and most likely scenario.
In order to build a clubs value you have to improve it, to improve it costs money and considerable risk and spending doesn't guarantee success, in fact, far from it.
It is far more likely that an owner with no affiliation to the club will want to use the club as an advertising tool, a platform to raise their profile and to make as much money from it as possible with risking as little as possible.
Given football clubs are a business with guaranteed £100m incomes, profits are guaranteed simply by making overheads considerably less. Right now we have an infra structure and personnel that in all likelyhood could keep us in the premier league with little investment to the playing staff for the next 5 years. With us posting 9 figure profits and TV money only going to increase - i think its a fair shout to suggest they will be thinking along these lines. | |
| |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:20 - Dec 16 with 1394 views | londonlisa2001 |
| (No subject) on 13:14 - Dec 16 by shandyjack |
didn't see the banner till it was posted on twitter. I have made my feelings perfectly clear,
if people want these new players they so desperately crave (two new full backs etc) ,want to expand the stadium and also keep up our off field growth then this money doesn't grow on trees. Outside investment is a must if we are to push on as a club. If we want to stagnate and stay as we are (which i'd be more than happy with) then we don't get investment.
There are a lot of people inside the club who have more knowledge than anyone on here on the workings and turn over inide the club and will do what they feel is a must to push on. All the doom stories help no one.
Remember we are talking investment not a takeover [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 13:20]
|
sorry but to your last sentence - at the moment we seem to be talking about no investment that we know of, and a partial takeover with who knows what planned for the future.
And I think it is naive to assume that those within the club will do what they feel is a must to push on. It may be that they will do what they feel is a must in order to maximise their own position. Those two things are rarely the same.
As for your first paragraph - I agree with you to an extent, but what's wrong with people having a bit of patience and realising that these things will come over time, not all at once? | | | |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:23 - Dec 16 with 1384 views | shandyjack |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:20 - Dec 16 by londonlisa2001 |
sorry but to your last sentence - at the moment we seem to be talking about no investment that we know of, and a partial takeover with who knows what planned for the future.
And I think it is naive to assume that those within the club will do what they feel is a must to push on. It may be that they will do what they feel is a must in order to maximise their own position. Those two things are rarely the same.
As for your first paragraph - I agree with you to an extent, but what's wrong with people having a bit of patience and realising that these things will come over time, not all at once? |
i fully agree with you Lisa, there is no rush at all for them all.
To your first paragraph, i have only hear HJ talk about Investment which is in the best interest of the club.
It is also out of our hands what and who the shareholders sell their shares too regardless of what a banner says. | |
| |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 13:27 - Dec 16 with 1373 views | MattG |
| (No subject) on 13:14 - Dec 16 by shandyjack |
didn't see the banner till it was posted on twitter. I have made my feelings perfectly clear,
if people want these new players they so desperately crave (two new full backs etc) ,want to expand the stadium and also keep up our off field growth then this money doesn't grow on trees. Outside investment is a must if we are to push on as a club. If we want to stagnate and stay as we are (which i'd be more than happy with) then we don't get investment.
There are a lot of people inside the club who have more knowledge than anyone on here on the workings and turn over inide the club and will do what they feel is a must to push on. All the doom stories help no one.
Remember we are talking investment not a takeover [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 13:20]
|
[Post edited 16 Dec 2014 13:27]
|  | | |
| (No subject) on 13:33 - Dec 16 with 1352 views | C_jack |
| (No subject) on 13:14 - Dec 16 by shandyjack |
didn't see the banner till it was posted on twitter. I have made my feelings perfectly clear,
if people want these new players they so desperately crave (two new full backs etc) ,want to expand the stadium and also keep up our off field growth then this money doesn't grow on trees. Outside investment is a must if we are to push on as a club. If we want to stagnate and stay as we are (which i'd be more than happy with) then we don't get investment.
There are a lot of people inside the club who have more knowledge than anyone on here on the workings and turn over inide the club and will do what they feel is a must to push on. All the doom stories help no one.
Remember we are talking investment not a takeover [Post edited 16 Dec 2014 13:20]
|
Amen.
I'll trust the board on this one, whatever does/does not happen. |  |
| |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:40 - Dec 16 with 1336 views | Starsky |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:23 - Dec 16 by shandyjack |
i fully agree with you Lisa, there is no rush at all for them all.
To your first paragraph, i have only hear HJ talk about Investment which is in the best interest of the club.
It is also out of our hands what and who the shareholders sell their shares too regardless of what a banner says. |
Seems to me that the ones stirring it up regarding extra investment being necessary are the board.
Last years sound bites were based on the "we buy cheap and sell on for big profits"
And "Some players will be using us as a stepping stone"
What's changed?
We seem to be making approx £14,000,000 a year and no doubt the sky money will probably keep spiralling.
Being an established mid table Premier league side is always going to be our realistic target and where there or thereabouts.
The shareholders advocating cashing in are not being honest to themselves or us, the fans.
I'd rather see us sell Bony for £25,000,000 to continue our development off the field, than bringing in new money men. |  |
| It's just the internet, init. |
| |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:45 - Dec 16 with 1328 views | shandyjack |
| "MOORE'S THE PETTY" on 13:40 - Dec 16 by Starsky |
Seems to me that the ones stirring it up regarding extra investment being necessary are the board.
Last years sound bites were based on the "we buy cheap and sell on for big profits"
And "Some players will be using us as a stepping stone"
What's changed?
We seem to be making approx £14,000,000 a year and no doubt the sky money will probably keep spiralling.
Being an established mid table Premier league side is always going to be our realistic target and where there or thereabouts.
The shareholders advocating cashing in are not being honest to themselves or us, the fans.
I'd rather see us sell Bony for £25,000,000 to continue our development off the field, than bringing in new money men. |
i'd like to bring in investment so we can keep the likes of Bony and Siggurdsson. But i agree it is a fine line to tread on | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
