| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:37 - Feb 6 with 1771 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:33 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
I have just realised what has happened here.
You think I have gone out of my way to assemble some statistics on Transfers with the specific intent of making Jenkins look bad.
The reality is that I already had data lying in a spreadsheet from whenever the last accounts came out and I was making some forward projections. i used that.
The reason for the gap between your perception and reality is you are off your rocker, just as you have demonstrated on several occasions in this thread. |
Like your kind use of the word "magician" and you going out of your way to promote Transfer Market.
Now you are saying its all from your spreadsheet.
Next you'll be saying you plucked it out yer arse, sonny.
go away mun. |  |
|  |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:39 - Feb 6 with 1769 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:37 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
And here's the proof (notice how the early data is flung together)
 |
 | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:59 - Feb 6 with 1729 views | E20Jack |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:52 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
How long to do the other tabs? In your expert opinon as regards financial modelling?
What data is relevant to forecasting future p&L and balance sheets?
Bet you are enjoying the Res pressing the self-destruct button furiously. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 16:54]
|
Well figures for a start Shakes. You have claimed you have gone off your spread sheet yet next to Gomis is completely blank. Not to mention the figures you have come from an internet website that has Clucas' value set at 8m euros.
Nobody has pressed the self destruct button other than yourself and it is a great shame as when you dont go through these periods of utter psychosis you are actually fine to read. |  |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:01 - Feb 6 with 1722 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:52 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
How long to do the other tabs? In your expert opinon as regards financial modelling?
What data is relevant to forecasting future p&L and balance sheets?
Bet you are enjoying the Res pressing the self-destruct button furiously. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 16:54]
|
This is so typical of your mentality to knock up a two Bob spreadsheet when you've been made a fool of.
You even mentioning the tabs below is the obvious clue to your fraudulent behaviour. You doth protest far too much.
By the way, where is financial year 14/15? | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:07 - Feb 6 with 1697 views | Shaky |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:37 - Feb 6 by TheResurrection |
Like your kind use of the word "magician" and you going out of your way to promote Transfer Market.
Now you are saying its all from your spreadsheet.
Next you'll be saying you plucked it out yer arse, sonny.
go away mun. |
Whatever, bottom line here is that you clearly believe I am the mastermind behind a sinister plot to tarnish the reputation of Jenkins.
Just as you apparently believe my refusal to demand money from the Trust for coming up with the legal strategy, was a surefire sign that I am involved in a fiendishly clever plot to make money off them.
Thing is though, you have been absolutely wrong about everything for what the last 18 months or so. Everything.
With that in mind there are several possible explanations for your delusions. And although correlation does not necessarily equate to causation, I'd strongly urge you - again - to review you relationship with Dimi.
There's certainly a strong correlation with your madness right there.
No charge for the advice. |  |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:08 - Feb 6 with 1693 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:07 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Whatever, bottom line here is that you clearly believe I am the mastermind behind a sinister plot to tarnish the reputation of Jenkins.
Just as you apparently believe my refusal to demand money from the Trust for coming up with the legal strategy, was a surefire sign that I am involved in a fiendishly clever plot to make money off them.
Thing is though, you have been absolutely wrong about everything for what the last 18 months or so. Everything.
With that in mind there are several possible explanations for your delusions. And although correlation does not necessarily equate to causation, I'd strongly urge you - again - to review you relationship with Dimi.
There's certainly a strong correlation with your madness right there.
No charge for the advice. |
It's all slowly turning out that I have been very much right about everythin | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:09 - Feb 6 with 1692 views | Shaky |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 16:59 - Feb 6 by E20Jack |
Well figures for a start Shakes. You have claimed you have gone off your spread sheet yet next to Gomis is completely blank. Not to mention the figures you have come from an internet website that has Clucas' value set at 8m euros.
Nobody has pressed the self destruct button other than yourself and it is a great shame as when you dont go through these periods of utter psychosis you are actually fine to read. |
Gomis is blank because he was a free transfer, you fraud. Not capital investment. Ask a friend who knows something about these things if you like
As for the value of Clucas that is their estimate of the current market value, not what was paid. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 17:13]
| |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:14 - Feb 6 with 1680 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:09 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Gomis is blank because he was a free transfer, you fraud. Not capital investment. Ask a friend who knows something about these things if you like
As for the value of Clucas that is their estimate of the current market value, not what was paid. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 17:13]
|
Why is he in financial year 16? | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:15 - Feb 6 with 1678 views | Shaky |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:14 - Feb 6 by TheResurrection |
Why is he in financial year 16? |
Becasue it is incomplete, just like I said.
And not relevant to forecasting future years. | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:17 - Feb 6 with 1677 views | E20Jack |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:09 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Gomis is blank because he was a free transfer, you fraud. Not capital investment. Ask a friend who knows something about these things if you like
As for the value of Clucas that is their estimate of the current market value, not what was paid. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 17:13]
|
Love the fact you have the audacity to call me a fraud after presenting that, i am sure "Tammy Adraham" (sic) would agree. Ffs
You cannot refer to your spreadsheet as a source for your list citing capital investment and financial risk as a factor then when presenting said amateur spreadsheet defend the fact that next to one of your selections on the list it shows you have no data.
I am hoping this is your psychosis talking and not the other part of your less mental Jekyll and Hyde personna otherwise we are in all sorts of trouble. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 17:34]
| |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:19 - Feb 6 with 1672 views | Shaky |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:15 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Becasue it is incomplete, just like I said.
And not relevant to forecasting future years. |
BTW it is also incomplete as regards '17. There's several small fry signings I have not included. Cos they are irrelevant and easily fall short of the 80/20 rule. | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:22 - Feb 6 with 1665 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:15 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Becasue it is incomplete, just like I said.
And not relevant to forecasting future years. |
Incomplete? Haha haha haha
One thing I agree with you on, it's facking irrelevant to your childish tantrums. | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:23 - Feb 6 with 1664 views | E20Jack |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:20 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Maybe you should ask Lisa about this, before you make yourself look even more stupid. |
I dont need to ask anybody Shakes, you have cited your source is your spreadsheet.
If that was the rules you set then why is Gomis there? If independant research was also a factor where you have spontaneously decided to use other factors outside capital investment... then why have you left out so many players.
Take your time.
Why you go through these temper tantrums is beyond me. You are a psychologists wet dream. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 17:35]
| |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:36 - Feb 6 with 1642 views | Shaky |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 17:22 - Feb 6 by TheResurrection |
Incomplete? Haha haha haha
One thing I agree with you on, it's facking irrelevant to your childish tantrums. |
Pay me $100,000 and I'll make it complete and get everything to print out beautifully to boot.
Oops, just let slip my criminal masterplan there. | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 18:22 - Feb 6 with 1585 views | londonlisa2001 |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 15:17 - Feb 6 by TheResurrection |
So all positive signs then. They're not piggy backing any debt onto us, they are spending relatively within our means and they are offering more money to the manager than he chooses to spend.
And this is what, 2 years in now? I guess we could have been sold to worse owners than these, eh? What's your opinion? |
Could we have been sold to worse owners? Yes. We could have been sold to owners that immediately sold everyone, replaced no one, took the money and ran.
Are these good owners? Well that's a different question.
I would say no.
I don't believe they have any interest in the long term future of the club. Their only interest was in buying a club as cheaply as possible and holding it with no investment just long enough to allow the next TV rights deal to kick in before selling it at a profit. They also identified the areas where they could make the club look more profitable in the short term (gaining control of the stadium, trying to increase commercial revenue, a failed attempt at increasing profile in the market they identified as being of biggest future value (via Bradley) ), all done at the club's expense.
Where they have been caught out is in their lack of understanding that relegation kills their plans and is a lot more real a possibility than they had believed. I think they looked at us and saw a club that had, on the face of it, comfortably survived with no investment whatsoever, and assumed that would continue comfortably until they flipped it. They also saw owners that were so desperate for profit they would sell to anyone, without diligence, with no demands made over future investment and at a relatively rock bottom price.
The only comfort we have is that at the moment, our aims are aligned, as staying in this league is as important to them for profit purposes as it is to us as fans. If we get relegated, you may see a significant divergence.
It would have been far better to sell to people that had a much longer term view of success and return. Prepared, for example, to say - we've bought the club for £70m, we will invest another £70m over the next 5 years, over that time building capacity of 32,000 in the stadium, and try to build something worth £250m. Not people out to make as quick a buck as they possibly could by saying, we've paid £70m, we'll hold it without putting in a penny, and sell for £120m simply by waiting for a bigger TV deal in 3 years' time.
Just my personal view. |  | | |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 20:02 - Feb 6 with 1500 views | Drizzy |
Main contributors to this thread: Lisa, E20, Shaky and The Res.
Anyone surprised that this is another thread of near endless tedium? Anyone? [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 20:08]
|  |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 20:37 - Feb 6 with 1456 views | E20Jack |
Spoken by the king of crackpot theories. I'm still waiting for my cheque from Huw Jenkins | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 21:00 - Feb 6 with 1429 views | E20Jack |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 20:49 - Feb 6 by Shaky |
Oh you think it is a crackpot question to enquire whether you have any sort of financial incentive in providing a 24/7 rapid distraction and deflection service in respect of criticism of Jenkins?
i think not, my little psychopath.
And can you please stop DMing me? Thanks so much. [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 20:50]
|
So that's your new crackpot deduction of your ludicrous accusations the other day is it?
My pleasure Shakes. 4 chances is more than enough to attempt to help someone suffering what can only be described as a severe mental episode. I can do no more. 
(In the meantime stop spreading your madmans false facts if you are too scared to be brought to task on them - thanks skør.) [Post edited 6 Feb 2018 21:22]
| |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 21:09 - Feb 6 with 1415 views | TheResurrection |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 18:22 - Feb 6 by londonlisa2001 |
Could we have been sold to worse owners? Yes. We could have been sold to owners that immediately sold everyone, replaced no one, took the money and ran.
Are these good owners? Well that's a different question.
I would say no.
I don't believe they have any interest in the long term future of the club. Their only interest was in buying a club as cheaply as possible and holding it with no investment just long enough to allow the next TV rights deal to kick in before selling it at a profit. They also identified the areas where they could make the club look more profitable in the short term (gaining control of the stadium, trying to increase commercial revenue, a failed attempt at increasing profile in the market they identified as being of biggest future value (via Bradley) ), all done at the club's expense.
Where they have been caught out is in their lack of understanding that relegation kills their plans and is a lot more real a possibility than they had believed. I think they looked at us and saw a club that had, on the face of it, comfortably survived with no investment whatsoever, and assumed that would continue comfortably until they flipped it. They also saw owners that were so desperate for profit they would sell to anyone, without diligence, with no demands made over future investment and at a relatively rock bottom price.
The only comfort we have is that at the moment, our aims are aligned, as staying in this league is as important to them for profit purposes as it is to us as fans. If we get relegated, you may see a significant divergence.
It would have been far better to sell to people that had a much longer term view of success and return. Prepared, for example, to say - we've bought the club for £70m, we will invest another £70m over the next 5 years, over that time building capacity of 32,000 in the stadium, and try to build something worth £250m. Not people out to make as quick a buck as they possibly could by saying, we've paid £70m, we'll hold it without putting in a penny, and sell for £120m simply by waiting for a bigger TV deal in 3 years' time.
Just my personal view. |
And what would happen to the Trust's 21% if someone came in and pumped the extra in then?
And like you say, their aims match our aims, short or long term doesn't really come into it really as if they achieve their objectives ie increased profitability and we're still in the EPL then great.
Then it will be who they sell to, a bigger worry perhaps | |
| |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 21:20 - Feb 6 with 1401 views | Cooperman |
| Huw jenkins: Do Swans fans have him ALL wrong? on 21:09 - Feb 6 by TheResurrection |
And what would happen to the Trust's 21% if someone came in and pumped the extra in then?
And like you say, their aims match our aims, short or long term doesn't really come into it really as if they achieve their objectives ie increased profitability and we're still in the EPL then great.
Then it will be who they sell to, a bigger worry perhaps |
Re the last line - the Trust need to be on the ball with this. The Americans will not have expected such a rough ride to this point and may well already be considering getting out earlier than planned. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
