But we're owned by a billionaire!

[Dave]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a shit job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

Completely contradicting yourself there.

 

What recent comments btw?

[mrmojorisin75]

on a side note if someone had told me in may smith & duff would still be at the club on august 28th i'd have been in fucken tears, i almost am now just thinking about it again

 

You see I'm not sure how the club is to blame for that. Those players aren't very good, and probably on huge wages. How are they meant to be moved on when everyone knows this? We can't force clubs to buy them.

 

we can't but (and we may have done this i don't know) say to their agents find another club, there's to be no fee and they're not wanted

 

i know this is basically a FM argument and the real world doesn't work like that but this is what needed to happen, they have to leave as they offer nothing and are a massive drain on resources, not to mention potentially holding back the development of younger players that could be given the chance to play in their place if we can't afford replacements

 

we know they do nothing, ever; we don't know that about lua lua, zamblera, donaldson etc...

 

lets face it if they stay for the length of their contracts now we'll get no money back (nor are we ever likely to get decent fees for them) and will have paid them millions, so what would be to lose by letting them go for nothing?

[manorpark]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

Completely contradicting yourself there.

 

What recent comments btw?

 

Dave, do you always play Devils Advocate??

 

You are good at it actually.

[Dokko]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a shit job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

Completely contradicting yourself there.

 

What recent comments btw?

 

Not really, i wasn't expecting it from him, but that doesn't mean i wouldn't want to see it happen, no contradiction in my eyes.

 

How he cannot restore us to where we belong by himself and he needs help from investors, basically saying, i cannot afford to put my own cash in to this, but i do not want to sell up.

 

He'll not suffer, he'll get everything and more back, while we stand still. Rather him go tbh.

[mrmojorisin75]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a shit job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

Completely contradicting yourself there.

 

What recent comments btw?

 

sorry dave but that's not even close to being a contradiction

[TRon]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a shit job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a shit job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8m for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

[Ericz]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

Completely contradicting yourself there.

 

What recent comments btw?

 

Indeed.

 

I am just curious...

 

( 1 ) Demand of Billionaires outstrip supply of Billionaires

( 2 ) Not all Billionaires will have an interest in football clubs

( 3 ) How many Billionaires will spend that kind of money lavishly?

 

If you could find us a Billionaire that is willing to spend lavishly, maybe not the extreme RA style but something close, I wouldn't mind to be honest... but possibility of finding one? For a start, how about naming one? : P

[Dave]

on a side note if someone had told me in may smith & duff would still be at the club on august 28th i'd have been in fucken tears, i almost am now just thinking about it again

 

You see I'm not sure how the club is to blame for that. Those players aren't very good, and probably on huge wages. How are they meant to be moved on when everyone knows this? We can't force clubs to buy them.

 

we can't but (and we may have done this i don't know) say to their agents find another club, there's to be no fee and they're not wanted

 

i know this is basically a FM argument and the real world doesn't work like that but this is what needed to happen, they have to leave as they offer nothing and are a massive drain on resources, not to mention potentially holding back the development of younger players that could be given the chance to play in their place if we can't afford replacements

 

we know they do nothing, ever; we don't know that about lua lua, zamblera, donaldson etc...

 

lets face it if they stay for the length of their contracts now we'll get no money back (nor are we ever likely to get decent fees for them) and will have paid them millions, so what would be to lose by letting them go for nothing?

 

But this is what I was getting at in the OP. Why on earth should Ashley be expected to just write off millions of pounds paid to other clubs in transfer fees for the players? You and I may think they're shit but they're not completely worthless. Your argument stands up in terms of the wages, but no business is just going to ditch assets like that, however poor their reputation.

[manorpark]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a s*** job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8 for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

One year my school report said . . . "Could do better, should do better"

[TRon]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a s*** job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8m for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

One year my school report said . . . "Could do better, should do better"

 

Was that in the middle of the term or at the end? Because Ashley still has till Monday to "do better".

[brummie]

re the huge turnover thing ..... you also have to take into account the cost of generating that turnover.

 

The obvious example is the signing of expensive players that create a buzz, help put bums on seats and sell shirts, all major contributors to turnover.

 

Hasn't Ashley discovered that the cost of generating that turnover was way too much and the club was sitting on a debt mountain, which he has now paid off?

 

I reckon he'll play it similar to Lerner - make the money available when the manager needs it but improve the business efficiency of the club and get it to contribute as much as it can, without necessarily having to be self sufficient. 

 

I'd take that over Shinawatra (who will leave Man City in a perilous situation) or the Icelandic bloke at West Ham (who went mental last year and has now got bored with the whole affair) any day of the week.

 

These are extremely rich men looking for a way to have a bit of big boys fun, even if it does cost them a lot of money. What they're obviously not going to do is irresponsibly blow a large chunk of their wealth in doing so.

 

There will never, ever be another Abrahmovich. I think people are slowly starting to understand that.

 

 

[TRon]

re the huge turnover thing ..... you also have to take into account the cost of generating that turnover.

 

The obvious example is the signing of expensive players that create a buzz, help put bums on seats and sell shirts, all major contributors to turnover.

 

Hasn't Ashley discovered that the cost of generating that turnover was way too much and the club was sitting on a debt mountain, which he has now paid off?

 

I reckon he'll play it similar to Lerner - make the money available when the manager needs it but improve the business efficiency of the club and get it to contribute as much as it can, without necessarily having to be self sufficient. 

 

I'd take that over Shinawatra (who will leave Man City in a perilous situation) or the Icelandic bloke at West Ham (who went mental last year and has now got bored with the whole affair) any day of the week.

 

These are extremely rich men looking for a way to have a bit of big boys fun, even if it does cost them a lot of money. What they're obviously not going to do is irresponsibly blow a large chunk of their wealth in doing so.

 

There will never, ever be another Abrahmovich. I think people are slowly starting to understand that.

 

 

 

[mrmojorisin75]

on a side note if someone had told me in may smith & duff would still be at the club on august 28th i'd have been in fucken tears, i almost am now just thinking about it again

 

You see I'm not sure how the club is to blame for that. Those players aren't very good, and probably on huge wages. How are they meant to be moved on when everyone knows this? We can't force clubs to buy them.

 

we can't but (and we may have done this i don't know) say to their agents find another club, there's to be no fee and they're not wanted

 

i know this is basically a FM argument and the real world doesn't work like that but this is what needed to happen, they have to leave as they offer nothing and are a massive drain on resources, not to mention potentially holding back the development of younger players that could be given the chance to play in their place if we can't afford replacements

 

we know they do nothing, ever; we don't know that about lua lua, zamblera, donaldson etc...

 

lets face it if they stay for the length of their contracts now we'll get no money back (nor are we ever likely to get decent fees for them) and will have paid them millions, so what would be to lose by letting them go for nothing?

 

But this is what I was getting at in the OP. Why on earth should Ashley be expected to just write off millions of pounds paid to other clubs in transfer fees for the players? You and I may think they're shit but they're not completely worthless. Your argument stands up in terms of the wages, but no business is just going to ditch assets like that, however poor their reputation.

 

i'm sorry but imo both are totally and utterly a waste of air & space, the only thing either of them do is get in the way of stuff other players are doing so it comes to nothing (duff) or this plus commit fouls in stupid places and getting sent off (smith)

 

i rate smith a touch higher than duff due to his fouls, they're not always red card offences and/or on the edge of the box so sometimes he inevitably breaks up moves by the opposition by default

 

dave you're on about throwing good money after bad basically and if it was peanuts i'd agree with you, but it's not it's millions & millions of more pounds we'll have to spend and we'll never get any money for either of them from what i can see so why keep them?  you consider that good business 'cause i don't

 

give their wages to milner, at least just just shit at crossing

[BONTEMPI]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a s*** job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8 for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

Yes I agree give him chance, 70m unexpected debt plus another 27m may have seriously held back the plans he initially had for us. Maybe that was our main transfer budget.

 

But only Dyer has gone, the other fee's are just paper talk.

 

Think Milners just holding out for a better deal from us, he would have seen Taylor get a better contract and would have thought I want some of that.

 

I am thankful for Ashley for buying out that fat useless cunt that would have seen us do another Leeds so i'd give him time.

[Dave]

Not really, i wasn't expecting it from him, but that doesn't mean i wouldn't want to see it happen, no contradiction in my eyes.

 

How he cannot restore us to where we belong by himself and he needs help from investors, basically saying, i cannot afford to put my own cash in to this, but i do not want to sell up.

 

He'll not suffer, he'll get everything and more back, while we stand still. Rather him go tbh.

 

Fair enough, I read it as though you didn't expect Abramovich spending with him but would with another 'better' billionaire. Implying he's failed.

 

I find it strange that you'd like to see him go though, the last thing we need is yet another period of change.

[Dokko]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a shit job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a shit job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8m for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

Where did we finish last season?

 

 

[Ericz]

re the huge turnover thing ..... you also have to take into account the cost of generating that turnover.

 

The obvious example is the signing of expensive players that create a buzz, help put bums on seats and sell shirts, all major contributors to turnover.

 

Hasn't Ashley discovered that the cost of generating that turnover was way too much and the club was sitting on a debt mountain, which he has now paid off?

 

I reckon he'll play it similar to Lerner - make the money available when the manager needs it but improve the business efficiency of the club and get it to contribute as much as it can, without necessarily having to be self sufficient. 

 

I'd take that over Shinawatra (who will leave Man City in a perilous situation) or the Icelandic bloke at West Ham (who went mental last year and has now got bored with the whole affair) any day of the week.

 

These are extremely rich men looking for a way to have a bit of big boys fun, even if it does cost them a lot of money. What they're obviously not going to do is irresponsibly blow a large chunk of their wealth in doing so.

 

There will never, ever be another Abrahmovich. I think people are slowly starting to understand that.

 

 

 

-Claps- Well written.

 

 

[manorpark]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a s*** job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8m for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

One year my school report said . . . "Could do better, should do better"

 

Was that in the middle of the term or at the end? Because Ashley still has till Monday to "do better".

 

Good point - but at this stage his report would say "Could do better, should do better, and should do it a da*n sight earlier and far more often"  !!!

[mrmojorisin75]

re the huge turnover thing ..... you also have to take into account the cost of generating that turnover.

 

The obvious example is the signing of expensive players that create a buzz, help put bums on seats and sell shirts, all major contributors to turnover.

 

Hasn't Ashley discovered that the cost of generating that turnover was way too much and the club was sitting on a debt mountain, which he has now paid off?

 

I reckon he'll play it similar to Lerner - make the money available when the manager needs it but improve the business efficiency of the club and get it to contribute as much as it can, without necessarily having to be self sufficient. 

 

I'd take that over Shinawatra (who will leave Man City in a perilous situation) or the Icelandic bloke at West Ham (who went mental last year and has now got bored with the whole affair) any day of the week.

 

These are extremely rich men looking for a way to have a bit of big boys fun, even if it does cost them a lot of money. What they're obviously not going to do is irresponsibly blow a large chunk of their wealth in doing so.

 

There will never, ever be another Abrahmovich. I think people are slowly starting to understand that.

 

 

 

 

do either of you think anyone here would disagree with that bit in bold like?

 

 

[brummie]

do either of you think anyone here would disagree with that bit in bold like?

 

 

 

Not necessarily, but you're taking it literally.

 

The point I was trying to make was that Ashley might not be a RA style billionaire owner, but neither is he a Shinawatra or Gorfulgoldfishbowlsson one either.

 

Maybe a responsible billionaire is the best type of billionaire owner to have?

[Dokko]

Not really, i wasn't expecting it from him, but that doesn't mean i wouldn't want to see it happen, no contradiction in my eyes.

 

How he cannot restore us to where we belong by himself and he needs help from investors, basically saying, i cannot afford to put my own cash in to this, but i do not want to sell up.

 

He'll not suffer, he'll get everything and more back, while we stand still. Rather him go tbh.

 

Fair enough, I read it as though you didn't expect Abramovich spending with him but would with another 'better' billionaire. Implying he's failed.

 

I find it strange that you'd like to see him go though, the last thing we need is yet another period of change.

 

Just not impressed mate, were ripe for some decent cash injection, but we never seem to do it. I watched Citeh last year do exactly what we should have done, if we had, with a more stable owner, it would be us brining in top players at the drop of a hat since were moving forward. Now you could say he didn't have his own manager, well now he has, and this summer's spending although good in terms of the quality, is only about half of what we need to have a strong season. I cannot see us signing 5+ players of the same quality in the time we've got left, therefore were in for another tough season, and another season lost where we could have easily made an impact.

 

[Dave]

on a side note if someone had told me in may smith & duff would still be at the club on august 28th i'd have been in fucken tears, i almost am now just thinking about it again

 

You see I'm not sure how the club is to blame for that. Those players aren't very good, and probably on huge wages. How are they meant to be moved on when everyone knows this? We can't force clubs to buy them.

 

we can't but (and we may have done this i don't know) say to their agents find another club, there's to be no fee and they're not wanted

 

i know this is basically a FM argument and the real world doesn't work like that but this is what needed to happen, they have to leave as they offer nothing and are a massive drain on resources, not to mention potentially holding back the development of younger players that could be given the chance to play in their place if we can't afford replacements

 

we know they do nothing, ever; we don't know that about lua lua, zamblera, donaldson etc...

 

lets face it if they stay for the length of their contracts now we'll get no money back (nor are we ever likely to get decent fees for them) and will have paid them millions, so what would be to lose by letting them go for nothing?

 

But this is what I was getting at in the OP. Why on earth should Ashley be expected to just write off millions of pounds paid to other clubs in transfer fees for the players? You and I may think they're shit but they're not completely worthless. Your argument stands up in terms of the wages, but no business is just going to ditch assets like that, however poor their reputation.

 

i'm sorry but imo both are totally and utterly a waste of air & space, the only thing either of them do is get in the way of stuff other players are doing so it comes to nothing (duff) or this plus commit fouls in stupid places and getting sent off (smith)

 

i rate smith a touch higher than duff due to his fouls, they're not always red card offences and/or on the edge of the box so sometimes he inevitably breaks up moves by the opposition by default

 

dave you're on about throwing good money after bad basically and if it was peanuts i'd agree with you, but it's not it's millions & millions of more pounds we'll have to spend and we'll never get any money for either of them from what i can see so why keep them?  you consider that good business 'cause i don't

 

give their wages to milner, at least just just shit at crossing

 

I completely agree on the merits of both players mate. They're fucking crap.

 

Just don't see why any club would just bin players for nothing. Not even 'as much money as we like' Chelsea do that. And what message would it give out to other players we're trying to attract?

[Ericz]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a s*** job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8m for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

Where did we finish last season?

 

 

 

Also, let us not forget that he is the owner not the executive director who is involved in day to day dealing with the club nor is he the manager who runs the game.

 

Would you reckon you could change a below-par company into a hugely successful company in just 1 year?

 

Would you reckon you could make your worst grade (assuming it's a 40/100) into an extremely good grade (assuming it's a 90/100) within a year? - assuming university level?

 

Of course, those aren't necessarily a good comparison. What I am trying to say is he needs to be given time, his own proper structure and his team of management staffs.

 

Have he not said how he intend to do it? or how many years it will take? or what his aims are?

 

For Christ sake... it's been repeated times and times again.

 

 

[JH]

Look on bright side of things. He wants us running as a business, making profit, becoming self-sustainable etc. - it's all positive stuff.

 

I'd rather that then Ashley come in and just throw millions of his own money away on players - that suggests that we're just a toy to him, and as we all know people become bored of toys and it wouldn't be long before he just tosses us aside and forgets all about us.

 

This way, I'm positive he's in it for the long term and we don't have to fear the future.

[BONTEMPI]

I expected more commitment than he's shown in terms of finance, i wasn't expecting RA style, but something decent to jolt us forward quickly, then to let the club build on that by itself.

 

As it is, he's done quite a s*** job so far and it won't get any better from his recent comments. Wouldn't be arsed to see him leave for a proper billionaire.

 

 

 

What exactly do you regard as a s*** job? Buying Guthrie, Coloccini, Bassong and Jonas? Negotiating £8m for Dyer, £4m for Shola and possibly £10m for Milner? Seems pretty competent work to me so far.

 

 

 

Where did we finish last season?

 

 

 

How can you blame that on Ashley?

 

Fat Sam assembled the squad, got them playing something that can't be described as football and it took Keegan at least 10-12 games to snap them out of the downward spiral.

 

He got rid of a shite manager appointed by a shite chairman. And he's put new plans in place.

 

You watch when we sign 2-3 players before sept 1st this will all be forgotten and he'll be the flavour of the month again.