Jump to content

Various: Mike Ashley in talks with Sheikh Khaled bin Zayed Al Nehayan


Kaizero
[[Template core/global/global/poll is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Recommended Posts

The value decreases with every defeat? Canny weird way to value a multi-million-pound company.

 

It does though; why wouldn't it? The closer we are to no longer being a PL entity, the value is bound to decrease. And the more likely Ashley is to take the money and run.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The value decreases with every defeat? Canny weird way to value a multi-million-pound company.

 

It does though; why wouldn't it? The closer we are to no longer being a PL entity, the value is bound to decrease. And the more likely Ashley is to take the money and run.

 

We're not really any closer or further away from being a PL entity though, it's December. Hopefully you're right about Ashley though obviously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The value decreases with every defeat? Canny weird way to value a multi-million-pound company.

 

It does though; why wouldn't it? The closer we are to no longer being a PL entity, the value is bound to decrease. And the more likely Ashley is to take the money and run.

 

We're not really any closer or further away from being a PL entity though, it's December. Hopefully you're right about Ashley though obviously.

 

That depends on whether or not you see us being able to shake off the losing mentality without any investment in January. Personally I can't see it because the players we have, even in the Championship last season were prone to silly mistakes and dropping their heads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still seems very weird to adjust the price of a £350m company based on what happens one Saturday afternoon. That's all I'm sayin'.

 

It's a company that's currently in a serious decline which threatens to take a massive slice of its revenue away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The cliff analogy isn't the greatest as it's not really reversible. :laugh:

 

Try this: a construction company currently has a lucrative fixed-term contract that's up for renewal in May. The client is willing to renew the contract for another year but only if several KPIs are met. After a promising start where it appeared the company would meet its obligations under the contract fairly easily, the parent company put the contractor up for sale because they want to focus on a different line of business. Recently though, standards are slipping massively and staff are underperforming. The management team believe their staff has could be much better and have asked for new blood; they've got their eyes on a couple of people at rival companies that would probably come if the money was right. Everyone is worried that the contract is at serious risk of not being renewed, and there's little else in the pipeline.

 

Why would any interested party pay full whack?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had a car worth £2k but needed £3k of work to keep it on the road, Roger lent you £1k and Sean lent you £2k but you were behind on your council tax by £500 and you just knocked up your girlfriend, why would you pay for a taxi to the zoo when you worked at an abattoir?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you had a car worth £2k but needed £3k of work to keep it on the road, Roger lent you £1k and Sean lent you £2k but you were behind on your council tax by £500 and you just knocked up your girlfriend, why would you pay for a taxi to the zoo when you worked at an abattoir?

 

If you worked in an abattoir then you'd see animals every day, so no. Wouldn't feel like a day out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...