pirate
Forum Legend
Posts: 18,740
|
Post by pirate on Jul 31, 2018 13:10:25 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 13:11:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by c4h10 on Jul 31, 2018 13:19:32 GMT
It was said earlier in this thread that there was no reason to expect the owners to put their own money into the signing of players. I feel that there is a moral right - no, that's a bit strong - a justifiable expectation, that the money received for a player who was already contracted to the club when they bought it should be re-invested in a replacement(s). Otherwise, we have quite the reverse of Evolution.
|
|
|
Post by gaelgas on Jul 31, 2018 13:23:17 GMT
Thank God for that, I thought it was Camilla PB
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 14:46:32 GMT
It was said earlier in this thread that there was no reason to expect the owners to put their own money into the signing of players. I feel that there is a moral right - no, that's a bit strong - a justifiable expectation, that the money received for a player who was already contracted to the club when they bought it should be re-invested in a replacement(s). Otherwise, we have quite the reverse of Evolution. Think that was me! Ordinarily I would agree with you, provided we weren't losing big money every year. The owners are also the custodians of our club and there is a justifiable expectation from supporters of the club that they will do all they can to ensure it survives at least, and hopefully thrives, in the future.
|
|
|
Post by philbemmygas on Jul 31, 2018 14:55:27 GMT
It was said earlier in this thread that there was no reason to expect the owners to put their own money into the signing of players. I feel that there is a moral right - no, that's a bit strong - a justifiable expectation, that the money received for a player who was already contracted to the club when they bought it should be re-invested in a replacement(s). Otherwise, we have quite the reverse of Evolution. Think that was me! Ordinarily I would agree with you, provided we weren't losing big money every year. The owners are also the custodians of our club and there is a justifiable expectation from supporters of the club that they will do all they can to ensure it survives at least, and hopefully thrives, in the future. We are losing in excess of £1m a year, is that not big money? I hope DC can bring a couple players in, lets keep our powder dry and wait and see.
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jul 31, 2018 14:58:06 GMT
It was said earlier in this thread that there was no reason to expect the owners to put their own money into the signing of players. I feel that there is a moral right - no, that's a bit strong - a justifiable expectation, that the money received for a player who was already contracted to the club when they bought it should be re-invested in a replacement(s). Otherwise, we have quite the reverse of Evolution. Some of it maybe, but monies received has to go back into the club to benefit it all round and distributed according
it may be a different scale, but it applies at all levels. How many times/years did you hear at Arsenal that they couldn't match Man U or Chelsea as they had to pay for the stadium? The magic fairies didn't build it for free and Usmanov and Kroenke didn't pony up there own personal cash.
Man U have to service debt, Spurs, Liverpool whatever the ridiculous sums of revenue they generate or receive
|
|
|
Post by paulpirate on Jul 31, 2018 15:05:33 GMT
It was said earlier in this thread that there was no reason to expect the owners to put their own money into the signing of players. I feel that there is a moral right - no, that's a bit strong - a justifiable expectation, that the money received for a player who was already contracted to the club when they bought it should be re-invested in a replacement(s). Otherwise, we have quite the reverse of Evolution. Some of it maybe, but monies received has to go back into the club to benefit it all round and distributed according
it may be a different scale, but it applies at all levels. How many times/years did you hear at Arsenal that they couldn't match Man U or Chelsea as they had to pay for the stadium? The magic fairies didn't build it for free and Usmanov and Kroenke didn't pony up there own personal cash.
Man U have to service debt, Spurs, Liverpool whatever the ridiculous sums of revenue they generate or receive
what stadium?
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jul 31, 2018 15:08:41 GMT
Some of it maybe, but monies received has to go back into the club to benefit it all round and distributed according
it may be a different scale, but it applies at all levels. How many times/years did you hear at Arsenal that they couldn't match Man U or Chelsea as they had to pay for the stadium? The magic fairies didn't build it for free and Usmanov and Kroenke didn't pony up there own personal cash.
Man U have to service debt, Spurs, Liverpool whatever the ridiculous sums of revenue they generate or receive
what stadium? Doesn't just have to be a stadium does it. It's anything and everything that pertains to the running of the club
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 15:13:49 GMT
Think that was me! Ordinarily I would agree with you, provided we weren't losing big money every year. The owners are also the custodians of our club and there is a justifiable expectation from supporters of the club that they will do all they can to ensure it survives at least, and hopefully thrives, in the future. We are losing in excess of £1m a year, is that not big money? I hope DC can bring a couple players in, lets keep our powder dry and wait and see. Exactly my point...it is very big money. We clearly need to bring a no9 or two in, the decision whether that is a permanent or marquee or loan signing has to be taken with the long term future of the club in mind as well.
|
|
|
Post by paulpirate on Jul 31, 2018 15:51:33 GMT
Doesn't just have to be a stadium does it. It's anything and everything that pertains to the running of the club always an excuse
|
|
|
Post by rovers5charlton5 on Jul 31, 2018 15:53:37 GMT
The position is that we are NOT in debt at all because we are owned by ALQ in a similar way to what City are not in debt because they are owned by Steve Lansdown. It would appear to me (but I could and probably am wrong) that a big difference is that ALQ has the Mem as protection against any money spent on all the bits and pieces done similar to Nick Higgs when he built Santas Grotto.They are not yet spending their own money in real terms. This will be the real tester and the big big difference that Steve Lansdown has proved again and again that he is prepared to put his own money into Bristol City whereas once the protection of the Mem is exceeded will Wael and his family be prepared to put their own money in? This time I imagine is not far away and will continue to get nearer and nearer as long as we stay at the Mem. The position is that the ALQs never said that they were going to spend large sums on players, Lansdown on the other hand, did.
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jul 31, 2018 16:02:59 GMT
Doesn't just have to be a stadium does it. It's anything and everything that pertains to the running of the club always an excuse the club has lost money since way back when. It either has to come out of the pocket of owners, or it has to reinvest excess funds across the club on and off the pitch, player sales, cup runs etc so you can continue to have a football club to watch
not an excuse, FACT
|
|
|
Post by peterparker on Jul 31, 2018 16:06:08 GMT
The position is that we are NOT in debt at all because we are owned by ALQ in a similar way to what City are not in debt because they are owned by Steve Lansdown. It would appear to me (but I could and probably am wrong) that a big difference is that ALQ has the Mem as protection against any money spent on all the bits and pieces done similar to Nick Higgs when he built Santas Grotto.They are not yet spending their own money in real terms. This will be the real tester and the big big difference that Steve Lansdown has proved again and again that he is prepared to put his own money into Bristol City whereas once the protection of the Mem is exceeded will Wael and his family be prepared to put their own money in? This time I imagine is not far away and will continue to get nearer and nearer as long as we stay at the Mem. The position is that the ALQs never said that they were going to spend large sums on players, Lansdown on the other hand, did. Not sure if Steve has been online, by I am interested in his response, because it has been pointed out the credit facility was extended over the value of the Mem as of 30th June 2017 in the last available accounts
|
|
|
Post by daniel300380 on Jul 31, 2018 16:45:52 GMT
Spoke with DC after the fans forum and he was incredibly honest when it came to a search for a striker... He wanted both Stockley and Doidge but was quoted over £750k meaning we couldn’t afford them. Bogle is on approx £10k a week so even with Cardiff paying 50% of his wages, he’d still be out of our reach. Plus he’d have 5 or 6 teams after him. He is looking at both Devante Cole and Joe Nutall as loan deals but didn’t say if either was close. They were “possibly on the burner.” Make of all that what you will. Don't know if this has been said already, as I have not been through all the pages. But him saying they both wanted over £750,000, which ruled us out. Does that mean he has the £750,000 from the sale of Ellis to reinvest? If he can find someone. If that's what he said, that's what it sounds like.
|
|
|
Post by cj on Jul 31, 2018 16:53:12 GMT
It is a good and honest message from Hamer. The only bit that worries me is the wording of the final paragraph: “All I can genuinely say, the owners are not burying their heads and are aware of what is required to maintain growth momentum within the club.“ We know that they are aware of what is required but he doesn’t go as far as to say that they are prepared to do anything about it. A political answer, worded to avoid it coming back on him, but nonetheless revealing of a bit of doubt in his mind, maybe? Like others have said, I have no axe to grind with SH. I think he’s on a hiding to nothing at the moment. I would interpret the bit when Hamer says "the owners are not burying their heads" is Hamer saying they are doing something about it. Again, that is just my way of interpreting it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2018 16:57:37 GMT
Spoke with DC after the fans forum and he was incredibly honest when it came to a search for a striker... He wanted both Stockley and Doidge but was quoted over £750k meaning we couldn’t afford them. Bogle is on approx £10k a week so even with Cardiff paying 50% of his wages, he’d still be out of our reach. Plus he’d have 5 or 6 teams after him. He is looking at both Devante Cole and Joe Nutall as loan deals but didn’t say if either was close. They were “possibly on the burner.” Make of all that what you will. Don't know if this has been said already, as I have not been through all the pages. But him saying they both wanted over £750,000, which ruled us out. Does that mean he has the £750,000 from the sale of Ellis to reinvest? If he can find someone. If that's what he said, that's what it sounds like. One of those that could be read either way I guess. I read it as DC saying a figure that is well over our budget. Would be astounded if he has enough to break our transfer record, never mind the proceeds from the Ellis sale.
|
|
|
Post by paulpirate on Jul 31, 2018 16:58:49 GMT
The position is that the ALQs never said that they were going to spend large sums on players, Lansdown on the other hand, did. Not sure if Steve has been online, by I am interested in his response, because it has been pointed out the credit facility was extended over the value of the Mem as of 30th June 2017 in the last available accounts what football club makes money,it’s a toy he can’t afford so why buy it
|
|
|
Post by neighbour on Jul 31, 2018 17:05:24 GMT
The position is that we are NOT in debt at all because we are owned by ALQ in a similar way to what City are not in debt because they are owned by Steve Lansdown. It would appear to me (but I could and probably am wrong) that a big difference is that ALQ has the Mem as protection against any money spent on all the bits and pieces done similar to Nick Higgs when he built Santas Grotto.They are not yet spending their own money in real terms. This will be the real tester and the big big difference that Steve Lansdown has proved again and again that he is prepared to put his own money into Bristol City whereas once the protection of the Mem is exceeded will Wael and his family be prepared to put their own money in? This time I imagine is not far away and will continue to get nearer and nearer as long as we stay at the Mem. The position is that the ALQs never said that they were going to spend large sums on players, Lansdown on the other hand, did. Not sure I’ve ever read or heard Lansdown state he / City were going to spend large sums on players In fact, I think City’s record signing is £5m. Pretty small amount in this day For Championship players
|
|
|
Post by dickiedamsell on Jul 31, 2018 17:15:23 GMT
ALQs, should bury their heads in the sand because we aint getting any money or support from them. Are they friends of PANTSDOWN ?
|
|