Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Jim Smith

Members
  • Content Count

    7,528
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Jim Smith

  1. Jim Smith

    PSG Owners To buy Leeds

    Our shares are worthless and always have been. The only shareholding worth any value in this club is the controlling interest (and perhaps to a certain extent Foulger's stake). I don't expect them to do anything. Its their prerogative to ask whatever price they like for their stake should they sell if but to insist on a price that saw a very significant profit would certainly fly in the face of the statements they have made over the years and I think be a little hypocritical given those statement and that they effectively picked up a controlling stake in the club for well below that value and that the fans and tv money are funding everything of late.
  2. Jim Smith

    PSG Owners To buy Leeds

    Well I think the answer is that it depends. Depends on how much someone wants it and how much Delia and MWJ would be willing to sell their stake for. My vague recollection is that the notional value of their shares is around £30m. However, they have said in the past that they do not ever expect to make any money out of the club. If they stuck to that line and were prepared to sell, to someone they thought could take the club forward, at a price that saw them recoup their investment then I think that's around the £5 million mark which would render us an absolute bargain.
  3. Jim Smith

    A club without ambition

    Yes although that's mainly because where clubs are performing well their owners want a considerable sum to sell them. Indeed if you read the stories about Leeds it suggests their owner is looking for a decent profit on top of the £38m he paid for the club and they are not yet in the premier league. If our owners were to stand by their statements about not expecting to ever make a profit from the club then our club "could" be available, debt free and in the premier league for a relative pittance to the right owner.
  4. Jim Smith

    PSG Owners To buy Leeds

    Personally I would see such a takeover bringing a degree of risk but also being a massive potential game changer for the club and an opportunity too good to turn down. I would also have hoped that given it seems widely known they have been in the market for an English Club, a club like ours who acknowledge that we don't have the means to compete at the top level would have sounded them out but I suspect that's wishful thinking.
  5. Jim Smith

    PSG Owners To buy Leeds

    Just asked the same on another thread. Genuinely interested in what people's attitude would be.
  6. Jim Smith

    Delia is 78, MWJ's is 78

    I've mentioned this on another thread but since this seems to be the active one what would people's attitude be if a takeover by Qatar Sports Investments (who are rumoured to be buying Leeds) was a genuine possibility? Would people want Delia and Michael to pursue that or would people not want that sort of owner for our club? Just genuinely interested in how people would feel. We all view things differently so there's no right or wrong answer here.
  7. Jim Smith

    A club without ambition

    Well I know Leeds are traditionally a bigger name but I would venture to suggest that one reason is because Leeds are available to buy and we are not. Unless of course our "task force" have made contact with them and enquired as to whether QSI are interested in buying a debt free, premier league club (and probably for a much lower price if our owners are to be believed) and they have said no, sorry we'd rather pay a lot more for a championship club with half a chance of getting to the prem. That said I am not sure how they would propose to get around the common ownership rules if Leeds do make it to the prem and ever look like qualifying for a UEFA competition.
  8. Jim Smith

    A club without ambition

    yes and all the time we refuse to consider such form of ownership we will get left behind. I'm sure there will be many who will say "wouldn't want them" blah, blah, blah though.
  9. Jim Smith

    A club without ambition

    I would say that arguably there is a strong moral case for doing that since the fans are the ones who are funding the club!
  10. Jim Smith

    The fabled academy

    Not writing him off at all Nutty. Clearly if a player is playing regularly for Belgium's U21s then they have some decent talent. I assume what we are looking for with his loan is physical development having come from a less physical league. I would though like to see him get a few games for Blackpool before the season is out so hopefully he can force his way into their team over the second half of the season. I was also a bit disappointed that we sent that other young centre back we have (whose name escapes me now) on loan to a non league side last season as well but again perhaps its a "character building" thing! James Husband is currently starting for them as a centre back in a back 3 so I think when trying to judge what sort of level he's currently at that is quite a helpful barometer! I'd love to see Idah go out on loan in preparation for next season and quite like what I've seen of that Hondermark too plus a couple of the young strikers in the younger sides seem to know where the net is and have a lot of potential.
  11. Jim Smith

    The fabled academy

    I agree entirely GPB. It would obviously be easier to give players a go in the championship than it is in the premier league. I think sending the players out on loan is a good thing. My point really is that I am a little disappointed that of the players we are sending out on loan who are 19/20 or even 21 very few seem to be holding down a regular starting place at a level which suggests that they are close to even becoming starters in the championship. For example I would expect a player who has played at Belgium U21 level to be able to earn a starting place in the Blackpool team at league 1 level. I am sure though that physically they learn a lot though from playing lower league or non league football (or Scottish football) and that can only stand them in good stead and with some of these youngsters that's probably what these loans are aimed at because we no doubt recruit looking for primarily technical ability.
  12. Jim Smith

    The fabled academy

    Its really hard to judge the academy at the moment I think because there is inevitably a lag between making changes and those players starting to come through to challenge for first team places. The results of the U23s and U18s have certainly been a little disappointing but I think are a little bit distorted by the fact that so many players are out on loan which means we have younger players in the U23s and presumably also has a knock on effect on the younger sides. I assume that the target is that of the players recently brought in and/or brought through we will see 1 or 2 a season challenging for first team action in 2 or 3 years time. my slight concern is who will be challenging in the shorter term should we sell a couple of the current first team youngsters. Idah perhaps, but i'm not sure who else is anywhere near ready (especially if we are premier league) and I've been a little bit disappointed at both the levels we seem to be loaning players out to and also that very few of our players out on loan seem to be getting regular rave reviews, I must confess I;ve not really heard how Gilmour is doing so he may be the one to watch but I note that Power has not been getting in the team up in Scotland (even though their fans seem to rate him) and Spyrou (who I've always thought looked very promising) has just had his loan at Chesterfield cut short after an unsuccessful loan at Wrexham and Bushiri is not getting a regular game at Blackpool. I would hope that as a premier league club, our young players would be able to play regularly and cope at league 1 level at the very least as otherwise one has to question whether they are going to make the grade long term for a "yo-yo" club like us. I would certainly like to see Idah given the second half of the season on loan this season with a view to preparing him to play in our first team next season in the championship if we go down.
  13. Jim Smith

    That Gary Neville interview with Delia

    Surely that’s just because when they are struggling buyers are able to pick them up on the cheap, often simply by taking on or clearing the debt. This is really where the statements Delia and MWJ have made about not expecting to make any money from owning the club become relevant because I agree that if they were to insist on the market value for their stake in the club then yes that might deter some. If, however, they were to sell at a price that maybe just saw them recoup what they have put in and forego any profit in return for a buyer putting funds into the team/club instead then we would be an absolute bargain.
  14. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    Steven Naismith was an idiotic purchase of a player we didn't really need given he played the same position as Hoolahan (probably because he had an agent who had links with Neil i suspect) coupled with Mcnally losing the plot and not including the usual safeguards in the contract. It was a lazy signing thayt suggested we had a very poor scouting network at the time. I would agree with you absolutely that we would not want to buy a load more Stephen Naismiths but that is not a typical example of the sort of players clubs going up into the premier league have tended to sign and I am very confident that is not the sort of player we would sign based on our general recruitment strategy. Stephen Naismith cannot and should not be used as evidence that we should never push the boat out to sign players again.
  15. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    Why is it such a "risky business venture" to buy a couple of players for several million pounds who, if scouted well, will most likely retain their value or indeed could possibly increase in value? We have probably circa £250m of TV revenues owed to us over the next 4 seasons even in a worst case scenario. We have saleable assets in players worth close to £100m I would say. That's before you even get to the value of the other property assets the club has. Taking it back to the mortgage analogy, if I lost my job for any prolonged period of time I would be struggling to make mortgage payments. I'd probably have to sell the house because I don't have 5 valuable cars sitting in the garage that I could sell off if necessary to raise some funds. To be honest, if any club or organisation could afford to "take a bit of a punt" then its a premier league football club.
  16. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    Its not really any more "gambling with your future" than me having a mortgage on my house though is it? What we are saying is we intend to live mortgage free, despite the fact we actually have millions and millions of assets and future revenues coming in. I'm not and I don't think anyone else is seriously suggesting spending hundreds of millions. We would need new owners to do that. However, even under the current owners we could arguably be a bit more bullish/ballsy in my view.
  17. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    Point 5 wasn't me so not sure why you've included that. Point 6 is not accurate. You borrow, primarily, against the guaranteed future TV monies just as we did but perhaps to a greater extent. You also don't necessarily need to borrow if you have a wealthy owner who can lend the money to you or plug the gap which was my initial point.
  18. Jim Smith

    Paddy D and Daniel Farke

    I don't know where he's got that from to be honest unless that's his interpretation of the boos at the end of the game which to my mind were no more than one would expect when you've just lost to the bottom side at home in a 6 pointer and sunk to the foot of the table. I don't think I've heard any fans say that Farke has taken us as far as he can. I think he still has credit in the bank although I do wonder if he needs to add a specialist defence/set piece coach to his team because that is an area he continues to struggle to get to grips with. Any discontent that there may be (or could be if things continue as they are) is, in my view, aimed fairly and squarely at the board/owners rather than Farke.
  19. Nobody is saying that money makes you "exempt" from relegation. But it certainly improves your chances and in our case I am far from convinced we would have needed to spend that much given the technically good and talented young players we have at our disposal. Unfortunately, defeats and loss of confidence is now getting to those players but it may not have been that way had we given ourselves that bit more of a chance to compete.
  20. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    I don't think there would be a problem borrowing money short term either but they clearly are not prepared to do it other than to cover what they absolutely have to (e.g. the bridging loan/overdraft we took out this summer which has already been repaid). Re the second point I accept that there is an element of risk to taking into account the value of your assets in terms of determining spending but for example, we have Pukki, Arrons, Lewis, Buendia, Godfrey who collectively, even with our/their current drop in form and ignoring the other players we have, must be worth £60m plus (and that's being conservative). Its inconceivable that all will have career ending injuries or be rendered worthless by a poor season for us in the premier league. Given this, I would regard spending an extra £20-£30m or so in the summer as pretty low risk should he worst happen and we get relegated as they are all saleable assets as, indeed, would any signings we made also be. Webber is big on "being honest" with the fans. If he explained that to people (i.e. if you want us to spend a bit then we would have to sell someone if we got relegated) then I will bet good money most fans would prefer us to try that rather than go down with a pathetic whimper as it looks like we may do. Fundamentally though what the recent financial figures have shown is that we have owners who cannot afford to own a sustainable premier league club or indeed championship club without parachute payments and who are undoubtedly holding us back through their stance of not even considering new ownership.
  21. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    To be fair King its all in the accounts as to why we did not have that much money to spend but accounts of course only tell half the story and 2 points really occur I suppose: 1. Uber caution over spending in advance against the promised receipts and going into debt or I suppose even spending on the basis that we have playing assets worth millions we can see if the worst happens and we go down. We are taking a route whereby we only borrow if we absolutely have to and I think in respect of the latter would regard it as too high risk. They did take out an overdraft this summer of around £19m but it appears that we really just to cover the promotion bonuses and extra payments due on promotion. It certainly did not leave a lot to spend on transfers etc. 2. Cashflow - the question has often been asked what benefits would having wealthier owners and again I would say its linked to her above and our uber cautious approach. If you have wealthy backers then what that of course gives you is flexibility on cashflow. i'm not really talking about them personally funding signings etc but if they are able to loan the club some money here, underwrite a loan there, cover some of the capital costs we had to incur etc then that gives more flex to spend money sooner on players. With us, we don't get the first prem tv money payment until the season is underway I believe. We therefore have a cash flow issue in the summer until those monies start to come in.
  22. And there, right there, is the little window into why this club will never again succeed at the top level under them. Some might categorise it as selfishness, others as a sort of blinkered, utopian, naivity but the fact is that if all the others have money and we don't then we are destined to relegation every time we get up. We are not some kind of social experiment for champagne socialists.
  23. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    Because it absolutely would happen if they let it.
  24. It’s not really his fault but his flaws are being badly exposed. The level of coaching of our defence and how utterly pathetic we are at both attacking she defending set pieces are things a coach at this level could and should address if you want to give yourself a genuine chance as a smaller club.
  25. Jim Smith

    Is 'The Model' flawed?

    For me a flaw in “the model” is also that it takes away hope and ambition and without that I’m not sure you have the same club. I certainly can’t be the only one who finds myself questioning “what is the point” walking away from Carrow Road after last night? I think there is a real risk of the whole club collectively feeling the same next season if our “target” is to get up just for another season of misery. let’s be honest, the model is in reality nothing more than necessity. It’s the only way our owners can keep hold of a club they cannot really afford to run. It’s not the best chance we have of success. im also nervous about the performance of our older academy sides this season if we are reliant on kids coming through for this model. We were lucky to have 4 come through at once last season. Aside from Idah I’m not sure who else is waiting in the wings and our academy results have got worse under Webber. I know our focus now is not on results at that level but.....
×