Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Community Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. [quote user="morty"][quote user="spudgfsh"]That''s the difference between having someone owning the club that has a good head for both business and for football.[/quote]How much is that owner worth, and how much have they put into Stoke?[/quote] Coates is owner of Bet365 (so worth a fair bit) but hasn''t pumped lots of money into the club (by modern standards) and the biggest one he''s made (or so I''m led to believe) was buying the local council out of owning the ground. What he has done is made sure that all of the money made in the club stays in the club (food etc). Yes there''s a lot of sponsorship but it''s his business and he''s not ''doing an man city'' The season ticket prices were always low and have stayed low. of course at the moment (and I hate to say it) I''d much rather watch a Mark Hughes inspired Stoke city (play anyone) than sit in the south stand every week.
  2. That''s the difference between having someone owning the club that has a good head for both business and for football.
  3. A friend of mine has a season ticket at Stoke City. consistently every year I''ve had my season ticket (since 2008-09) his season ticket has been over £200 cheaper than mine (for a not to dissimilar seat). I''ll say that again at least £200 every season over 10 seasons (when I renew). in that period he has seen consistent premier league football in a stadium and supporter base not too dissimilar to ours. They have not been run at a loss over that period either. someone said that the least they could do was freeze the prices... They''re still costing me £2000 more over a decade for (mostly) worse football. BRING THE PRICES DOWN!!!
  4. If your''re really interested as to whether it''s a hoax I''d ask someone like chris gorham or Rob Butler to see whether it looks anything like they see prior to the embargoed version they get. I believe that they get them the night before release. It''s got a statement on the front saying when they can be released (in its favour) and as has been said it''s got a not perfect quality image on the front (questionable). It''s not a document meant for wide circulation (to the general public) so they may not put that much effort into getting it to look right.
  5. I think that following his season at boro he started to believe he''d made it. last season at Palace and then with us he showed that he''s not quite good enough for the premier league (at the moment). He just didn''t look good enough. Compare him to Harry Kane, both are strikers at big clubs who are of a similar age and have been sent out on loan a lot. Kane didn''t look very good when with us but took the experience and has clearly learned from the experience. Bamford on the other hand has had a good season in the championship (scoring more in that one season than harry kane did in all his loan spells combined) and hasn''t looked like much since. Technically he may be very good but until someone can sit him down and get his head in the right place he''s just not good enough to make it at the level we will need him to.
  6. It''s on the Internet.... It must be true
  7. I may be missing something but it seems like a leap between him saying leaving Everton was a good thing for his career to him saying that he''s 100% defninately staying at Carra Rud this summer...
  8. The loan window, like the change to transfer windows, has been on the radar of FIFA for a long time. It was only left alone in the first place because of very good lobbying by the FL. There will be a lot of problems within the lower leagues (more especially leagues 1 and 2) where clubs won''t be able to afford all of the players that they need. Most championship clubs will be able to cope without the loan window as they''ll have the squad (or squad + youngsters) to be able to cope. If you look at the way the PL has coped with the transfer window introduction it''s clear it took them until the last couple of years for teams to work out that they need to plan ahead (us included). The last couple of years teams have been more pro-active in their transfer policies and it''s made the transfer deadline day much less interesting.
  9. I have a season ticket and travel from derby. Generally make it a weekend for saturday matches but travel there and back on midweek games. (not looking forward to those extra midweeks next season)
  10. I do get that we were forced to pay back the banks when we were first promoted to the PL. The points I was trying to make was that debt wasn''t in and of itself is not a bad thing if you can service it and that the aim to remain debt free in all circumstances is very limiting on the club. The only way we will ever get a stadium capacity of 35,000 would be through debt.
  11. if we make a profit we will be paying corporation tax. we paid £2.5M in corporaration tax in 2013/14
  12. There''s a difference between ''being in debt'' and being in ''financial trouble''. You can be in debt by a significant amount of money (personally, as a enterprise or as a nation) but if you can service that debt then you are not in financial trouble. if you have a mortgage then you''ll have a significant amount of debt (sometimes up to 4 time your income) but if you keep making the payments then your bank will be making money and will quite happily leave you alone. Debt in and of itself is not a bad thing. The debt taken on to pay for stadium improvements will pay for itself if you can get the extra paying punters into matches. That was the mistake that McNally made was to pay off the debt and then aim for being completely externally debt free. If we take on debt to pay for fees, wages etc the we''ll turn into a QPR or a Fulham but that is not what should or would have happened. I still contend that the debts which we had when going into league 1 was nothing compared to some had and we could have managed them better before the relegation and managed them well during the league 1 and championship seasons.
  13. I''ve said all season that all of the shirts this season were horrific. you''d have to pay me to have one and even then I''d still not be seen dead in it. The home shirt could have been brilliant but it just looks stupid with the bite out of it. The away shirt could just about be considered tolerable but pin stripes still look stupid on a football shirt (always have always will). The third kit is an affront to all taste and dignity,
  14. they''d have to be compensated by more TV money. I''m sure that they could find 20 to 30 million quid from somewhere in football to compensate them. the full press release is here BTW http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/article/2016/a-whole-game-solution-3119809.aspx
  15. The mechanics of making 3*24 team leagues (plus 8 new teams) into 4*20 team leagues in one go is quite tortuous. (which has been proposed) if you had 2 teams promoted from league 1 and 2 you''d need 6 relegated from the championship and 10 from league 1 and the bottom 12 from league 2 to make up the new league 3. I can''t see the league 1 clubs agreeing to 10 relegation spots in a single season. I assume they''d end up doing it over 2 seasons with the first season being 22,22,18,18 with 4 down and 2 up from champ, l1 and l2
  • Create New...