Jump to content

Badger

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    8,544

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    15

Posts posted by Badger

  2. Posted

    2 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

    1. I think there is enough in the squad that it should be top 6, even with the injuries we have had. There are deficiencies in the squad but some of the selections and tactics have made it (and certain players) look worse than they are.

     

    2. I have no idea if it’s realistic but I would have tried to get Potter. If he ends up at one of our divisional rivals that will be irritating. I would hope also that Knapper might know of some young, highly rated coaches that we might be able to approach.

    I like Wagner as a bloke and who can’t help but feel pleased for him when we pull a result out of the bag like Sunday but his way of playing is so dependent on having all of the right personnel fit (and even then I’m not sure it now wouldn’t be exposed by the better sides) that it’s not going to work. The main problem, as ever, is in the midfield and that appears to be his blind spot. 

     

    I don't disagree with much of this. There is a current of opinion which says that we have poor players, but generally, when fit, which I disagree with. (It always strikes me as strange when some on here say that all our players are useless and that we should sack the manager - if the players are as bad as they suggest, he is pulling a blinder to keep us midtable!)

    Like you, I think that our squad is top end championship with out the outstanding players that a couple of the relegation clubs have. A play off place would be par for the course as far as I'm concerned. I also like Wagner as a person but feel that we keep on giving away the same type of goal - repeatedly. Every time is can be described as an individual error but it makes me think that perhaps the strategy is too demanding on some of them, precisely because it cannot accommodate error in the press - which makes the midfield look invisible (although my suspicion is that it is an error elsewhere that has sold them down the river). 

  4. Posted

    2 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

    It’s not working. As soon as we play anyone decent we will lose. Nothing has changed we’ve just played three crap sides. It’s a bit like under Smith when were picking up results whilst playing crap and everyone could see it wasn’t sustainable. 

    So can I clarify Jim:

    1. Do you think that Webber assembled a squad that should be pushing for promotion rather than being mid table?

    2. Which currently available manager do you think would help us attain said promotion?

    For my part, I am not a big fan of Wagner as a manager, but I don't think that rushing to a quick sacking is necessarily the best solution - it is more likely to lead to a rushed appointment and the lack of a pre-season makes it harder for a new manager to implement his playing style.

  6. Posted

    1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

    If they had any sense, no more than they were required to.

    Who would?

    The point is however, that they "benefit" from UK infrastructure (roads etc) without making a significant contribution towards it upkeep and development. The appalling state of our infrastructure is one of the reasons why our productivity growth is slow and the low rate of economic growth. There needs to be a method of fairly taxing the online mega businesses.

    • Like 1

  8. Posted · Edited by Badger
    Changed "and" to "as."

    18 hours ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

    I suppose I would describe it as a well struck long ball into the channel for the centre forward to chase. And, yes, he's obviously going to be better at bringing the ball out from the back than your average Championship central defender.

    It's funny isn't it? All the talk before the game was about playing Kenny in central defence, with many posters citing it as evidence that Wagner had gone completely mad, but at the end of the day our defence wasn't noticeably any better or any worse than in previous games. 

    Perhaps it just further evidence that many of the 20% are as clueless about football as most of them are about finance! 😇

    • Like 1

  10. Posted

    48 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:

    Once the penny drops that her perception of it only being 20% of disgruntles is shown up to be the myth that it is, then her self-perceived vision of her value to the club will be realised.

    I don't think that is her perception at all. Nobody can be happy atm, herself included, what she said was that the "boo boys" were only about 20%, which from what I have observed is not far off.

    The last time we had regular good times watching City live, were pre covid, nobody enjoys this but a lot of fans have experienced this before and know in their hearts that those who offer easy solutions and panaceas are not to be believed.

  11. Posted

    28 minutes ago, Indy said:

    Who cares about other clubs? I’m pointing out those who ran riot to get Bob out for big debt, poor running of the club are now happy to back the same standards now! I just want to know why the double standards?

    Perhaps they saw the results and learnt from it? Would you say it was an overwhelming success?

  12. Posted

    2 hours ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

    Say what you like about the media Nutty, but they’re far more in tune with the fanbase than condescending boot-lickers like you.

    There's nothing like intelligent debate is there? And this is nothing like it!

    Do you really have to be so offensive to a dedicated City fan just because they have a different viewpoint to you? It really doesn't help your case as it suggests a lack of capacity for reasoned thinking.

  13. Posted

    1 hour ago, KeiranShikari said:

    Self funding has a different definition now. Attanasio's self funding means that they themselves can put money in as opposed to what it was before where we could only spend what we made through player sales or received as tv money.

    I'm not sure that it was ever "defined." As it seems that MA is charging interest on the money he is lending us, the main difference for this this "model of self-funding," is that we are paying interest to a director rather than to a bank.

    There is a not insignificant advantage to this in that a director is less likely to foreclose, but interest is still interest and it means that there will be less money to spend on the team than if we had not borrowed in the first place. It's a shame that we took up the urge to borrow loads just as interest rates were moving to a generational high.

  14. Posted

    7 hours ago, king canary said:

    The most reassuring point in there is MA saying he sees the loans as self funding.

    The most concerning part is Delia and MWJ's complete rejection of any concern over governance. 

    Now I'm confused - is self-funding good now? I thought is was the root of all evil?*

    *BTW that is not a point specifically addressed to you - I know how sensitive you are to these things.

  16. Posted

    2 hours ago, GMF said:

    MA has put in over £40m in the past year. How’s that going?

    And so far at least, he has charged interest on the money he has lent us, meaning that we have less money, not more.

    Using the car metaphor that seems to have been introduced, not only are we still unable to buy a Ferrari, but now we are going to have to sell the Fiat because we can't afford to run it.

    Can you rent mopeds?

    • Like 1
    • Haha 2

  17. Posted

    12 hours ago, NewNestCarrow said:

    Balls is just a professional misery, who loves the attention.

    He spent much of the late 1990s moaning about the state of the club, being silenced by the success of 2002 onwards.

    After a few years he was back, casting gloom around him, comparing City unfavourably to Wigan. 

    And then, his oh-so-public Season Ticket surrender, conducted via social media.

     

    I think the term is "fair weather supporter:" only loyal when things are going well. Frankly, we're better off without them.

    • Like 1

  18. Posted

    21 hours ago, shefcanary said:

    On another thread I've modelled what I think will happen to debt.

    I foresee a reduction to £48m (halved - £38m to Attanasio includes £10m for C Prefs, £4m to other  pref shareholders / bondholders, £6m to third parties secured on future transfer instalments). The recent profit of summer transfers (£18m), the conversion of Attanasio's relevant loan (£5m), repayment of the third party loans secured on parachute and transfer payment instalments (£17m + £8m respectively) will be used. This assumes a break-even operating return and a balanced net transfer spend. Any adverse variance from this I assume will be bankrolled by Attanasio.

    Whatever, the majority will be owed to Attanasio et al. Can he really afford to take £5m+ from the club's operating budget ad finitum?

    That is quite literally, the multi-million pound question! The fact that he has taken money last year, is not encouraging - but I suppose he may feel when we are in receipt of parachute payments it is not quite as critical. The other thing he could do (I think others have) is to turn the interest due into further debt which he can claim when (if) we regain PL status, or alternatively use the debt to buy equity in the future. (I'm sure you know this 😁)

  19. Posted

    1 hour ago, Big O said:

    Why do we give these people a platform? I mean he’s an awful fan who I’ve witnessed booing and taking the mick out of our own players on several occasions and his columns were utter dross. Very odd. 

     

    Is he the one who has stopped supporting the club as some form of "protest?" (Presumably because we didn't take on enough debt?)

  20. Posted

    3 hours ago, essex canary said:

    I am sure Ben Gibson's uncle would do better than that.

    Then again I doubt he would pay his nephew such a ridiculous salary, incur £2 million interest to borrow £5 million for a training ground project or engage in the highest salary bill in Premier League history and be marooned at the bottom?

    How to make the Premier League gulf even bigger in one easy lesson.

    TBF, Gibson has spent over £200 million to make Middlesborough a mid-table Championship club, with visits to the PL less frequent than our own.

  21. Posted

    3 hours ago, shefcanary said:

    After today's UK inflation news of 4.6% (and more importantly yesterdays US inflation news which was down to 3.2%), now is not the time to fix the interest rate based on current rates. If we are still in negotiation with our biggest lender (ha, ha) base it on likely future BoE rate of 2.5 - 4%. Attanasio must not be allowed to charge 11% on the renegotiated long term loan, anything more than 6% and he is taking the proverbial. 

    Some clubs (e.g. Southampton) were paying about 9% above the Bamk's base rate in 2021 to MSD and an Australian bank (Macquarie) was rumoured to be charging more, which would suggest a commercial rate of c 14% (for highly geared football clubs - nb look at the rate of administration). In this case, 11% could be seen as a pretty good deal!! (Rather hoping that we don't pay this much.)

    Given obvious attempts to reduce the wage bill etc, would you dare venture an estimate of debt levels from this year's accounts (+/- 50%)? I was under the impression, perhaps erroneously, that they may decline this year as a result of the actions taken.

  22. Posted

    12 hours ago, essex canary said:

     

    I agree. It is not helpful to charge it when at Championship level. By charge, I mean charge. No point in deferring it either as it may take a while to get back PL in which case it will pile up and inhibit the first attempt back in the PL

     

    With interest rates at a generational high, it is the worst time imaginable to become highly geared. 

  23. Posted

    3 hours ago, essex canary said:

    Do most owners charge interest? I can't see that at the likes of Middlesbrough and Blackburn. It can't be good practice when without PL or parachute TV money.

    I don't think that many in the championship do as it would rather defeat the purpose of subsidising the club to gain premier league riches! It is much more common in the PL, but then there's more money to play with. The other thing, obviously, is how the debt is owed - if it is external debt, as some of ours is, currently at least, interest is unavoidable.

    If MA intends to continue to do so, we need to get our debt down quickly, or it would weaken our long-term advantages at Championship level - player sales being the obvious solution.

  24. Posted

    10 minutes ago, duke63 said:

     

    I just don't see every club making a profit on transfers when we see the ridiculous and ever increasing transfer fees plus wages that go with them.

    Wages do not count as part of the calculation. As I've tried to explain the fees are written down over time. What you view as "profit" is probably not the same as it is accounted for in accounting terms.

  25. Posted

    2 hours ago, duke63 said:

    I struggle to understand how nearly every club is making a profit in player trading. That cannot be true. 

    As suggested above it's due to amortisation and players developed through the academies.

    An academy player is more or less pure profit.  Amortisation involves writing down the value of a player's registration over time.

    e.g. If you buy a player for £10 million on a five year deal, his registration is written down over 5 years, - @ 2 million p.a. Therefore, after 4 years, he will only be valued at £2 million - if a club then sells him for say, £4 million, it has made a profit of £2 million, even though it paid £10 million originally.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...