Jump to content
TIL 1010

Can't Argue With Any Of This But Some Will No Doubt.

Recommended Posts

Certainly some truth in it. The Times article was a PR disaster; there is no guarantee of promotion next year etc

Some things definitely wrong - our budget is not shoestring in the Championship, especially with parachute payments. It is likely to be the biggest or second biggest next year.

Some parts purely speculative. He acknowledges that by special resolution there is the capacity to create a million new shares, which is as far as I am aware correct but then says that he doesn't think that the owners want them to be taken up. It is, of course, purely speculative with no evidence and does not even attempt to explain why they should pass and renew the special resolution?

So, whilst the OP might agree with all of it, perhaps he might explain why he believes that our budget will be lower than most Championship clubs and why the special resolution has been passed enabling the creation of new shares?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An excellent piece of writing. Thanks for sharing.

It highlights the problem that things will probably have to go very wrong before Smith and Jones decide to sell. I hope not but they've never behaved in any way to suggest otherwise. 

I shuddered when I heard the news from Oldham yesterday. OK, we're a 'bigger' club than them but so what. **** happens. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting things to a vote described as ‘crazy’. Personally I’m quite keen on democracy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“The notion that Delia Smith and Michael Wynn-Jones are literally the only two people capable of owning and controlling this football club is wearing a little thin.”

 

👍

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

From the article:

"Why are our Club’s owners so reluctant to allow someone – or something – into the club to help make it more robust and competitive? Why will they not even contemplate it?

As things stand, we’re marooned in the hinterland betwixt Premier League and Championship – good enough to compete successfully in one while being hopelessly out of our depth in the other.

There will naturally come a time when we’re unable to bulldoze our way out of the Championship thanks to the comfort blanket of parachute payments, but those for whom Delia is Queen pretend this will never be a thing because our innovative recruitment and our academy’s reliable production line will always pull us through.

But one day it won’t. That time could be next season."

 

Could easily be argued with:

"Why are our clubs fans so sure that someone- or something- would make the club more successful and competitive? Why are they so sure of it?

As things stand, we’re marooned in the hinterland betwixt Premier League and Championship – good enough to dominate in one while struggling in the other.

There will naturally come a time when we’re unable to bulldoze our way out of the Championship thanks to the comfort blanket of parachute payments, but those for whom Delia is Satan claim this will be easily rectified by the presence of any billionaire because money guarantees Premier League stability.

But it doesn't. Look at how many mega-rich owners have failed to achieve Premier League promotion and left their clubs languishing in the EFL."

Edited by Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Badger said:

Certainly some truth in it. The Times article was a PR disaster; there is no guarantee of promotion next year etc

Some things definitely wrong - our budget is not shoestring in the Championship, especially with parachute payments. It is likely to be the biggest or second biggest next year.

Some parts purely speculative. He acknowledges that by special resolution there is the capacity to create a million new shares, which is as far as I am aware correct but then says that he doesn't think that the owners want them to be taken up. It is, of course, purely speculative with no evidence and does not even attempt to explain why they should pass and renew the special resolution?

So, whilst the OP might agree with all of it, perhaps he might explain why he believes that our budget will be lower than most Championship clubs and why the special resolution has been passed enabling the creation of new shares?

I've always suspected that the 1 million new shares resolution was a publicity stunt. Just because the club is prepared to issue 1m new shares doesn't mean that they will sell them all to the same person. Smith/Jones are in a position to make it up as they go along. I have never believed they will relinquish control and doubt they will in the future unless things get very unpleasant. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Badger said:

Certainly some truth in it. The Times article was a PR disaster; there is no guarantee of promotion next year etc

Some things definitely wrong - our budget is not shoestring in the Championship, especially with parachute payments. It is likely to be the biggest or second biggest next year.

Some parts purely speculative. He acknowledges that by special resolution there is the capacity to create a million new shares, which is as far as I am aware correct but then says that he doesn't think that the owners want them to be taken up. It is, of course, purely speculative with no evidence and does not even attempt to explain why they should pass and renew the special resolution?

So, whilst the OP might agree with all of it, perhaps he might explain why he believes that our budget will be lower than most Championship clubs and why the special resolution has been passed enabling the creation of new shares?

Yeah to be fair there's some good bits in it but he's got some facts spectacularly wrong. We will be paying more wages than at least 20 clubs in the division next season, and likely spend more in transfer fees too.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yeah to be fair there's some good bits in it but he's got some facts spectacularly wrong. We will be paying more wages than at least 20 clubs in the division next season, and likely spend more in transfer fees too.

You’ve got to love the old parachute payments haven’t you. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree with all of that. But there will be others that are so steadfast in the support of the Smith/Wyn-Jones regime that any opposing views just get condescendingly dismissed. There’s starting to develop a real split in the fan base over this issue. Probably more so for a decade or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FenwayFrank said:

“The notion that Delia Smith and Michael Wynn-Jones are literally the only two people capable of owning and controlling this football club is wearing a little thin.”

 

👍

That would be my counter-argument to anyone who thinks otherwise. Not every potential buyer is an immoral and dodgy organisation, despite what we are constantly reminded of.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, FenwayFrank said:

“The notion that Delia Smith and Michael Wynn-Jones are literally the only two people capable of owning and controlling this football club is wearing a little thin.”

 

👍

I'm not aware of ever having read this anywhere though? I am on this board too frequently, but I can't recall ever seeing it. I can recall many occasions when it has been alleged, but none where this has been evidenced once challenged.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yeah to be fair there's some good bits in it but he's got some facts spectacularly wrong. We will be paying more wages than at least 20 clubs in the division next season, and likely spend more in transfer fees too.

There’s some good bits but let me highlight something that isn’t particularly relevant to the ownership debate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Yeah to be fair there's some good bits in it but he's got some facts spectacularly wrong. We will be paying more wages than at least 20 clubs in the division next season, and likely spend more in transfer fees too.

I don't think so. The two that go down with us will probably have bigger budgets and possibly Sheffield United and WBA will as well. And the important point not made is that we were promoted twice because we had Farke and Buendia. We now have Gilmour and Smith. 

The main point of the article is, what happens when we don't go back up? That's when the majority of supporters will turn, some in quite an unpleasant way.

To be perfectly honest I would now take Championship safety over the last 2 Premier League seasons. But you only need to look down the road to see what happens when you accept mediocrity. 

Edited by dylanisabaddog
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Badger said:

Certainly some truth in it. The Times article was a PR disaster; there is no guarantee of promotion next year etc

Some things definitely wrong - our budget is not shoestring in the Championship, especially with parachute payments. It is likely to be the biggest or second biggest next year.

Some parts purely speculative. He acknowledges that by special resolution there is the capacity to create a million new shares, which is as far as I am aware correct but then says that he doesn't think that the owners want them to be taken up. It is, of course, purely speculative with no evidence and does not even attempt to explain why they should pass and renew the special resolution?

So, whilst the OP might agree with all of it, perhaps he might explain why he believes that our budget will be lower than most Championship clubs and why the special resolution has been passed enabling the creation of new shares?

"Why are our Club’s owners so reluctant to allow someone – or something – into the club to help make it more robust and competitive? Why will they not even contemplate it?"

"The notion that Delia Smith and Michael Wynn-Jones are literally the only two people capable of owning and controlling this football club is wearing a little thin."

I believe the first claim to be false, and I don't think anyone, and that includes S&J, regards them as the only people fit to own and control the club.

But if Gowers wants new ownership then he is in a very good position at MFW not just to campaign for that but actually to do something about finding the right people.

  • Like 4
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I don't think so. The two that go down with us will probably have bigger budgets and possibly Sheffield United and WBA will as well. 

Given their financial situations, I very much doubt that Burnley and Watford will bigger budgets than us. The others are debateable and to some extent depends upon performance - if they go up and we don't it might be the case as clubs pay more than budgeted in the knowledge of Premier league revenues (I should have caveated my point above).

What is beyond doubt though is that to describe our budget next year as shoestring by championship standards is ridiculous and calls into question the authors knowledge on this aspect at least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I genuinely don’t understand and would love someone to explain why the club doesn’t do a new share run?

We are a self funding club, businesses that are self funding would do this for investment.

Are you honestly telling me that if shares were offered that a mixture of supporters and investors wouldn’t snap them up? 

The only reason not to do so, to my admittedly vague knowledge on this issue, to me seems to be to maintain the value and control of the current shareholders as presumably they’d be unwilling to buy new shares at an amount to maintain their control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I don't think so. The two that go down with us will probably have bigger budgets and possibly Sheffield United and WBA will as well. And the important point not made is that we were promoted twice because we had Farke and Buendia. We now have Gilmour and Smith. 

The main point of the article is, what happens when we don't go back up? That's when the majority of supporters will turn, some in quite an unpleasant way.

To be perfectly honest I would now take Championship safety over the last 2 Premier League seasons. But you only need to look down the road to see what happens when you accept mediocrity. 

Regarding 'accept mediocrity' Marcus Evans money wasn't too mediocre! Apparently it was ambitious and look what happened there! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Can't Argue With Any Of This But Some Will No Doubt.

And lo and behold, the usual suspects do exactly that.

Because some people with critical faculties are able to demonstrate that some, but not all, of the article is wrong. The perceived errors in the article that the OP swallowed without challenge have been made and the he is able to demonstrate where these replies are wrong but has thus far had better things to do - and good luck to him - I off now too! 😃

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

because we had Farke and Buendia. We now have Gilmour and Smith. 

Farke who you labelled as 'completely out of his depth' at the beginning of the first promotion winning season?

Gilmour won't be here (thankfully) and it's ridiculous to be writing off Smith after 3 quarters of a season with an extremely limited squad, that on the couple of occasions of showing some promise, was then ruined by injuries to key players.

It's entirely predictable and in keeping with general lazy fan opinion (tooing and froing) that so many want Smith out like they also wanted Farke out before he then helped orchestrate the most enjoyable season I've witnessed as a City fan. Thankfully those fans don't make the decisions on hiring and firing and there's hope Smith is given the time and opportunity to make his mark on the squad and club.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Badger said:

Because some people with critical faculties are able to demonstrate that some, but not all, of the article is wrong. The perceived errors in the article that the OP swallowed without challenge have been made and the he is able to demonstrate where these replies are wrong but has thus far had better things to do - and good luck to him - I off now too! 😃

The other point is that, with the exception of the topical Webber stuff, Gowers could have written this same piece, with the same arguments, some of which are valid, some of which are highly debatable, and some of which are specious, after we beat Burnley, or after we lost narrowly at Old Trafford.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, tea total said:

Regarding 'accept mediocrity' Marcus Evans money wasn't too mediocre! Apparently it was ambitious and look what happened there! 

Be interesting to see how things pan out with their American ownership, they seem to be making all the right noises so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

31 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Can't Argue With Any Of This But Some Will No Doubt.

And lo and behold, the usual suspects do exactly that.

That’s because parts of it are incorrect and much of it is conjecture/opinion, rather than fact as presented.  If it resonates with your view I guess you’re not bothered about the former and will agree with the latter, but thankfully there’s some who do like to question things.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For some, the grass will always be greener on the other side of the fence.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Branston Pickle said:

 

That’s because parts of it are incorrect and much of it is conjecture/opinion, rather than fact as presented.  If it resonates with your view I guess you’re not bothered about the former and will agree with the latter, but thankfully there’s some who do like to question things.

It seems according to some that if youre not calling Webber a c*nt outside the city stand you're no longer allowed to point out factual mistakes in an article. 🙃

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, kdncfc said:

Be interesting to see how things pan out with their American ownership, they seem to be making all the right noises so far.

All the right noises but likely to finish even worse than the season before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...