stupid transfer policy of our board!!!

[Big Down Under 0]

[quote user="Mr.Carrow"]Fair enough BDU, i am just trying to encourage people to see the bigger picture and ask a few questions. The likes of Ralph Wright seem to think if you ask questions about the club which he is uncomfortable with you must be a club-hating binner. Maybe we are just concerned about decisions made at the club and the reasons for the decline of recent years? But then i appreciate there are more people on here who are prepared to look at both sides of the argument. [:)][/quote]Ralph Wright is just a mirror image of Smudger, Mr Carrow. Things aren''t 100% right just as they aren''t 100% wrong. It seems the majority on here seem to think in terms of 100% either way, but there are a handful of posters who can see both sides of the argument and have a debate. I too am concerned about some of the decisions made, but always try to put them into the context of the modern game. Once you do that, you at least see why the board have done what they have done, and realise they do have the long term health of the club foremost in mind.

[Big Down Under 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Mr Carrow, you know better than most that the board have invested heavily in off field activities, specifically the land deal. You also know that the club stands to make a very healthy profit from that. The fact that they have invested too much at a time in off field activities also seems obvious, but none of us know how much Roeder has left on the table for the summer. We can guess, based on rumoured bids, but thats all.Smudger, if you don''t understand that clubs can''t earn enough through gate receipts these days to fund a consistently competitive team, you really should leave the finance talk to those that do.Arthur, unless you can provide any sort of quote from the club that they had spent money upfront on Big Dave you really should shut up on this. The media came up with a figure based on his release clause. We got him for one year cheaper than his release clause, and were contracted to spend 1m if we wanted to keep him. The board always kept the figures undisclosed until he went. You can''t blame the board for your own assumptions (well obviously you can, but to be honest it makes you look foolish).We aren''t a rich club. To much of the club''s money is tied up in a land deal, but we will make a profit on it. This is affecting our spending power, but we don''t fully know to what extent. We are now nearer the play off places than the relegation places, playing much better football, have an excellent manager, and more balanced looking squad, and we KNOW we have some funds for the summer. No need for the hysterical whinging at all.[/quote]

Yet the club did not mind letting their public believe that when it suited them did they?

When it suited them to tell us what they now want us to belive as the truth though, they are only too happy to talk to the press!!!

[/quote]While the contract was in place, the terms were undisclosed. Once the contract was cancelled, terms were released. Hardly cause for a conspiracy theory. If people can''t work out the difference between press speculation and quotes from the club, they should keep their mouth firmly shut.

[Big Down Under 0]

[quote user="Smudger"]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Mr Carrow, you know better than most that the board have invested heavily in off field activities, specifically the land deal. You also know that the club stands to make a very healthy profit from that. The fact that they have invested too much at a time in off field activities also seems obvious, but none of us know how much Roeder has left on the table for the summer. We can guess, based on rumoured bids, but thats all.Smudger, if you don''t understand that clubs can''t earn enough through gate receipts these days to fund a consistently competitive team, you really should leave the finance talk to those that do.Arthur, unless you can provide any sort of quote from the club that they had spent money upfront on Big Dave you really should shut up on this. The media came up with a figure based on his release clause. We got him for one year cheaper than his release clause, and were contracted to spend 1m if we wanted to keep him. The board always kept the figures undisclosed until he went. You can''t blame the board for your own assumptions (well obviously you can, but to be honest it makes you look foolish).We aren''t a rich club. To much of the club''s money is tied up in a land deal, but we will make a profit on it. This is affecting our spending power, but we don''t fully know to what extent. We are now nearer the play off places than the relegation places, playing much better football, have an excellent manager, and more balanced looking squad, and we KNOW we have some funds for the summer. No need for the hysterical whinging at all.[/quote]

Please point me to where I have said this.

No I thought that you couldn''t.

We do however have a bigger fan base than most in this league, plus recent money from our season in the Premiership, plus we have made money on tansfer activity year after year for the last few years.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I thought it was the job of a football club director to put money in to the club?

If they can''t do this and are soley relying on the fans to keep the club afloat, then surely it is time that they put the club up for sale and moved on???

[/quote]How many times do you ciriticise them for their off field investments and money generating schemes? Profits from these activities DO go back into the club. They have all put considerable amounts of their own personal money into the club, and unlike you they continue to do so. Every time you open your mouth you demonstrate your lack of understanding of the financing behind the modern game.Too much of our money right now seems to be tied up in land deals, and meeting the financing for those land deals. However this will return as future revenue for the club, and the profit on these deals is looking excellent. Meanwhile, wow we make a profit on player transfers. Are you trying to say we never did that in our history until Delia came along? Don''t you realise most other clubs our size, who don''t have mega rich board members, are in the same position?

[Mello Yello 2,281]

[quote user="Big Down Under"][quote user="Smudger"]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Mr Carrow, you know better than most that the board have invested heavily in off field activities, specifically the land deal. You also know that the club stands to make a very healthy profit from that. The fact that they have invested too much at a time in off field activities also seems obvious, but none of us know how much Roeder has left on the table for the summer. We can guess, based on rumoured bids, but thats all.

Smudger, if you don''t understand that clubs can''t earn enough through gate receipts these days to fund a consistently competitive team, you really should leave the finance talk to those that do.

Arthur, unless you can provide any sort of quote from the club that they had spent money upfront on Big Dave you really should shut up on this. The media came up with a figure based on his release clause. We got him for one year cheaper than his release clause, and were contracted to spend 1m if we wanted to keep him. The board always kept the figures undisclosed until he went. You can''t blame the board for your own assumptions (well obviously you can, but to be honest it makes you look foolish).

We aren''t a rich club. To much of the club''s money is tied up in a land deal, but we will make a profit on it. This is affecting our spending power, but we don''t fully know to what extent. We are now nearer the play off places than the relegation places, playing much better football, have an excellent manager, and more balanced looking squad, and we KNOW we have some funds for the summer. No need for the hysterical whinging at all.
[/quote]

Please point me to where I have said this.

No I thought that you couldn''t.

We do however have a bigger fan base than most in this league, plus recent money from our season in the Premiership, plus we have made money on tansfer activity year after year for the last few years.

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I thought it was the job of a football club director to put money in to the club?

If they can''t do this and are soley relying on the fans to keep the club afloat, then surely it is time that they put the club up for sale and moved on???

[/quote]

How many times do you ciriticise them for their off field investments and money generating schemes? Profits from these activities DO go back into the club. They have all put considerable amounts of their own personal money into the club, and unlike you they continue to do so. Every time you open your mouth you demonstrate your lack of understanding of the financing behind the modern game.

Too much of our money right now seems to be tied up in land deals, and meeting the financing for those land deals. However this will return as future revenue for the club, and the profit on these deals is looking excellent. Meanwhile, wow we make a profit on player transfers. Are you trying to say we never did that in our history until Delia came along? Don''t you realise most other clubs our size, who don''t have mega rich board members, are in the same position?
[/quote]

Is your above comment just hearsay, opinion - or are you fortunate and privy, to exclusive ''need to know'' information that you''ve personally weaned from behind Carra closed doors from so far, far, away?

You live (apparently) the other side of the world, yet seem to have all the answers to anyone''s criticism or the questioning of decisions made by the board......Enlighten me and many others where you obtain your ''pukka gen'' and most lucrative gossip from........and that, "the profit on these ''land deals'' is looking excellent.".......How do you actually know?

If I come on here and say that the club is in more financial woe than what folk think, and don''t back up my statement with fact....."I''m a binner" or just using guff and unsubstantiated comment - to once again beat the board with....So therefore, does that make you a ''board apologist'' and ''official and exclusive mole and club info leaky outerer'' who uses your ''inside knowledge'' to ''big the board up''?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[T 190]

If the current transfer policy of the board is stupid lets hope they and GR make some more stupid decisions.

[renegade tootsie 0]

I bet you feel REALLY foolish now dont you....

[quote user="baldyboy"]why oh why do we continue to waste money on loans? now we have more loanees than can be in a matchday squad!! why? surely this shows a total lack of ambition from this board of ours. we cannot keep relying on loans we need to make permanaent signings and quick.[/quote]

[Cheerio 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]why oh why do we continue to waste money on loans.[/quote]Terrible loan that Evans.....

[Big Down Under 0]

Mello - read http://www.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1/1131088/ShowPost.aspx#1131088 this thread Mr Carrow explains it with T.I''ve never ever even hinted at calling you a binner. I don''t think you are a binner. I have no inside information, and I am not a board member, friend, or whatever. You seem to think I am a liar, why? Becuase I don''t agree with you? Stop casting doubts about me the person, and start answering my points, or shut up.

[Rupethebear 0]

Not looking quite so stupid now is it??

Another 2 goals and 3 points from Ched Evans.....this type of player is not available to buy!!!!

[Green and Yellow 0]

[quote user="baldyboy"]why oh why do we continue to waste money on loans? now we have more loanees than can be in a matchday squad!! why? surely this shows a total lack of ambition from this board of ours. we cannot keep relying on loans we need to make permanaent signings and quick.[/quote]

I agree with you on that one. Loans are OK in the short term, but they are not a long term solution. So the board will have to bite the bullet and cough up money for permanent signings.

[BigFish 1,986]

[quote user="The Great Escape. "]

[quote user="baldyboy"]why oh why do we continue to waste money on loans? now we have more loanees than can be in a matchday squad!! why? surely this shows a total lack of ambition from this board of ours. we cannot keep relying on loans we need to make permanaent signings and quick.[/quote]

I agree with you on that one. Loans are OK in the short term, but they are not a long term solution. So the board will have to bite the bullet and cough up money for permanent signings.

[/quote]This type of thinking is at least a decade out of date. "Long term solution" lol. Teams are built these days almost on a season by season basis and season long lones are the equal of a signing. Particularly in the CCC where you go up or your best players leave e.g. Etuhu, Earnshaw etc.There is no long term when it comes to the team so grow up, stop moaning and realish another three points.

[Big Down Under 0]

[quote user="BigFish"][quote user="The Great Escape. "]

[quote user="baldyboy"]why oh why do we continue to waste money on loans? now we have more loanees than can be in a matchday squad!! why? surely this shows a total lack of ambition from this board of ours. we cannot keep relying on loans we need to make permanaent signings and quick.[/quote]

I agree with you on that one. Loans are OK in the short term, but they are not a long term solution. So the board will have to bite the bullet and cough up money for permanent signings.

[/quote]This type of thinking is at least a decade out of date. "Long term solution" lol. Teams are built these days almost on a season by season basis and season long lones are the equal of a signing. Particularly in the CCC where you go up or your best players leave e.g. Etuhu, Earnshaw etc.There is no long term when it comes to the team so grow up, stop moaning and realish another three points.[/quote]Absolutely right Bigfish. Somebody who gets it.

[Mello Yello 2,281]

[quote user="Big Down Under"]Mello - read http://www.pinkun.com/cs/forums/1/1131088/ShowPost.aspx#1131088 this thread Mr Carrow explains it with T.

I''ve never ever even hinted at calling you a binner. I don''t think you are a binner. I have no inside information, and I am not a board member, friend, or whatever. You seem to think I am a liar, why? Becuase I don''t agree with you? Stop casting doubts about me the person, and start answering my points, or shut up.
[/quote]

Sorry, I don''t do ''shut up''........You (just like ickle old me) are just a supposed regular and average individual, (you from afar) posting opinion, supposition, unsubstantiated and personal comment on a football message forum. If you wish to become defensive and go on the offensive - because I question your source and facts pertaining to ''land deals'' etc, then so be it. You have no inside information, are not a board member, friend or whatever.......Therefore, I will now accept the fact that what you type on this forum is as credible as what any other contributing input is.....and will continue to agree to disagree with your input pertaining to the financial fruition from off the field assets and various other matters concerning the NCFC board. (And other stuff).

''Non Binner'' Mello Yello.   

  

  

[Poringland Canary (1) 0]

Some people on here are so thick!

The loanees are making the regulars sit up and take notice - no regular place.

Glenn couldn''t get the right permanant people, and at the time

the play offs were just a dream, Glenn must have been looking at next season?

So then decide what happens re Hucks, and Taylor?

And then with a mill or two, but the right players.

And who knows? ..... maybe one or two loanees may want a permannant move?

And ....... time to sus out Martin and Jarvis''s

[arrdee 1]

[quote user="The Great Escape. "]

[quote user="baldyboy"]why oh why do we continue to waste money on loans? now we have more loanees than can be in a matchday squad!! why? surely this shows a total lack of ambition from this board of ours. we cannot keep relying on loans we need to make permanaent signings and quick.[/quote]

I agree with you on that one. Loans are OK in the short term, but they are not a long term solution. So the board will have to bite the bullet and cough up money for permanent signings.

[/quote]

What we must all try to understand is that football has changed , loans are like short term transfers . There is nothing wrong with loans , would you buy a car without trying it first? Or being with your girlfriend before marriage ? You must always try before you buy . Would you have been happy if we had paid £750 K for Jimmy Smith ?

[corbs 0]

''but I thought it was the job of a football club director to put money in to the club?''. Really, and who is being naive now!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

[quote user="arrdee"]

What we must all try to understand is that football has changed , loans are like short term transfers . There is nothing wrong with loans , would you buy a car without trying it first? Or being with your girlfriend before marriage ? You must always try before you buy . Would you have been happy if we had paid £750 K for Jimmy Smith ?[/quote]

That''s a great point about Jimmy Smith. We have to realise that football has changed. Being stuck with unwanted players on long contracts has been the ruination of many clubs. It''s not the fee that''s the problem with permanent transfers these days, it''s the contracts.