West Ham sold to Icelandic banks.

[lappinitup 629]

Doomed to failure............

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/08062009/58/premier-league-west-ham-sold-icelandic-banks.html

"We have an initial two-year plan which includes improving the infrastructure at the club and we will be getting to work on this as soon as the new board is appointed."

Why, oh why didn''t they consult our Guild of Fag Packet Accountants before they made such a rash decision. Perfectly obvious that they don''t have a clue and Div3 beckons............

Everybody knows you don''t spend money on tangible fixed assets HAH!...........

They''re doomed I tell ye, doomed, DOOMED! [:D][:$][H]

[LQ 0]

You need to be careful with the use of that word ''sold'' there, Lappin! It''s just a matter of time before someone says "well if they can find a buyer why can''t we???" [;)]Just to clarify, West Ham wasn''t sold it was taken over by a new company formed from the major creditors who were terrified that they weren''t going to see anything back in their mitts after all. No-one else was interested and the holding co was about to go belly-up.

[blahblahblah 2]

You''ll be telling me that Arsenal shouldn''t have built the Emirates Stadium next [;)]

[I am a Banana 0]

there in a better position than us though!

[ndhscanary 0]

seems a bit of a wierd move to me but I thought the guy who owned it before was one of the majority shareholders of one of the main banks.

Seems like more and more clubs seem to be getting help from different governments. Obviously west ham are owned by this bank which is now nationalised in Iceland. The yanks were helping out man u as AIG had also been nationalised. While northern rock still sponsor newcastle and bradford and bingley bradford. Does anyone else not find it a bit ridiculous that tax payers money is going towards bradford and especially newcastle due to the amount of money they seem to waste. Although I suppose in rescent weeks the tax payers money has been wasted on a lot worse things

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="blahblahblah"]You''ll be telling me that Arsenal shouldn''t have built the Emirates Stadium next [;)][/quote]Exactly Blah, it''s perfectly obvious that Arsenal didn''t win the Premiership because they spent money on tangible fixed assets when everybody knew they needed good experienced strikers! [:@] 

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="ndhscanary"]

seems a bit of a wierd move to me but I thought the guy who owned it before was one of the majority shareholders of one of the main banks.

Seems like more and more clubs seem to be getting help from different governments. Obviously west ham are owned by this bank which is now nationalised in Iceland. The yanks were helping out man u as AIG had also been nationalised. While northern rock still sponsor newcastle and bradford and bingley bradford. Does anyone else not find it a bit ridiculous that tax payers money is going towards bradford and especially newcastle due to the amount of money they seem to waste. Although I suppose in rescent weeks the tax payers money has been wasted on a lot worse things

[/quote]That''s because banks run the world not Governments.

[Mad Anthony 0]

I think the reason Northern Rock are still sponsoring Newcastle (and I guess the same goes with AIG at Man Utd etc) is because any sponsorship money will have been budgeted for, and is money they are contractually obliged to pay.

It''s the same as RBS sponsoring PGA Events. It is a commitment that they can''t get out of and would be reluctant to due to the intial amounts they will have paid up front.