David Gold & David Sullivan offer to buy into West Ham

[Butterbean_Canary 0]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/w/west_ham_utd/8403457.stm

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

Boring bar stewards!

[The Fish Seller 0]

"The duo would take a substantial shareholding for a nominal fee,

promising to invest in the team in January and offer expertise.

They also want the option of buying the club outright at a later date."

Such ''nominal fee'' being based upon the fact that Wet Sham are deeply in debt I would think.

Would never have worked at Norwich, oh no we''re much ''too cleverer'' than that.

[blahblahblah 2]

Sullivan would never have bought into Norwich, it''s too far away.

[In Dubious Battle 0]

We dodged a bullet there.

[PKC 0]

Rather them than Charlton.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there. [/quote]Did we?Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

Agree with PKC. We can do without Charlton having a sudden injection of cash for the January window!

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there.
[/quote]

Did we?

Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.
[/quote]

Can''t be true, T and his followers says no one makes money out of investing in Football clubs.

You must have just made all that up[:D]

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote user="The Butler"]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there. [/quote]Did we?Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.[/quote]

Can''t be true, T and his followers says no one makes money out of investing in Football clubs.

You must have just made all that up[:D]

[/quote]Gold & Sullivan made money out of the club, in the same way a property developer makes money out of a house.  You could argue that Yeung bought at the top of the market - but their money making has nothing to do with the club as a going concern, which for all we know could have been stacking up a mountain of debt that will require a multi-millionaire to service.Would you be happy for NCFC to be used to make 2 rich men richer ?

[a1canary 0]

Main concern, as already mentioned, is that it''s not Charlton. This raises the probability of them having to sell in January.

And more or less eliminates the possibility of them getting serious investment before then.

[The Butler 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="The Butler"]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there.
[/quote]

Did we?

Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.
[/quote]

Can''t be true, T and his followers says no one makes money out of investing in Football clubs.

You must have just made all that up[:D]

[/quote]

Gold & Sullivan made money out of the club, in the same way a property developer makes money out of a house.  You could argue that Yeung bought at the top of the market - but their money making has nothing to do with the club as a going concern, which for all we know could have been stacking up a mountain of debt that will require a multi-millionaire to service.

Would you be happy for NCFC to be used to make 2 rich men richer ?
[/quote]

You have made an assumption it''s not.

Never make an assumption that you can neither prove or disprove.

Only time will tell..

oNLY TIME WILL TELL.

[PurpleCanary 5,554]

[quote user="The Butler"]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there. [/quote]Did we?Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.[/quote]

Can''t be true, T and his followers says no one makes money out of investing in Football clubs.

You must have just made all that up[:D]

[/quote]That figure of £81m refers to the cost of buying all of Birmingham''s shares, which were mainly split up between three major shareholders, who got around £50m in total. Sullivan''s holding, for example, was less than 25 per cent, meaning he pocketed around £20m. And to know what profit (if any) he and the others (David and Ralph Gold) actually made by selling out one would have to factor in what they invested in Birmingham while they were owners. And they were owners for 16 years. According to Ralph Gold: "We invested big

time."

[blahblahblah 2]

[quote]

You have made an assumption it''s not.

Never make an assumption that you can neither prove or disprove.

Only time will tell..

oNLY TIME WILL TELL.[/quote]

On the drive into work this morning, I was listening to Radio 4 as I''m getting too old to listen to that rubbish on Radio 1.  Melvyn Bragg was hosting a discussion on the meaning of numbers, and their use in ancient Greece and other cultures.  There was great debate as to whether the number one was an odd number at the time, apparently.  There are very few absolute facts, almost everything is doubtable if you want to put enough effort into doubting it.

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="The Butler"][quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="The Butler"]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there. [/quote]Did we?Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.[/quote]

Can''t be true, T and his followers says no one makes money out of investing in Football clubs.

You must have just made all that up[:D]

[/quote]Gold & Sullivan made money out of the club, in the same way a property developer makes money out of a house.  You could argue that Yeung bought at the top of the market - but their money making has nothing to do with the club as a going concern, which for all we know could have been stacking up a mountain of debt that will require a multi-millionaire to service.Would you be happy for NCFC to be used to make 2 rich men richer ?[/quote]

You have made an assumption it''s not.

Never make an assumption that you can neither prove or disprove.

Only time will tell..

oNLY TIME WILL TELL.

[/quote]£82,000,000 is considerably higher (tens of millions) than the asset value of the club which surely implies that the price paid by Yeung does include a large payment in respect of BCFC ''the business''. I would have no issues with anybody making money out of the club if it were not done at the expense of the club (asset stripping or over remuneration of directors) since this is normal business practice in WELL RUN businesses.The Golds and Sullivan may well have earned six figure salaries for 15 years and a vast profit upon sale but look at where BCFC is now and look where it was when the Kumars were in control. There really is no comparison and no denial that BCFC have done rather well out of their tenureship.[img]http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h207/gigvideo/BCFC_GroundGames__02a.jpg[/img]BCFC St Andrews vs Brighton late 1980''s

[Barclay hero 0]

[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="The Butler"]

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Say Hello To The Angels"]We dodged a bullet there.
[/quote]

Did we?

Late 1980''s early 1990''s Blues were playing in the lower 2nd and 3rd divisions on a pitch surrounded by corrugated iron they''re now in the Prem, have a good stadium and an annual turnover several times that of our own. Sullivan and Gold (on paper) made a profit of  up to£81,999,999 having bought the club at its ebb for just a £1 (or £700k depending which source you believe) so the clubs healthy, they made a very healthy profit (and a good wage) it''s just Yeung who is unhappy and that appears to be primarily because he didn''t do his research properly. There aren''t many Blues fans older than their mid twenties who wont concede that the club improved dramatically under this pair, the problem simply appeared to be they did the norm and overstayed.
[/quote]

Can''t be true, T and his followers says no one makes money out of investing in Football clubs.

You must have just made all that up[:D]

[/quote]

Gold & Sullivan made money out of the club, in the same way a property developer makes money out of a house.  You could argue that Yeung bought at the top of the market - but their money making has nothing to do with the club as a going concern, which for all we know could have been stacking up a mountain of debt that will require a multi-millionaire to service.

Would you be happy for NCFC to be used to make 2 rich men richer ?
[/quote]

And for quite a while they were very unpopular with Birmingham fans.  The relegation to Div 3 happened AFTER they took over 

[The Fish Seller 0]

[quote user="Barclay hero"]

And for quite a while they were very unpopular with Birmingham fans.  The relegation to Div 3 happened AFTER they took over 

[/quote]That relegation happened at the end of the first season after they took over a club in a terrible mess, (they bounced straight back up the following year). The relegation to which I refer was a couple of years earlier the FIRST time Blues had EVER been that low so if third div is a shock to us after 50 years what does it feel like to those who have never been that low?