What's the Plan "B" ?

Come on, I'd like to know from those of you who unequivocally endorse every single action Lowe and Wilde takes, and sneer at those of us who dont, what the Plan "B" is if it turns out that the level of competition in the CCC is totally incompatible with 32%...errr..."total football" - but that in the meantime we've sold every player with any nous about them that may be able to help turn such a nosediving situation around ?

What happens if attendances fall due to dire results and performances as strong, physical teams pick off SFC due to good reading of the single tactic, badly executed due to players of insufficient talent ?

Come on, I'd like to know what we do next, except ask Messrs Barclays and Norwich Union to call in the administrators ?

You havent got a clue, have you ?

I'd probably blame Burley and/or Crouch.

Blimey Alps, plan "B"!!

Thought you still had plenty of mileage to rip plan "A" apart yet.

Give it a rest please, you are depressing me

My apologies for feeding the troll but asking what 'plan B' is assumes we aren't already on plan Z.

We're playing with kids and selling off the high earners because that's the only option we have left, and that frankly is that.

Alpine.

Have you actually bothered to watch any of the football in the CCC??

Tell me.

Who are these physical bullying teams??

Even if you only took a cursory interest in the Championship(ITV) you would have seen more football being played than bullying.

It is sooo like our fans to assume that we are the only team trying to play football in this league...

Blimey Alps, plan "B"!!

 

Thought you still had plenty of mileage to rip plan "A" apart yet.

 

Give it a rest please, you are depressing me

Sorry, but I am f**king livid that we are going into this season depending on David McGoldrick.

Have you not considered waiting to see what happens with Plan A first of all?

Alpine, you may some really good comments sometimes and then go and **** it up with stupid threads like this.

We have played one game in the CCC and one cup game, with one win and one loss, yet you're already looking to the failure of Plan A.

Be a fan!

Sorry, but I am f**king livid that we are going into this season depending on David McGoldrick.

I don't think many are chuffed but most are aware that mismanagement means that £££ has to be saved and I'd sooner keep SJ than GR.

Sorry, but I am f**king livid that we are going into this season depending on David McGoldrick.

2 against Premier West Ham, One against Premier Stoke, One against an half decent Championship Cardiff, 2 against a newly promoted Exeter

That is 6 in 4 games. Give the poor bugger a chance.

Sorry, but I am f**king livid that we are going into this season depending on David McGoldrick.

Is this the joke where his team mates are in the bar but he still manages to get a draw?

Have you not considered waiting to see what happens with Plan A first of all?

 

Alpine, you may some really good comments sometimes and then go and **** it up with stupid threads like this.

 

We have played one game in the CCC and one cup game, with one win and one loss, yet you're already looking to the failure of Plan A.

 

Be a fan!

Rob, a few weeks ago as JPs views started to emerge, I took the comments of "balance" at face value, meaning that I knew deep down a couple of players would leave, but genuinely disbelieving (despite how negative I am accused of being) that we would not lose all our "big guns". What's happening ? The average age of the squad is plummetting.......

I am genuinely annoyed at the prospect of having lost Saga and Rasiak within a few days - I expected Saga to stay with John, then when Saga left I believed Rasiak would be staying. But no, and meantime Thomas, Skacel and Euell are frozen out and in the shop window with tags round their necks.

Also in the meantime, no actual f**king money is coming in from the disposal of Saga and Rasiak, except some piddling loan fee, so actually the cash position of the club hasnt improved that much.

My current and previous companies are public listed, and I see how much damage is done by taking a ridiculously short-term view of the finances - it is often massively detrimental to the mid-term fortunes.

is this the joke where his team mates are in the bar but he still manages to get a draw?

lol!

Rob, a few weeks ago as JPs views started to emerge, I took the comments of "balance" at face value, meaning that I knew deep down a couple of players would leave, but genuinely disbelieving (despite how negative I am accused of being) that we would not lose all our "big guns".

 

I am genuinely annoyed at the prospect of having lost Saga and Rasiak within a few days - I expected Saga to stay with John, then when Saga left I believed Rasiak would be staying. But no, and meantime Thomas, Skacel and Euell are frozen out and in the shop window with tags round their necks.

 

Also in the meantime, no actual f**king money is coming in from the disposal of Saga and Rasiak, except some piddling loan fee, so actually the cash position of the club hasnt improved that much.

 

My current and previous companies are public listed, and I see how much damage is done by taking a ridiculously short-term view of the finances - it is often massively detrimental to the mid-term fortunes.

The funny thing about the mid-term is that UNLESS YOU SORT THE IMMEDIATE FECKING PROBLEMS OUT there isn't one...

We are on Plan B Alps.

Plan A was last years sh*te,where we played the normal CCC way,with crap players.

The players you want to keep didn't do it before,why do you think they are going to do it alongside even worse players.They can't play with the young players,so we would have to find a load of normal CCC players that we can't afford anyway.

You are wishing for something that is now impossible.

Come on, I'd like to know from those of you who unequivocally endorse every single action Lowe and Wilde takes, and sneer at those of us who dont, what the Plan "B" is if it turns out that the level of competition in the CCC is totally incompatible with 32%...errr..."total football" - but that in the meantime we've sold every player with any nous about them that may be able to help turn such a nosediving situation around ?

 

What happens if attendances fall due to dire results and performances as strong, physical teams pick off SFC due to good reading of the single tactic, badly executed due to players of insufficient talent ?

 

Come on, I'd like to know what we do next, except ask Messrs Barclays and Norwich Union to call in the administrators ?

 

You havent got a clue, have you ?

People can be tired of the constant opposition to Lowe and Wilde without this meaning that such people endorse every action they take. I can't recall any poster on here who takes that line. RL and MW have rightly been criticised in the past for things thay have done, but now Alpine is complaining in advance about things that haven't happened yet!

As for the what if? I'd say Alpine has answered his own question. If the rescue plan doesn't work, administration must be a stronger possibility, but where does that get us? Currently these are the two people the club depends upon, like it or not, and the best that fans can do is not to distract either of them from doing the best job they can. Anti posts on here may have no effect, but if they are translated into a negative attitude in the SMS that can.

If things starts to go wrong, thats the time to have a go at them.

People can be tired of the constant opposition to Lowe and Wilde without this meaning that such people endorse every action they take. I can't recall any poster on here who takes that line. RL and MW have rightly been criticised in the past for things thay have done, but now Alpine is complaining in advance about things that haven't happened yet!

As for the what if? I'd say Alpine has answered his own question. If the rescue plan doesn't work, administration must be a stronger possibility, but where does that get us? Currently these are the two people the club depends upon, like it or not, and the best that fans can do is not to distract either of them from doing the best job they can. Anti posts on here may have no effect, but if they are translated into a negative attitude in the SMS that can.

If things starts to go wrong, thats the time to have a go at them.

LOL have you got Scooby on ignore then?

Also, how many games do we have to lose before things can be considered to be 'going wrong'??

We are on Plan B Alps.

 

Plan A was last years sh*te,where we played the normal CCC way,with crap players.

 

The players you want to keep didn't do it before,why do you think they are going to do it alongside even worse players.They can't play with the young players,so we would have to find a load of normal CCC players that we can't afford anyway.

 

You are wishing for something that is now impossible.

Erm, how do you know that they cant play along the youngsters ?

For that matter, how does Poortvillet considering his lack of knowledge of the English game and the fact he's not allowed to use any of them to try it out ?

Poortvillet is considered to be a much more inspiring manager than the drunk we had before. How do we know he couldnt get those players firing on all cylinders ?

Rob, a few weeks ago as JPs views started to emerge, I took the comments of "balance" at face value, meaning that I knew deep down a couple of players would leave, but genuinely disbelieving (despite how negative I am accused of being) that we would not lose all our "big guns". What's happening ? The average age of the squad is plummetting.......

 

I am genuinely annoyed at the prospect of having lost Saga and Rasiak within a few days - I expected Saga to stay with John, then when Saga left I believed Rasiak would be staying. But no, and meantime Thomas, Skacel and Euell are frozen out and in the shop window with tags round their necks.

 

Also in the meantime, no actual f**king money is coming in from the disposal of Saga and Rasiak, except some piddling loan fee, so actually the cash position of the club hasnt improved that much.

 

My current and previous companies are public listed, and I see how much damage is done by taking a ridiculously short-term view of the finances - it is often massively detrimental to the mid-term fortunes.

I agree on some points.

Firstly, if we are in as much financial trouble as is reported, we need to cash in on our assets to raise the much needed funds for clearing debt. So we sell players, right? No, we loan them....? It's clear they have no future at the club, so why mess around with loans?

If the finances aren't so critical, why not raise cash from player sales to be re-invested in the team?

I don't understand these loans.

Secondly, I agree that short-term financial views have the potential to cause medium or long-term problems. Playing devils advocate... perhaps their is an argument that loaning our players helps in the short term by reducing outgoings but keeps an asset on our books that can be sold to raise money in the future? January perhaps? Who knows.

But what I don't agree with is writing off our season so early. I also don't agree with your views on David McG.

If a player doesn't perform, I have no problem with them being criticised. I can even understand people not liking those hit-and-miss players. But McG has scored what, 6 goals in 4 games? What more can he do? What more do you expect from a striker, if scoring goals regularly is not enough?

And granted, we lost out first game, but that's one game. We won our next game against a decent team full of confidence. If we are 10 games in and things are looking bad, by all means ask about Plan B. But please, give it a chance first!

plan a is play the kids

plan b is play their kids

plan a is play the kids

plan b is play their kids

lol

I agree on some points.

 

Firstly, if we are in as much financial trouble as is reported, we need to cash in on our assets to raise the much needed funds for clearing debt. So we sell players, right? No, we loan them....? It's clear they have no future at the club, so why mess around with loans?

If the finances aren't so critical, why not raise cash from player sales to be re-invested in the team?

I don't understand these loans.

 

Secondly, I agree that short-term financial views have the potential to cause medium or long-term problems. Playing devils advocate... perhaps their is an argument that loaning our players helps in the short term by reducing outgoings but keeps an asset on our books that can be sold to raise money in the future? January perhaps? Who knows.

 

But what I don't agree with is writing off our season so early. I also don't agree with your views on David McG.

 

If a player doesn't perform, I have no problem with them being criticised. I can even understand people not liking those hit-and-miss players. But McG has scored what, 6 goals in 4 games? What more can he do? What more do you expect from a striker, if scoring goals regularly is not enough?

 

And granted, we lost out first game, but that's one game. We won our next game against a decent team full of confidence. If we are 10 games in and things are looking bad, by all means ask about Plan B. But please, give it a chance first!

In reality these are probably good for the balance sheet. We retain an asset but reduce our overhead. If that asset value then rises so much the better.

I agree on some points.

 

Firstly, if we are in as much financial trouble as is reported, we need to cash in on our assets to raise the much needed funds for clearing debt. So we sell players, right? No, we loan them....? It's clear they have no future at the club, so why mess around with loans?

If the finances aren't so critical, why not raise cash from player sales to be re-invested in the team?

I don't understand these loans.

 

Secondly, I agree that short-term financial views have the potential to cause medium or long-term problems. Playing devils advocate... perhaps their is an argument that loaning our players helps in the short term by reducing outgoings but keeps an asset on our books that can be sold to raise money in the future? January perhaps? Who knows.

 

But what I don't agree with is writing off our season so early. I also don't agree with your views on David McG.

 

If a player doesn't perform, I have no problem with them being criticised. I can even understand people not liking those hit-and-miss players. But McG has scored what, 6 goals in 4 games? What more can he do? What more do you expect from a striker, if scoring goals regularly is not enough?

 

And granted, we lost out first game, but that's one game. We won our next game against a decent team full of confidence. If we are 10 games in and things are looking bad, by all means ask about Plan B. But please, give it a chance first!

Fair comment, but I certainly dont like the way things are shaping up.

Every report by fans at pre-season games pointed out that the older players were like fish out of water in the new system.

The only way we can now use them is if we surround them with their own kind.

Not an option any more.Plus,we would just have an inferior team to last season.

Certain relegation.

Come on, I'd like to know from those of you who unequivocally endorse every single action Lowe and Wilde takes, and sneer at those of us who dont, what the Plan "B" is if it turns out that the level of competition in the CCC is totally incompatible with 32%...errr..."total football" - but that in the meantime we've sold every player with any nous about them that may be able to help turn such a nosediving situation around ?

 

What happens if attendances fall due to dire results and performances as strong, physical teams pick off SFC due to good reading of the single tactic, badly executed due to players of insufficient talent ?

 

Come on, I'd like to know what we do next, except ask Messrs Barclays and Norwich Union to call in the administrators ?

 

You havent got a clue, have you ?

Why do you have to be so antagonistic? You contribute absolutely sweet FA to any debate because all you are interested in is sniping.

I agree on some points.

 

Firstly, if we are in as much financial trouble as is reported, we need to cash in on our assets to raise the much needed funds for clearing debt. So we sell players, right? No, we loan them....? It's clear they have no future at the club, so why mess around with loans?

If the finances aren't so critical, why not raise cash from player sales to be re-invested in the team?

I don't understand these loans.

 

Secondly, I agree that short-term financial views have the potential to cause medium or long-term problems. Playing devils advocate... perhaps their is an argument that loaning our players helps in the short term by reducing outgoings but keeps an asset on our books that can be sold to raise money in the future? January perhaps? Who knows.

 

But what I don't agree with is writing off our season so early. I also don't agree with your views on David McG.

 

If a player doesn't perform, I have no problem with them being criticised. I can even understand people not liking those hit-and-miss players. But McG has scored what, 6 goals in 4 games? What more can he do? What more do you expect from a striker, if scoring goals regularly is not enough?

 

And granted, we lost out first game, but that's one game. We won our next game against a decent team full of confidence. If we are 10 games in and things are looking bad, by all means ask about Plan B. But please, give it a chance first!

Quite simply the club taking him on loan does not want the initial full outlay plus his wages if he fails like he did at Bolton. Loan fee and paying his wages is the best way for such club. we are not in much of a position to bargain.

WE CANNOT AFFORD A PLAN B (not aimed at you Rob) But if we can control our outgoings by getting the high earners off the books and cut back in other areas we should be able to survive financially, even if we are relegated. Other teams are.

Quite simply the club taking him on loan does not want the initial full outlay plus his wages if he fails like he did at Bolton. Loan fee and paying his wages is the best way for such club. we are not in much of a position to bargain.

 

WE CANNOT AFFORD A PLAN B (not aimed at you Rob) But if we can control our outgoings by getting the high earners off the books and cut back in other areas we should be able to survive financially, even if we are relegated. Other teams are.

This club is finished if it is relegated.

And I am wondering, seeing as I know you have contacts and this is the first time I have heard relegation referred to like that, if we are being prepared for a "soft landing" into relegation....

plan a is play the kids

plan b is play their kids

Nice injection of humour. Just what the doctor ordered.

I agree on some points.

 

Firstly, if we are in as much financial trouble as is reported, we need to cash in on our assets to raise the much needed funds for clearing debt. So we sell players, right? No, we loan them....? It's clear they have no future at the club, so why mess around with loans?

If the finances aren't so critical, why not raise cash from player sales to be re-invested in the team?

I don't understand these loans.

 

Secondly, I agree that short-term financial views have the potential to cause medium or long-term problems. Playing devils advocate... perhaps their is an argument that loaning our players helps in the short term by reducing outgoings but keeps an asset on our books that can be sold to raise money in the future? January perhaps? Who knows.

 

But what I don't agree with is writing off our season so early. I also don't agree with your views on David McG.

If a player doesn't perform, I have no problem with them being criticised. I can even understand people not liking those hit-and-miss players. But McG has scored what, 6 goals in 4 games? What more can he do? What more do you expect from a striker, if scoring goals regularly is not enough?

 

And granted, we lost out first game, but that's one game. We won our next game against a decent team full of confidence. If we are 10 games in and things are looking bad, by all means ask about Plan B. But please, give it a chance first!

Great post, it contains balance and analysis of known facts rather than hyper-pessimistic speculation...

I agree that DMG is in good form and can only get better with confidence. Another attribute he brings to the side is versatility, which fits perfectly with our new system. There's no way we could ever stick Rasiak out on the wing during a game, so in that respect DMG is a much better option than GR.

Fair enough if we go back to 4-4-2, perhaps Rasiak would be needed, but until then we'll be fine without him.

If John were to go as well, then I'd start to worry. But why worry something that hasn't happened?

Plan b is,

If it all goes tits up of course then our Rupes will sack the dutch and promote Hockaday because we won`t be able to afford anyone else

will we?

it is far too early to write off the season.

We came closer to a result at Cardiff and did better in the cup -already holding up to last year not the disaster yet some predicted.

The way Stern J is being talked about -and played in first available game -suggests he is part of the plans.

There is no way any of us expected to keep both Rasiak and John, and potentially the current forwards are better for the team as a whole.

Squad is stronger than this time last year.

How many plans does a club need?

Pay what you can afford, get the best players you can afford and motivate them.

Really don't know what others want or expect?

This club is finished if it is relegated.

A very strong statement there. But... I don't think it's too far from the truth.

We have far too much debt, stadium mortgage included, to survive in League 1 with League 1 levels of income.

Our only hope would be a buyout. And since our value would be so little, that probably becomes more likely in League 1 than it is now?

This club is finished if it is relegated.

 

And I am wondering, seeing as I know you have contacts and this is the first time I have heard relegation referred to like that, if we are being prepared for a "soft landing" into relegation....

Nope, are any of the clubs relegated this season to Div 1 finished?

And no, there is a fair amount of optimism but there would be, both their sons are playing regularly now

Will find out more when I see them at the game on Saturday.

I agree on some points.

 

Firstly, if we are in as much financial trouble as is reported, we need to cash in on our assets to raise the much needed funds for clearing debt. So we sell players, right? No, we loan them....? It's clear they have no future at the club, so why mess around with loans?

If the finances aren't so critical, why not raise cash from player sales to be re-invested in the team?

I don't understand these loans.

 

Secondly, I agree that short-term financial views have the potential to cause medium or long-term problems. Playing devils advocate... perhaps their is an argument that loaning our players helps in the short term by reducing outgoings but keeps an asset on our books that can be sold to raise money in the future? January perhaps? Who knows.

 

But what I don't agree with is writing off our season so early. I also don't agree with your views on David McG.

 

If a player doesn't perform, I have no problem with them being criticised. I can even understand people not liking those hit-and-miss players. But McG has scored what, 6 goals in 4 games? What more can he do? What more do you expect from a striker, if scoring goals regularly is not enough?

 

And granted, we lost out first game, but that's one game. We won our next game against a decent team full of confidence. If we are 10 games in and things are looking bad, by all means ask about Plan B. But please, give it a chance first!

If we can't sell them then the next best coarse of action is to loan them out. At least we get a loan fee (assuming) but the very least it reduces our wage bill and as these players are high earners that could be a lot of money.

Great post, it contains balance and analysis of known facts rather than hyper-pessimistic speculation...

 

I agree that DMG is in good form and can only get better with confidence. Another attribute he brings to the side is versatility, which fits perfectly with our new system. There's no way we could ever stick Rasiak out on the wing during a game, so in that respect DMG is a much better option than GR.

 

Fair enough if we go back to 4-4-2, perhaps Rasiak would be needed, but until then we'll be fine without him.

 

If John were to go as well, then I'd start to worry. But why worry something that hasn't happened?

I haven't seen or heard a quote suggesting John will go?

Nope, are any of the clubs relegated this season to Div 1 finished?

How many of them are servicing debt on a £25m stadium that nowadays is only half-full ?

How many of them are servicing debt on a £25m stadium that nowadays is only half-full ?

Don't you mean half-empty

Quite simply the club taking him on loan does not want the initial full outlay plus his wages if he fails like he did at Bolton. Loan fee and paying his wages is the best way for such club. we are not in much of a position to bargain.

If we can't sell them then the next best coarse of action is to loan them out. At least we get a loan fee (assuming) but the very least it reduces our wage bill and as these players are high earners that could be a lot of money.

I could understand this if we were just talking about one player, particularly a player with a less than perfect reputation (i.e. GR). But what about Sagga? A player we reportedly had to fight to sign in the first place who did really well int the Euros?

If we really wanted to sell both, I think we would. We may have to accept less than we would like, but they could both be sold with money in the bank.

This club is finished if it is relegated.

 

And I am wondering, seeing as I know you have contacts and this is the first time I have heard relegation referred to like that, if we are being prepared for a "soft landing" into relegation....

In what way?

A very strong statement there. But... I don't think it's too far from the truth.

 

We have far too much debt, stadium mortgage included, to survive in League 1 with League 1 levels of income.

 

Our only hope would be a buyout. And since our value would be so little, that probably becomes more likely in League 1 than it is now?

Surely our value would be the same in either case - ie the value of our debts, plus the value the shareholders put on their shares?

Rob, a few weeks ago as JPs views started to emerge, I took the comments of "balance" at face value, meaning that I knew deep down a couple of players would leave, but genuinely disbelieving (despite how negative I am accused of being) that we would not lose all our "big guns". What's happening ? The average age of the squad is plummetting.......

 

I am genuinely annoyed at the prospect of having lost Saga and Rasiak within a few days - I expected Saga to stay with John, then when Saga left I believed Rasiak would be staying. But no, and meantime Thomas, Skacel and Euell are frozen out and in the shop window with tags round their necks.

 

Also in the meantime, no actual f**king money is coming in from the disposal of Saga and Rasiak, except some piddling loan fee, so actually the cash position of the club hasnt improved that much.

 

My current and previous companies are public listed, and I see how much damage is done by taking a ridiculously short-term view of the finances - it is often massively detrimental to the mid-term fortunes.

Well, if you think that this is the short term view, then we must have had the long term for the last 3 years, with phenomenal success!

I think you'll find that we now have a long term plan. Obviously you don't like it, but it looks like it could work.

LOL have you got Scooby on ignore then?

 

Also, how many games do we have to lose before things can be considered to be 'going wrong'??

In the bottom 3 at end of Sept would be 'going wrong' for me. What would amount to 'doing OK' for you? Top 6 presumably, or is that unfair on you?

Why the feck are people talking about relegation with one game gone??

There is one thing I know about football.

If you give up hope, you should give up going.

I could understand this if we were just talking about one player, particularly a player with a less than perfect reputation (i.e. GR). But what about Sagga? A player we reportedly had to fight to sign in the first place who did really well int the Euros?

 

If we really wanted to sell both, I think we would. We may have to accept less than we would like, but they could both be sold with money in the bank.

It does seem strange that we've had no offers for players such as Saga. I can only guess that maybe their high wages are the problem for potential buyers and as such our best course of action is to get those wages off our books

People can be tired of the constant opposition to Lowe and Wilde without this meaning that such people endorse every action they take. I can't recall any poster on here who takes that line. RL and MW have rightly been criticised in the past for things thay have done, but now Alpine is complaining in advance about things that haven't happened yet!

As for the what if? I'd say Alpine has answered his own question. If the rescue plan doesn't work, administration must be a stronger possibility, but where does that get us? Currently these are the two people the club depends upon, like it or not, and the best that fans can do is not to distract either of them from doing the best job they can. Anti posts on here may have no effect, but if they are translated into a negative attitude in the SMS that can.

If things starts to go wrong, thats the time to have a go at them.

You have a point but one of Lowe's faults last time he did not react until it was too late. The autumn Wigley was in charge loads of fans saw it was not working but Lowe stubbornly failed to see it himself (just a blimp he said). Having a plan B with the slightly unhinged Rupert around is a sensible tactic. If John goes - quite possible - we simply cannot rely on David McG who if you remember Burley farmed out to Port Vale last season and he failed to impress.

In the bottom 3 at end of Sept would be 'going wrong' for me. What would amount to 'doing OK' for you? Top 6 presumably, or is that unfair on you?

The team playing well and putting some results together I'd be happy with.

Comfortably above the relegation spots would be my measure of success, but since we won't know that until the end of the season, I would be happy for some comfortable results in the interim.

Surely our value would be the same in either case - ie the value of our debts, plus the value the shareholders put on their shares?

Any company is valued on it's assets and earning potential, amongst other things. League 1 attendances tend to be lower, so income is lower. There is also less income from TV money and less money from areas such as sponsorship due to less TV airtime and exposure.

Then there is the assets - players and buildings mainly. Granted the buildings remain the same value, but any players with a reasonable talent will be sold off, younger promising players will be long gone and investment in the academy, another item of value, will be reduced, thus reducing it's value too.

So as a company, it's worth less than it is in the CCC or Prem. That make the share value drop, which makes the company worth less and cheaper to buyout.

I'm no expert by any means, but that seems logical to me!

I haven't seen or heard a quote suggesting John will go?

Nick take it from me John has been "invited" to find another club. He will be allowed to go for no fee as Rupert just wants him off the wage bill. This has come from (virtually) the horses mouth.

The autumn Wigley was in charge loads of fans saw it was not working but Lowe stubbornly failed to see it himself (just a blimp he said).

To be fair to fat boy Wigley, I think Lowe said it was "just a blip"

Any company is valued on it's assets and earning potential, amongst other things. League 1 attendances tend to be lower, so income is lower. There is also less income from TV money and less money from areas such as sponsorship due to less TV airtime and exposure.

 

Then there is the assets - players and buildings mainly. Granted the buildings remain the same value, but any players with a reasonable talent will be sold off, younger promising players will be long gone and investment in the academy, another item of value, will be reduced, thus reducing it's value too.

 

So as a company, it's worth less than it is in the CCC or Prem. That make the share value drop, which makes the company worth less and cheaper to buyout.

 

I'm no expert by any means, but that seems logical to me!

I was pretty sure that players held no value on the balance sheets....

Also what you've said is all well and good, but the value of the club is different in terms of takeover valuations...

Nick take it from me John has been "invited" to find another club. He will be allowed to go for no fee as Rupert just wants him off the wage bill. This has come from (virtually) the horses mouth.

Stern John told me and a few others after Claus` testimonial that

Lowe was trying to sell him and ALL the senior pro`s.