Jump to content

Frank's cousin

  • Content Count

  • Joined

Posts posted by Frank's cousin

  1. Frank, Soggy various people called Nick, loads of others on the bandwagon. About twenty times more people than called Pelle the best in the world or whatever you were going on about yesterday.


    Er NO. you are getting a little confused in your old age - On that particular stadium debate, my only point was that cheaper tickets = higher attendance, and that it would be possible to have more flexibility on pricing if capacity were higher.. for some odd reason some took issue and made up a load of ******... but tehn that is pretty typical of this place at times.

  2. BMW seem to be about to join the list of culprits as well. I have a diesel DS4, I have no doubt that the CO2 emissions are way above whatever's written on the test sheet.


    From what I have read on BBC site and VWs, its not CO2 that is the issue - CO2 emissions are lower with diesels and are not influenced by this software. The software looks to run the engine to minimize Nitrogen oxide (not to be confused with Nitrogen dioxide) emissions which are not an issue in the EU, but are in the US (despite their clean air act ingnoring any ****e that diesel trucks spew out as its only applicable to cars). Its likely that those in the EU fitted with this software had not even had it activated. Seems to be the 2 ltr TDI that is most affected... my V6 3ltr is fine apparently!


    I don't really have any info on how bad/harmful NO is to atmosphere, but also read that many EU manufacturers are struggling to meet latest EU wide emissions levels for diesels.

  3. It's the risk of big injuries like this that makes it the sensible thing for young players to do, to move for big wages even if it is too soon in playing terms. Luke will be insured for much more now that he would have been at saints, and (God forbid) were this to be a career ending injury he'd be much better off with compensation based on his much bigger salary at Man U.


    Sorry, but when will this be finally put to bed. Yes it would be hideous to have an injury wreck a career, no argument there. BUT why are footballers different form anybody else? This whole 'its a short career' rubbish really gets me wound up, as what is to stop a footballer getting ANOTHER job/career when football is over? most below the prem will have to and the top players used to... why is it that they are all of a sudden work shy after 35?


    Many folk have to change careers through no fault of their own, relearn/train/ go back to college etc. Why not footballers? Its not like they don't have to complete normal education, so if football no longer becomes an option, they should look at something else..


    The 'its a short career' should be replaced by the truth which is ''I don't want to have to work after I retire from football so want to urn as much cash as I can now'' - at least it would be more honest.


    I have every sympathy for any player that has his playing career cut short through injury. BUT I have no sympathy with the attitude that don't expect to work again...

  4. Because he is actually pretty good at what he does


    True he is good at what he does... but its the fact we play a system that includes 'what he does' or even 'needs what he does' is why IMHO we wont get close to winning a thing.


    In a way the fact that for the last few qualifying groups have been relatively straight forward, just masks the true level we are at. Yet the media/nation will act surprised when/if we don't do so well in the actual tournament. I predict we win a couple of the friendlies against Spain, France and Germany and we become self proclaimed favourites (despite those sides probably fielding younger probables)..only to then get beat when its for real.


    We don't even have the passion of a side like the Scots, who despite being so clearly outclassed by the Germans the other night, gave it a good go... Looked to me like the Germans could have upped it even more, yet some of their pass and move up front was scarily good...


    As for Rooney? Cant take away he has scored 50 goals, but given our early tournament exists and so many score in qualifying against lesser teams, I cant see him as the best by long shot. He is just such an unpleasent a character who loves grannies, so easy to dislike which does not help, but think you need to score more in tournaments and at top end to be considered the best.

  5. I used to think that one of these days you would grow up and we could have a serious debate about this. Clearly it isn't going to happen. You seem totally incapable of grasping the concept of dealing with a situation without applying the Alpine Knee Jerk reactive response and prose. Messiah? Really? You need to grow up.


    When you have some spare time when you are not howling at the moon, please feel free to explain how I am using the current strife to push my Lowe agenda. To my (perhaps deluded) mind I was simply responding to a post that peddled the same old tired clichés without backing them up with any evidence. Something you do on a daily basis I should add.


    This has always been a challenge when trying to debate these issues... for some unknown reason, grown men who should really know better become bitter and twisted and filled with a rather irrational hatred for folks who 'mess with their club'...'perspective' seems lost on some folks. There is a complete lack of self awareness (or any hint of seeing the irony) in some who love to ridicule those down the road for their 'portsmyths', yet feel totally justified in pedaling equally spurious urban myth about Lowe... with a passionate vitriol that is more appropriate for child murderers... perspective...


    The club is struggling to hold on to and attract the quality of player that will see us maintain and potentially build on what we achieved last season. Some of reasons for this are beyond the club control, others are probably in error, but worst would be if its some sort of strategy - a belief that its possible to build and grow each year by making profits on player sales in the hope that cheaper 'undiscovered' talent + our 'amazing conveyor belt' of youth will overcome the annual disruption and a rebuild will be an effective way forward to challenge for top 6/8 and eventually be in the CL.... afterall that is what Ralph has said is our aim... 'it has not changed'.


    The parallel to Lowe's time is that he said the same thing, then as now there was a real disconnect between what is said, and the actions that simply wont be able to support it.


    All we expect as fans is a bit of honesty, and maybe if very lucky a little transparency as to what the real strategy is and why - most (well I live in hope) are mature enough to accept that. The fact that the conditions created by the Premier League have in effect now prevented or reduced the level of competition is not the club's fault, but they should at least be able to give us a truthful view of our real ambitions, no matter that it will probably just add to the feeling that its no longer really that interesting participating in a league where there is 0% chance of ever winning the thing...ever.

  6. Loyalty points have got nothing to do with it. I just hate it when people make up rubbish in support of their own agenda. I don't recall Lowe ever owning the club therefore why should he put his own money in? Took the club into administration? Wasn't that the banks doing? Picked loads of crap managers? Some yes but plenty of good ones too - no mention of that though so that was well balanced. Taking money out of the club? Embezzlement? Never saw any evidence of that. If he took what he was entitled too what is the problem? I am sure people running football clubs get far less than the players they employ. As for Lowe keeping is appointments - how many managers have we had since he left the club? No one is beyond criticism, but if people are going to criticise, use facts not things that they wish were true. We also stayed in the top flight of English football on crowds of 15k - no mean feat. The current owners also seem to think that running the club his way is the way to do things (ie self sustaining model) so perhaps he wasn't totally wrong? The people he worked with at the FA said he was a visionary. Again, perhaps we wasn't total crap. Plenty of clubs of ours size get into difficulties so again, to say that it was all about Lowe is complete nonsense. Of course he made mistakes. You show me a CEO/Chairman who hasn't. The wrecking of the club as you put it didn't totally happen when he was he. Plenty of well intentioned people had a hand in that when he left the first time but that get airbrushed out of history for people like you with a blinkered agenda. You really need to get a balanced view. I think you will find that very little in life is as black and white as you need it to be.


    Fair and balance IMHO. It was not my intention to start a debate about Lowe v others, but to pose the question that historically, when money form transfers has not all been reinvested, this has led to a lot of negativity aimed at the board - and indeed many believed it was the main reason for relegation in 2005 and complained that we had failed to capitalize on the 8th place finish in 2003... with Lowe at the saying he wanted to compete in Europe - which sounds rather familiar when we hear Ralph speak.


    I have no problem if our financial woes and time in the lower leagues have tempered fans expectations, and that more are now happy with a 'living within our means' plan - its sad that this is not enough to be competitive, but is fair and sensible. My only issue is that at present we do not seem to be reinvesting the monies from sales - it would appear its being used to repay loans etc - fair enough, but that implies that apart form the initial 30 mil transfer that her father invested, there has been no more investment form the owner. Again I don't have a problem with that either as its not expected that someone 'donates' cash to the club, but fans then need to stop suggesting the current owners are investing anymore than the previous ones.... again we know nothing for sure because there is no need for full publication of accounts s there was under PLC status.


    ... what i would like to know is, that if the income from transfers is not being reinvested, is it needed to fund operations? If so it would suggest we are not self sustaining - in addition, Les needs to see that what happened last season was NOT without a huge dose of luck and without replacing quality with quality and stopping this annual wholesale, several things happen: we will stop progressing, we will erode the confidence of players in our ambition (more will want to leave), we wont be able to attract quality, we may well get relegated...This is not some bed wetting nonsense, but an observation/opinion. TBH, i am not sure I even care that much anymore as playing in a league where the result is a foregone conclusion and you are playing for scraps, without any chance of progression is not really that interesting anymore... never thought i would say that.

  7. Lowe came into the club with hardly any money, got rich from our club. He ruined Stoneham, picked loads of terrible managers over long period and didn't put in a penny. The liebbhrs saved the club from going bust, got us promoted from league 1 to 7th in premier league and have invested a lot of money. Lowe also took us into administration. Quite simple.


    We were a stable self sustaining prem club for several years under his watch and whatever feck ups happened with Stoneham, we still moved to a new stadium under his watch... far form perfect, sure he was arrogant, but who cares... ML put in 30 mil - that was eventually converted to equity an investment that is now worth 100mil+ the more recent cash injections have been loans as far as I can tell, although no idea if they have been paid back or still remain as 'debts' so be careful when talking of 'putting in pennies' - Rupes never promised he was bringing any monies... again devils advocate, how is the current situation on a purely sporting/operational level, any different from back then? Especially given that by being a PLC the accounts were full published and it was clear the club was breaking even - in effect monies from sales were reinvested in higher wages and new players, albeit bloated journeymen...?


    Yes we MUST be grateful to Markus for all he did for the club, and yes we must be grateful to KL for her continued support of her fathers investment...BUT if we continue to follow this model of sales without similar quality or better coming back in, then we cant complain if we go down... its happened before to us and others. On a purely business/sporting perspective, forgetting the personalities involved... not sure we are in a good place right now.

  8. Its fair enough. I'm not sure the Mane and Wanyama situations would have exactly been a huge shock to the club seeing as they would both attract admirers and we surely have known for a while that Wanyama wasn't going to sign a new deal so logical he may consider moving on.


    But the basis is fair enough. We need to wait til the end of the window and see what happens when we have a more settled squad, but barring unforeseen transfer activity it will be a fact that over the last two summers combined we have brought more money in than we have spent on transfers. That alone is fine, it makes sense.


    Its the backdrop of the huge TV deal which makes it a slight frustration, because essentially the club must be wealthier now than it ever has been. If we have been under no financial need to sell then why not reinvest all the money?


    But those aren't questions for Koeman, and probably not even for Reed.


    To play devil's advocate a second... some of us remember the vocal majority calling a certain R Lowe all sorts of things for assuming we had done that - selling assets and not reinvesting the cash from players sales... when in the prem, in effect suggesting it was this lack of investment back in 2003/4 following the 8th place finish that led to our relegation 24 months later. Can someone far more enlightened, educated, visionary, whatever than me please explain how the current situation is any different, and why we don't have the screaming hoards demanding RK(ueger) and KL ''spend some f***ing money'' as we had back then?


    I am happy for the club to be self sustaining, and that annual revenues should covers wages, overheads and operating costs, with player sales cash being used for new players - If we are selling players and to balance books, that is NOT self sustaining, and given the current levels of prem TV revenue, if its costing more than 100 mil a year to run the club and pay wages, then someone is seriously fecking things up.


    Why no 'Duck off'? Or does that only apply to posh people?

  9. Ultimately whatever the stated aims and ambitions, he old cliche always comes back 'its a results business' - and there will no doubt be plenty of pundits who were left with egg on face last season after predicting our demise as a result of selling 5 first teamers, who will now be be getting ready to retract and rewrite their personal histories and say 'I told you so'


    IMHO, logic does suggest that when you revamp a side so completely, we should have struggled last season - but through a bit of luck and perhaps a bit of extra fight + Ronald's astute style, we took many by surprise at the start of the season. Second half was acceptable, but no where near as good as we were sussed out, and injuries took their toll...


    Whether a club of our size can or should hold on to players is a separate debate. But for me its clear that we are probably not going to get as lucky this time with a policy that when it works is seen as a 'brilliant bit of business' and when it does not as 'the road to relegation'. What Ronald thinks or feels about not being able to build longer term, we do not know, but I do think its a little too easy for Ralph K and Les to state how we build using youth integration, when we have a decent crop, and a lot harder to implement if the cupboard is a little drier/we have sold them all (which will happen to the very best academies).


    All depends on what we expect/want. Personally, I would like to see a little more evolution and less what seems like revolution of the playing squad - and for me that is where Ralph and Les seem unable to make the reality match their more words.


    Knowing/planning a replacement for Koeman, may well be a necessary thing come the end of the season... whether we can again attract anyone of that calibre against a backdrop of annual sales is another matter... Think we are in for a tough season.

  10. We are in the European super league already. It just happens to be played in England. The money is here and other leagues can't stop the drain of their players as they can't compete on wages. There are a few super powers out there (either through global appeal RM,Barcelona etc through domestic domination bayern juve and through external funding PSG etc

    But the highest turnover teams in the world is being dominated by English clubs now.


    We can't compete with the top 6 directly as we will always lose players to them. However getting them to fund our club to the tune of 100s of millions in transfer fees could be a good model but we need to continue to invest in decent quality players from the other leagues and get a couple of seasons from them before selling them on at a big profit.....It works for Atletico.


    Having that money coming in will ensure we grow, can have a bigger squad and are more successful (long term) than teams like palace Leicester and Stoke maybe even newcastle but finishing higher than last year ever year just isn't possible. The money will give us stability within the league like Everton, Spurs etc who are never really in danger go going down..they may flirt down there a little from time to time but it's not really going to happen and that's what we need to be aiming at.


    IMO we haven't got a bad business model which will grow the club. We could really do with a cup final or two though to raise our profile!


    Agree we dont have a bad business model, but surely the point is that whilst its good business, its not great for the the sport.

  11. Big off today when an bloke in front of me braked when we were at tempo for no reason.


    16 stitches in the face. Bike is fine though. 43b95361870a122885a65bf752e739ff.jpgbdfdec0161c97f8c9cfe2373bec28152.jpg81ac4d318cc1fbb0f7556c6da144a525.jpg


    We don't particularly see eye to eye on most things, but would not wish that on anyone - was hit by a car in 2003 at 30mph... fractured elbow, fecked wheels and need for a new helmet... and arse hanging out of a rather expensive pair bib shorts which was interesting sat in casulty. Stay safe.

  12. When you buy a player (you pay a fee in order to get his contract) the value of the player increases your capital assets and this value is usually written down over the term of the contract, so a £20m deal for 4 years will increase your book value by £20m which will then decrease by £5m per season. The terms of the deal don't alter this basic process but will affect the cash flow. For this reason loans are sometimes more attractive because the player's value won't affect your capital value much and may ease your Corporation Tax liabilities. It's a bit like the difference between buying a car outright or just leasing it.


    As I understand it cash upfront deals are not common these days although Abramovich was doing that when he took over Chelsea and started splashing the cash.


    Cheers Whitey, interesting stuff. From my limited accounting knowledge, it would appear as if we are in great financial health right now and that despite Gareth Rogers talking of 'legacy' debt, surely if the value of the asset has increased to where we are now, its not a bad thing? As NET, KL mill be quids in.


    Its why it always surprised me when Mat Le Tiss IMHO rather disingenuously, criticized Cortese as 'being good at spending other peoples money' - if Cortese had spent 30 mil and not increased the value of the asset then fair enough, fire away, (as we have seen ther are many examples of spending millions and achieving nothing) but given how the spending 'worked' and increased the value of the Liebherr's asset by probably 300%, I am sure Matt wishes he had seen those kind of returns on his own business ventures?

  13. Question to those that know about these things.... which if an, of our sales and purchases would have been full amount upfront versus spread over number of years? If spread over a number of years and each deal is different, how does this play out in the annual accounts? It would seem 'normal' that only receipts and payments due in that year would be included and NOT the full amount of the deals? This makes a big difference to what is read into the 'accounts' as I understand that its noraml to right off the cost of a player purchase over the years of his contract?


    This would also account for why club have stated that the additional 20 mil loaned by Kat during 2013/2014 was to aid 'cashflow', rather than an amount to cover additional overspend? Interested to know what is the correct accounting process here, rather than more speculation.... Its like the time the BBC made a headline out of us 'owing' 27mil in transfer fees, when this was the balances due over a subsequent years.


    As to whether Kat knew of the the Cortese loans... It would be just as easy to assume that his contract/role gave him that permission... If not, would have expected a 'gross misconduct charge or something? Its clear Kat wanted to change to a 'board' based decision making process and Corteses did not want this more democratic approach, a bit of fall out so he buggered off/resigned, but not sure there was anything 'wrong' in his taking out loans... even if courtesy may have suggested he offer a more open communication withe the owner.


    Interesting as well that NC was heavily criticised for the 'overspend' on Staplewood development, yet Kat and the new board committed to even further spending and development on top of this, expanding the facilities further. Again, from a more neutral perspective, it seems we probably payed more than we needed to because of design and additional changes to the plans after work had started, but I have no issue with that additional spend given the quality of the facilities we end up - 38mil may seem a lot, but its 8mil less than we received for Shaw and Chambers... so value is another thing.


    KL has been great, happy to state that for the record and I am pleased because it continues Markus' legacy. But we should at least acknowledge that her 'investment' has as far as we know only been the 30mil that was converted to equity and included Markus' original 12-13mil to pay off the debts and take the club on. The rest has been loans, and through the current and precious leadership that 30mil is probably worth over 100mil-130mil today. Not a bad return really for 7 years.

  14. Need to separate things: From what I have read, most Journos and folks in the game would love us to qualify for CL - as it would show the strength in depth in the Prem, + is good for the game as a whole... but from a media perspective, stories/coverage etc, they are quite rightly most concerned about clubs with the biggest followings = biggest readership/ratings etc.


    Back during the summer of doom, all I was hopeful for was that we progress - ignore what position we end up in, but that we progress from 54 points to say 60 etc. After all the sales, I could not see that happening, but we could still end up with 65/66 IMHO and that would be a phenomenal season.

  15. Jeremy Clarkson is also an anagram of "Snarly Mock Jeer".


    I am sure its also an anagram of ''Unfunny, irrelevant, bullying c***''... but I could be wrong*


    *the c*** can represent Mr May's favourite softer naughty work, or what Mr Crassson called the Irish producer, allegedly according to the hotel guest witnesses... who knows as its a crazy world out there. Meanwhile in other news, Eight people at least killed in a tropical cyclone, but as there were no British passport holders among them, its far less important than the histrionics over a 50 something former public schoolboy acting like a spoiled tosser... shucks, there's something I never thought I'd see.... Zzzzzz


    Though I suspect if I punched my boss Ill get sacked, but then I don't earn my employers millions of pounds


    This... the only relevant statement in all the ****e posted on the bloke... the only reason he is still in his job is because of the earnings of the show... the fact that any normal person would have been sacked, but normal rules don't apply because of the cash is the real idiocy of the situation....

  17. Interesting point from one of the stokies about us being reffed out of the race because we'd be bad for the brand.


    Football is an extremely dark place behind the scenes.




    Think you are suffering from an element of paranoia.... having said that, PL seemed happy just to 'fine' West Ham, over the whole Tevez thing... keeping them in the PL... in effect giving Sheffield united a pay off - is it just me or in other walks of life would that be considered corrupt?


    ...To be honest I don't think it would do the 'brand' any harm for folks to see more 'competition' - it might harm those who only think of TV rights, given OUR brand is not so global and attractive in the Far East and to BT Sport viewers next season. Premier League likes to spank itself raw that its the greatest in the world - our getting into the Champions league would be good for that message.... if **** for the TV boys...

  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})