shurlock

I still find it puzzling that an overseas bank would lend Goa nearly the entire purchase price of the club against an asset in China that is volatile, opaque, relatively illiquid and itself highly indebted. The interest payments must be through the roof.

A bit rich coming from a soft-as-s**t baby-boomer.

Seriously? You struggle to understand a lot of things pal.

We’ve made the title our own in recent years. But no dynasty lasts forever. Although we are in very capable hands with Goa as owner, what do people think our chances of retaining the crown this season? Are we finally going to hit the buffers as we struggle to shift the deadwood and Ralph insists on players who fit his system? And who are our closest challengers? Chelsea who may be hit by a transfer ban? Nearly-rans Spurs? Possible retrenchment by one of the smaller clubs who, if you believe the experts on here, are hurtling towards financial Armageddon? I suspect we may come up short for once - still it’ll be a keenly fought race and with our pedigree, we can never be counted out.

I thought you told us it was about entering the UK property and infrastructure market?

Most owners who lend the club money will charge a healthy amount of interest, so let’s not pretend they’re simply acting out of altruism. Our owner is obviously limited in what he can do as he hasn’t got a pot to pîss in and is seemingly heavily indebted. Another myth is that the only way to be profitable in the PL is by following our approach and winning the net spend title virtually every season. Of course, that doesn’t explain how clubs like Bournemouth have enjoyed a pre-tax profit since being promoted to the PL.

Yep. Would happily take Wolves what with their early Europa League distractions.

There’s a difference between belt-tightening and self-sufficiency.

Flamboyant in the same way Gadhafi and the fella with the shark tank in James Bond were. FT-speak for dodgy as f**k.

Belt-tightening and self-sustaining are not the same thing.

I reckon Raab’s a roid head.

Belt-tightening at the club? Haven’t we been doing that since 2014? Not sure why it warrants special mention. Elsewhere in the article it suggests that the focus on austerity reflects the poor performance of Goa’s business in China which is a new factor and might mean we see more belt-tightening than we’ve seen historically. Can a lawyer or accountant explain how Lander Sports Investment, which owns SFC, is unrelated to Lander Sports Development when Goa used his stake in Lander Sports Development as collateral for loans to buy SFC? The article does nothing to dispel the suspicions about LD Sports. By Goa’s own admission, the company doesn’t yet have an operating business and is only launching this summer -notwithstanding the lofty claims it made on its now defunct Chinese website. It’s all well and good saying we can spend more on new players than we receive from selling them; but if, as the article makes clear, that’s determined by profits and for a club our size, profits are determined not by commercial revenue but by net spend, then the statement appears pretty circular and vacuous.

You must be happy that your mate Stephen Yaxley Lennon exposed himself as a cûntish, little sucker puncher?

Nonce? Don’t try so hard.

I know but are they 1%, 5%, 10%, 20%, 50% or 90% etc less likely to vote? Your answer will, in turn, affect the size of the weights you’d use if you wanted to understand electorally what would happen if, in a completely fictitious world, each socioeconomic group had the same likelihood of voting. And that’s only the tip of the iceberg in terms of the information you’d need if you wanted to take a stab at your question.

There are so many things you’d have factor in -you haven’t even stated the degree to which C2DE are less likely to vote than the population as a whole- before you could attempt to answer your question. That’s leaving aside the dynamics of FPTP and the reliability and quality of a single poll taken at one point in time, based on incomplete information regarding what the Brexit Party stands out (hello manifesto). Next time think a bit before you make sweeping and categorical statements.

Whoosh

Nolan if you’re relying on that as evidence (in isolation and without any sense of the magnitudes involved), you’re in trouble pal. Next you’ll be telling that the young are less likely to vote and they’re more likely to vote Brexit Party

Any evidence that Brexit Party supporters are less likely to vote? Frankly the opposite argument could be made - that their supporters are highly engaged ('loons') as well being a new party and so more likely to vote than average.

Unlucky Les and LD. Your little saviour Nige really thought he had it in the bag. Must have been all that disinformation that was put out

What a joke.

£10k bankrolled indeed

They were out of contention by then.

Survey evidence shows that there is minimal support among the public for deregulation; there is support for consumer, financial, environmental and employment standards among a large majority of remainers and leavers and indeed in some areas there is support for stricter standards. https://www.ippr.org/files/2018-02/1519061948_leaving-the-eu-not-the-european-model-part1-feb18.pdf Brexiteers have played a blinder by turning Brexit into an end in itself and de-emphasising the type of country they want to emerge once the UK allegedly takes back control.