Jump to content

Consider this......


Block34
 Share

Recommended Posts

OK, here's something for discussion.....

 

Picture this, a boardroom, moreover the boardroom of an 'un-named' Premier League football club. Gathered around are the owner, the Director of Football, the CEO, the CFO and the Accountants. The subject for discussion, the next 3 years.....

 

Owner: So, do we have the assets to get us a factor higher than we are now, to increase revenue, the maximise profit? I'd like to see some operational profit if nothing else.

DOF: Not with the full range of assets we currently have, it's too limited. However, we could acquire sufficiently skilled assets that with guidance could take us to where we want to be financially. We would need to sell though

Owner: Sell which ones? The lower end or upper?

DOF: Upper, gives us maximum ROI.

Owner: But that leaves us with ****?

DOF: No, relatively speaking they're still PL quality. But we will need to invest, probably with 'foreign' skills - cheaper, need honing over a season or two, but good natural skills.

Owner: And how much more will this cost me?

DOF: Realistically? Not a lot, possibly nothing. Sales => purchases if planned well, even if not, no more than you were planning to invest anyway. Essentially non-UK players are 50% cost-wise, so 2 for one - a case of BOGOF in effect. This builds the squad as opposed to just the team, which is much more than we have been used to, so allows us, with this depth of skills, to consider competing in the Europa League - Champs League is a few years off yet but with the Academy and some good fortune maybe not so many seasons away.

Owner: CFO - any questions?

CFO: Only the FFP perspective - are there any adverse considerations we need to take into account?

DOF: Since all the costs are, in effect, self contained, no.

Owner: So performance wise, over the nest 3 years, what should I see?

DOF: Mid-table next season, Europe League the following couple of seasons, but maybe, just maybe, challenging for CL in the third.

Owner: Is our new manager up to it?

DOF: Perfomance to date suggests he is

Owner: CFO, any objections?

CFO: Providing we can be as near as possibly self-sustaining, then with the Sky money etc and no more unexpected Staplewood costs, no, no objections

Owner: Accountants: any objections, comments?

Accountants: Only that from a personal perspective, cash injections into the company, unless in the form of a loan, albeit an interest free one, should be kept to a minimum where possible.

Owner: But I could go mad if I wanted to?

Accountant: Don't go there, please!

Owner: OK, in that case - COF - Make it happen

Edited by Block34
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

I couldn't get through this sorry too many TLAs

 

(Three letter abbreviations!)

 

CFO - Chief Financial Officer (so in charge of the companies purse strings, theoretically)

DOF - Footballing director - various titles available :rolleyes:

Edited by Block34
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, this is far too optimistic an assessment. It assumes that the board is competent, that the club will buy wisely and that the new manager is capable. It also assumes the board are not going to trouser all the transfer cash. I have read all the threads and it obviously ain't gonna happen. :-(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, this is far too optimistic an assessment. It assumes that the board is competent, that the club will buy wisely and that the new manager is capable. It also assumes the board are not going to trouser all the transfer cash. I have read all the threads and it obviously ain't gonna happen. :-(

 

Ah well., takes all sorts, f*ckwits included. Your assessment also presumes you know what you're talking about - you obviously think you do - bless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here's something for discussion.....

 

Picture this, a boardroom, moreover the boardroom of an 'un-named' Premier League football club. Gathered around are the owner, the Director of Football, the CEO, the CFO and the Accountants. The subject for discussion, the next 3 years.....

 

Owner: So, do we have the assets to get us a factor higher than we are now, to increase revenue, the maximise profit? I'd like to see some operational profit if nothing else.

DOF: Not with the full range of assets we currently have, it's too limited. However, we could acquire sufficiently skilled assets that with guidance could take us to where we want to be financially. We would need to sell though

Owner: Sell which ones? The lower end or upper?

DOF: Upper, gives us maximum ROI.

Owner: But that leaves us with ****?

DOF: No, relatively speaking they're still PL quality. But we will need to invest, probably with 'foreign' skills - cheaper, need honing over a season or two, but good natural skills.

Owner: And how much more will this cost me?

DOF: Realistically? Not a lot, possibly nothing. Sales => purchases if planned well, even if not, no more than you were planning to invest anyway. Essentially non-UK players are 50% cost-wise, so 2 for one - a case of BOGOF in effect. This builds the squad as opposed to just the team, which is much more than we have been used to, so allows us, with this depth of skills, to consider competing in the Europa League - Champs League is a few years off yet but with the Academy and some good fortune maybe not so many seasons away.

Owner: CFO - any questions?

CFO: Only the FFP perspective - are there any adverse considerations we need to take into account?

DOF: Since all the costs are, in effect, self contained, no.

Owner: So performance wise, over the nest 3 years, what should I see?

DOF: Mid-table next season, Europe League the following couple of seasons, but maybe, just maybe, challenging for CL in the third.

Owner: Is our new manager up to it?

DOF: Perfomance to date suggests he is

Owner: CFO, any objections?

CFO: Providing we can be as near as possibly self-sustaining, then with the Sky money etc and no more unexpected Staplewood costs, no, no objections

Owner: Accountants: any objections, comments?

Accountants: Only that from a personal perspective, cash injections into the company, unless in the form of a loan, albeit an interest free one, should be kept to a minimum where possible.

Owner: But I could go mad if I wanted to?

Accountant: Don't go there, please!

Owner: OK, in that case - COF - Make it happen

 

LOL like it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah well., takes all sorts, f*ckwits included. Your assessment also presumes you know what you're talking about - you obviously think you do - bless.

 

Oscar Wilde once said that "sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence," Both have obviously passed you by...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here's something for discussion.....

 

Picture this, a boardroom, moreover the boardroom of an 'un-named' Premier League football club. Gathered around are the owner, the Director of Football, the CEO, the CFO and the Accountants. The subject for discussion, the next 3 years.....

 

Owner: So, do we have the assets to get us a factor higher than we are now, to increase revenue, the maximise profit? I'd like to see some operational profit if nothing else.

DOF: Not with the full range of assets we currently have, it's too limited. However, we could acquire sufficiently skilled assets that with guidance could take us to where we want to be financially. We would need to sell though

Owner: Sell which ones? The lower end or upper?

DOF: Upper, gives us maximum ROI.

Owner: But that leaves us with ****?

DOF: No, relatively speaking they're still PL quality. But we will need to invest, probably with 'foreign' skills - cheaper, need honing over a season or two, but good natural skills.

Owner: And how much more will this cost me?

DOF: Realistically? Not a lot, possibly nothing. Sales => purchases if planned well, even if not, no more than you were planning to invest anyway. Essentially non-UK players are 50% cost-wise, so 2 for one - a case of BOGOF in effect. This builds the squad as opposed to just the team, which is much more than we have been used to, so allows us, with this depth of skills, to consider competing in the Europa League - Champs League is a few years off yet but with the Academy and some good fortune maybe not so many seasons away.

Owner: CFO - any questions?

CFO: Only the FFP perspective - are there any adverse considerations we need to take into account?

DOF: Since all the costs are, in effect, self contained, no.

Owner: So performance wise, over the nest 3 years, what should I see?

DOF: Mid-table next season, Europe League the following couple of seasons, but maybe, just maybe, challenging for CL in the third.

Owner: Is our new manager up to it?

DOF: Perfomance to date suggests he is

Owner: CFO, any objections?

CFO: Providing we can be as near as possibly self-sustaining, then with the Sky money etc and no more unexpected Staplewood costs, no, no objections

Owner: Accountants: any objections, comments?

Accountants: Only that from a personal perspective, cash injections into the company, unless in the form of a loan, albeit an interest free one, should be kept to a minimum where possible.

Owner: But I could go mad if I wanted to?

Accountant: Don't go there, please!

Owner: OK, in that case - COF - Make it happen

 

 

Mmm.....???? ...how many " un-named " Premier League clubs have a training facility called Staplewood? "

 

Should we start to guess, or do you want a poll ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, here's something for discussion.....

 

Picture this, a boardroom, moreover the boardroom of an 'un-named' Premier League football club. Gathered around are the owner, the Director of Football, the CEO, the CFO and the Accountants. The subject for discussion, the next 3 years.....

 

Owner: So, do we have the assets to get us a factor higher than we are now, to increase revenue, the maximise profit? I'd like to see some operational profit if nothing else.

DOF: Not with the full range of assets we currently have, it's too limited. However, we could acquire sufficiently skilled assets that with guidance could take us to where we want to be financially. We would need to sell though

Owner: Sell which ones? The lower end or upper?

DOF: Upper, gives us maximum ROI.

Owner: But that leaves us with ****?

DOF: No, relatively speaking they're still PL quality. But we will need to invest, probably with 'foreign' skills - cheaper, need honing over a season or two, but good natural skills.

Owner: And how much more will this cost me?

DOF: Realistically? Not a lot, possibly nothing. Sales => purchases if planned well, even if not, no more than you were planning to invest anyway. Essentially non-UK players are 50% cost-wise, so 2 for one - a case of BOGOF in effect. This builds the squad as opposed to just the team, which is much more than we have been used to, so allows us, with this depth of skills, to consider competing in the Europa League - Champs League is a few years off yet but with the Academy and some good fortune maybe not so many seasons away.

Owner: CFO - any questions?

CFO: Only the FFP perspective - are there any adverse considerations we need to take into account?

DOF: Since all the costs are, in effect, self contained, no.

Owner: So performance wise, over the nest 3 years, what should I see?

DOF: Mid-table next season, Europe League the following couple of seasons, but maybe, just maybe, challenging for CL in the third.

Owner: Is our new manager up to it?

DOF: Perfomance to date suggests he is

Owner: CFO, any objections?

CFO: Providing we can be as near as possibly self-sustaining, then with the Sky money etc and no more unexpected Staplewood costs, no, no objections

Owner: Accountants: any objections, comments?

Accountants: Only that from a personal perspective, cash injections into the company, unless in the form of a loan, albeit an interest free one, should be kept to a minimum where possible.

Owner: But I could go mad if I wanted to?

Accountant: Don't go there, please!

Owner: OK, in that case - COF - Make it happen

 

I see your point, worthwile but slightly glass half full. I think circumstances have forced this rather than planned action.

 

And don't worry about those with the attention of a goldfish, good way to try and get your point across.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a better one:

 

Les Reed: Please write the following team onto a canvas so we can put it up in the board room.

 

Boruc

 

Clyne Fonte Lovren Shaw

Wanyama

Steven Davis Schneiderlin

Lallana Lambert Rodriguez

 

 

KL/Ralph Krueger: Nice team, great season! But why treat it as art?

Les Reed: Well it's not going to get any better so we might as well have some nice memories around!

Secretary: Sorry to interrupt, I have Arsenal FC on the phone. They say they want an urgent meeting, they don't want to dicuss any transfer matters over the phone but it's about Morgan and Dejan, and 45 mill...

LR/KL/RK: SOLD!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe its an acronym first, and just a coincidence its also a palindrome.

 

Not a coincidence - it simply (sorry) is. And it's meaningless to say the acronym is 'first'. An acronym can also be a palindrome, just as any word can - but we don't say the word came first. These is a deep philological issue. But with this sorted, we should be free and clear to win at Anfield.

 

Don't thank me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I won't thank you!

 

Do you think they came up with the acronym RADAR so it could be a palindrome? No. It just happened that way because they used the word RADAR, rather than saying RAdio Detection And Ranging each time they discussed that piece of equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. An acronym should form a new word in its own right, like RADAR. These are abbreviations, maybe initialisms if the letters are pronounced individually.

 

Yes really. DOF is an acronym. "Etc" would be an abbreviation. QED (not sure about that one). :)

Edited by kpturner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes really. DOF is an acronym. "Etc" would be an abbreviation. QED (not sure about that one). :)

 

Oh, all right, but only if you pronounce it 'doff'. I can't see CFO ever being anything other than an abbreviation though. QED is an abbreviation of 'Quod Erat Demonstrandum' which is Latin for 'which is what was to be demonstrated' and should only be used properly at the conclusion of a mathematical proof, although a lot of people use it as 'therefore' these days.

 

Anyway, back to the footy :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, all right, but only if you pronounce it 'doff'. I can't see CFO ever being anything other than an abbreviation though. QED is an abbreviation of 'Quod Erat Demonstrandum' which is Latin for 'which is what was to be demonstrated' and should only be used properly at the conclusion of a mathematical proof, although a lot of people use it as 'therefore' these days.

 

Anyway, back to the footy :)

 

I can't believe you've never said "KEFOW" for a CFO! Where have you been??

 

PS I did really know what QED stood for but am happy to have provided you with a quick excuse to look it up :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe you've never said "KEFOW" for a CFO! Where have you been??

 

PS I did really know what QED stood for but am happy to have provided you with a quick excuse to look it up :)

 

You must have realised by now that I am of the old school and in my day Latin was almost the Lingua Franca (never quite worked that out?) of the scientific community and indeed I have an O-Level from 1965 gathering mildew in a draw somewhere. I knew you knew but my comments are partly aimed at the wider community. One day my sort will have died out and then you'll all be able to say what you like :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You must have realised by now that I am of the old school and in my day Latin was almost the Lingua Franca (never quite worked that out?) of the scientific community and indeed I have an O-Level from 1965 gathering mildew in a draw somewhere. I knew you knew but my comments are partly aimed at the wider community. One day my sort will have died out and then you'll all be able to say what you like :)

 

Whose is it? ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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