|
|
Post by ExeterAddick on Feb 3, 2024 18:37:40 GMT
I've seen this said a few times on here now and, let me tell you from experience, it's absolute bollocks.
Wealthy Americans make horrendous fuck ups very often, and there's every chance we could be another one.
|
|
|
|
Post by valley on Feb 3, 2024 18:38:19 GMT
Friedman the only rich one?.
|
|
|
|
Post by valley on Feb 3, 2024 19:09:03 GMT
What's the point spending £6m plus a season and going backwards?.
|
|
|
|
Post by se7sm on Feb 7, 2024 9:42:27 GMT
We do have some wealthy American owners and we also have some not so wealthy owners. Are the money men expected to cover everything regarding the transfer money fund and extra investment when needed? With all these low percentage owners probably explains why we didn’t bring in a decent striker . would be nice to know how this works trying to get everyone to agree when extra is needed too many cooks spoil the broth.🤔
|
|
|
|
Post by coloradocafc on Feb 7, 2024 15:43:33 GMT
At the risk of being offensive, this is just silly. I think folks are clutching at straws in these difficult circumstances.
These owners have had success in business. The resulting money gives them the freedom to try at football, and to either succeed or fail. Running one successful business does not guarantee you'll be successful in another. Making money in oil, or software, or finance does not guarantee that you have the skills and ability to construct a successful sporting endeavor. The world is filled with clubs and franchises, owned by very wealthy Americans, which have been unsuccessful. And, of course, this isn't specific to Americans. It's true wherever there is money and the desire to play or invest in sport.
In business, there can often be many winners. In sport, the structure essentially guarantees a large fraction will 'fail' - at least in some definition of the word. I'm hopeful that this ownership is taking the endeavor seriously, and with eyes wide open. There are positives in the first few months. I'm hopeful they will improve the state of the club significantly. Time will tell.
|
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Feb 7, 2024 16:11:49 GMT
At the risk of being offensive, this is just silly. I think folks are clutching at straws in these difficult circumstances. These owners have had success in business. The resulting money gives them the freedom to try at football, and to either succeed or fail. Running one successful business does not guarantee you'll be successful in another. Making money in oil, or software, or finance does not guarantee that you have the skills and ability to construct a successful sporting endeavor. The world is filled with clubs and franchises, owned by very wealthy Americans, which have been unsuccessful. And, of course, this isn't specific to Americans. It's true wherever there is money and the desire to play or invest in sport. In business, there can often be many winners. In sport, the structure essentially guarantees a large fraction will 'fail' - at least in some definition of the word. I'm hopeful that this ownership is taking the endeavor seriously, and with eyes wide open. There are positives in the first few months. I'm hopeful they will improve the state of the club significantly. Time will tell. I agree with this but I do believe that Charlton should be, at least, mod table in the Championship based on the size of the club and it's fan base. So it shouldn't take huge success for us to progress as a club. Getting into the Premier League would be 'excessive' success but competent owners that are willing to appoint the right people to the right positions should be able to get us out of League One - and I don't mean into League Two. |
|
|
|
Post by manikin on Feb 7, 2024 16:22:17 GMT
What's the point spending £6m plus a season and going backwards?. The point is it happens, money is no guarantee of success, particularly in football. Besides money, you need the right people to work with, i.e. a " team " on and off the field. |
|
lewisham
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 179
|
Post by lewisham on Feb 7, 2024 17:06:12 GMT
If all 20 Premier League clubs had rich American owners 3 of them are going to fail. It depends on how ambitious they are and how much they're willing to spend
|
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Feb 7, 2024 17:28:17 GMT
At the risk of being offensive, this is just silly. I think folks are clutching at straws in these difficult circumstances. These owners have had success in business. The resulting money gives them the freedom to try at football, and to either succeed or fail. Running one successful business does not guarantee you'll be successful in another. Making money in oil, or software, or finance does not guarantee that you have the skills and ability to construct a successful sporting endeavor. The world is filled with clubs and franchises, owned by very wealthy Americans, which have been unsuccessful. And, of course, this isn't specific to Americans. It's true wherever there is money and the desire to play or invest in sport. In business, there can often be many winners. In sport, the structure essentially guarantees a large fraction will 'fail' - at least in some definition of the word. I'm hopeful that this ownership is taking the endeavor seriously, and with eyes wide open. There are positives in the first few months. I'm hopeful they will improve the state of the club significantly. Time will tell. I completely agree with this, including the very first sentence. There can never be any guarantee of success. For me the key questions are a) are the investors credible, b) do they appear to be committed to achieving sustainable success and c) is there clear evidence of a structured and professional approach. Those questions would apply wherever they came from. We can never be certain of anything, but I think we can be fairly positive when answering. There is also evidence of a willingness to spend money. It’s all down to execution, therefore, but that challenge should not be underestimated. I’m not sure we could have expected a much more credible entity to acquire the club. |
|
|
|
Post by se7sm on Feb 7, 2024 17:39:45 GMT
At the risk of being offensive, this is just silly. I think folks are clutching at straws in these difficult circumstances. These owners have had success in business. The resulting money gives them the freedom to try at football, and to either succeed or fail. Running one successful business does not guarantee you'll be successful in another. Making money in oil, or software, or finance does not guarantee that you have the skills and ability to construct a successful sporting endeavor. The world is filled with clubs and franchises, owned by very wealthy Americans, which have been unsuccessful. And, of course, this isn't specific to Americans. It's true wherever there is money and the desire to play or invest in sport. In business, there can often be many winners. In sport, the structure essentially guarantees a large fraction will 'fail' - at least in some definition of the word. I'm hopeful that this ownership is taking the endeavor seriously, and with eyes wide open. There are positives in the first few months. I'm hopeful they will improve the state of the club significantly. Time will tell. I completely agree with this, including the very first sentence. There can never be any guarantee of success. For me the key questions are a) are the investors credible, b) do they appear to be committed to achieving sustainable success and c) is there clear evidence of a structured and professional approach. Those questions would apply wherever they came from. We can never be certain of anything, but I think we can be fairly positive when answering these questions. There is also evidence of a willingness to spend money. It’s not down to execution, therefore, but that challenge should not be underestimated. I’m not sure we could have expected a much more credible entity to acquire the club. my question was are the wealthy Americans expected to pay the bulk of everything including pumping in more money (turnover) if so what is the point of low percentage holders ? |
|
|
|
Post by coloradocafc on Feb 7, 2024 17:50:23 GMT
If all 20 Premier League clubs had rich American owners 3 of them are going to fail. It depends on how ambitious they are and how much they're willing to spend According to one definition. For a significant number of clubs, being the last team to stay up would be defined as 'failure'. And it's certainly related to ambition and spending, but one can certainly fail while outspending your competitors. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Feb 7, 2024 18:03:07 GMT
I completely agree with this, including the very first sentence. There can never be any guarantee of success. For me the key questions are a) are the investors credible, b) do they appear to be committed to achieving sustainable success and c) is there clear evidence of a structured and professional approach. Those questions would apply wherever they came from. We can never be certain of anything, but I think we can be fairly positive when answering these questions. There is also evidence of a willingness to spend money. It’s not down to execution, therefore, but that challenge should not be underestimated. I’m not sure we could have expected a much more credible entity to acquire the club. my question was are the wealthy Americans expected to pay the bulk of everything including pumping in more money (turnover) if so what is the point of low percentage holders ? I think that’s a very good question se7sm and we may never know the answer with any certainty. A reasonable expectation might be that all shareholders would make a proportionate contribution to the funding of losses, so that if £5m is needed to fund a season’s cash deficit a 1% shareholder would be required to contribute £50,000, for example. However, this may not necessarily be the case. There are lots of possibilities here and all are speculative. It’s possible, for example, that Charlie Methven will not need to provide 5% plus of each year’s call for funding, in recognition of his role in putting the consortium together. The same may apply if other Directors or employees have small stakes. It’s possible, though less likely, that other minority investors are involved for their expertise in some area seen as potentially valuable going forwards and that they too have a different status to the major investors. It’s worth bearing in mind here that lenders (those providing ongoing funding) will get their money back before the other equity investors (like Methven). All this having been said, my guess is that all the investors, including any with less than a 5% stake, will be on the hook for their share of funding with the likely exception of Methven and any other members of the management team who have stakes. That is just a guess. It’s a good question, but not one I’d be unduly concerned about. Just my perspective of course. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 7, 2024 18:30:32 GMT
my question was are the wealthy Americans expected to pay the bulk of everything including pumping in more money (turnover) if so what is the point of low percentage holders ? I think that’s a very good question se7sm and we may never know the answer with any certainty. A reasonable expectation might be that all shareholders would make a proportionate contribution to the funding of losses, so that if £5m is needed to fund a season’s cash deficit a 1% shareholder would be required to contribute £50,000, for example. However, this may not necessarily be the case. There are lots of possibilities here and all are speculative. It’s possible, for example, that Charlie Methven will not need to provide 5% plus of each year’s call for funding, in recognition of his role in putting the consortium together. The same may apply if other Directors or employees have small stakes. It’s possible, though less likely, that other minority investors are involved for their expertise in some area seen as potentially valuable going forwards and that they too have a different status to the major investors. It’s worth bearing in mind here that lenders (those providing ongoing funding) will get their money back before the other equity investors (like Methven). All this having been said, my guess is that all the investors, including any with less than a 5% stake, will be on the hook for their share of funding with the likely exception of Methven and any other members of the management team who have stakes. That is just a guess. It’s a good question, but not one I’d be unduly concerned about. Just my perspective of course. From memory , Methven said he put £75,000 of his own money. Incidentally Mundell it’s disappointing to see your style of supporting CAFC attracting criticism on other forums. As you know , I don’t agree with your lack of ambition for the club, but the fanbase is a broad church, and you have every right to express it. #SolidarityWithMunders |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Feb 7, 2024 20:06:53 GMT
I think that’s a very good question se7sm and we may never know the answer with any certainty. A reasonable expectation might be that all shareholders would make a proportionate contribution to the funding of losses, so that if £5m is needed to fund a season’s cash deficit a 1% shareholder would be required to contribute £50,000, for example. However, this may not necessarily be the case. There are lots of possibilities here and all are speculative. It’s possible, for example, that Charlie Methven will not need to provide 5% plus of each year’s call for funding, in recognition of his role in putting the consortium together. The same may apply if other Directors or employees have small stakes. It’s possible, though less likely, that other minority investors are involved for their expertise in some area seen as potentially valuable going forwards and that they too have a different status to the major investors. It’s worth bearing in mind here that lenders (those providing ongoing funding) will get their money back before the other equity investors (like Methven). All this having been said, my guess is that all the investors, including any with less than a 5% stake, will be on the hook for their share of funding with the likely exception of Methven and any other members of the management team who have stakes. That is just a guess. It’s a good question, but not one I’d be unduly concerned about. Just my perspective of course. From memory , Methven said he put £75,000 of his own money. Incidentally Mundell it’s disappointing to see your style of supporting CAFC attracting criticism on other forums. As you know , I don’t agree with your lack of ambition for the club, but the fanbase is a broad church, and you have every right to express it. #SolidarityWithMunders You might want to read the link I shared when replying to one of your posts a couple of days ago Occam’s Razor It was about the parable of the blindmen and an elephant. It’s highly relevant here and metaphorically both you and I are amongst the blindmen, though you don’t accept it. I don’t lack ambition for the club anymore than you do. I simply have a different perspective. From my perspective, as one of the blindmen, I simply have a different understanding to yours about what the club needs to do succeed. From that perspective, if the club does the things I hope it will do, it will be successful. And that means getting into the Championship and staying there, before challenging to win promotion to the Premier League. You have a different perspective and that’s fair enough. I know I might be wrong and can recognise you might be right, even though I don’t think you are. You seem to assume that simply because I have a different perspective, I must, by definition, have the wrong motivation or don’t really care. You’re wrong. Take a look at the parable. It’s a thirty second read. Re Methven, he owns a minimum of 5% of the club. On the assumption GFP paid circa £12m, that stake cost him a minimum of £600,000. The stake might easily have cost £750,000, instead of £75,000, which would have bought him 6.25% of the company. se7sm ‘s question was what happens going forward? If the club needs £10m of additional funding, say, is Methven on the hook for another £625,000 and so on? The answer is we don’t know. It’s possible he isn’t though. |
|
|
|
Post by coloradocafc on Feb 7, 2024 20:18:01 GMT
Too often the argument is far too simplistically, 'we're a big club, we should be in the Championship,' like it's some divine right. That attitude at best is old-fashioned and short-sighted. At worst it has the potential to hamstring the club and its progress.
Being in the Championship is neither owed nor simple. It's a reasonable short-term goal, but it takes work and a progression of successes. The other clubs in League One are not our inferiors. We have some considerable advantages relative to much of our competition, but the table shows what we are.....
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 7, 2024 20:30:21 GMT
Re-read my post MundellI was actually defending you against the criticism you are receiving on another forum for lacking ambition. As for Methven, nowhere have I seen it said - even by loose lips himself, that he’s sunk £625,000 into the club. I’m paraphrasing him here, and reamsofverse will know more, but CM definitely said he had put in a token amount of £75,000 which was not a lot, but was a lot to him. |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Feb 7, 2024 21:26:58 GMT
Re-read my post MundellI was actually defending you against the criticism you are receiving on another forum for lacking ambition. As for Methven, nowhere have I seen it said - even by loose lips himself, that he’s sunk £625,000 into the club. I’m paraphrasing him here, and reamsofverse will know more, but CM definitely said he had put in a token amount of £75,000 which was not a lot, but was a lot to him. Like our fellow fan in Prague, you have a tendency to refer to individuals, whilst being selective about events and completely sidestepping concepts. This is all one big puzzle but many of the pieces are out in the open for all to see. Some elsewhere speculate about share holdings rather than understand the basic structures at play. I genuinely believe that it will assist both fanbase and club if we take a deep breath, watch the games, and then assess both the management as well as the squad. Bottom line: the investors and SMT will either transition the club into a higher plane, or not. But if we waste our time on gossip then that's time NOT spent upon defining what the next level looks like! For sure promotion = ambition, but somewhere between 10 and 16 clubs have their eyes on the play-offs every season. And all those finishing in the top seven or eight might target two points per game next season. Here's an example: some wish to debate Dobson vs Coventry, and how Dobson hasn't been offered a gold plated contract. But they wish to discuss that with the lens of a failing Appleton. And with the intention of blaming the Technical Director. Why not watch a few games under our new manager and only then appraise the squad? What's the harm in holding fire until we have a better view. Ultimately, if the investors / owners and SMT fail then revenues will suffer - it will become more expensive to recover. They all need to learn on the job, but let's take a broad view of player talents, and what's required to compete. After we've escaped the bottom six! Jones gets it! That's obvious... and some will be curious why it took so long for him to land the job, given discussions last September 🤔 But gossip ain't gonna win us the games on Saturday and Tuesday! No, what we fans can do is watch the game at Reading...discuss... and then get everybody down to the Valley next Tuesday. It really doesn't get much bigger than the next couple of games! (Unless you were at any one of the play off games vs Leeds or Sunderland) |
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 8, 2024 7:12:54 GMT
Re-read my post MundellI was actually defending you against the criticism you are receiving on another forum for lacking ambition. As for Methven, nowhere have I seen it said - even by loose lips himself, that he’s sunk £625,000 into the club. I’m paraphrasing him here, and reamsofverse will know more, but CM definitely said he had put in a token amount of £75,000 which was not a lot, but was a lot to him. Like our fellow fan in Prague, you have a tendency to refer to individuals, whilst being selective about events and completely sidestepping concepts. This is all one big puzzle but many of the pieces are out in the open for all to see. Some elsewhere speculate about share holdings rather than understand the basic structures at play. I genuinely believe that it will assist both fanbase and club if we take a deep breath, watch the games, and then assess both the management as well as the squad. Bottom line: the investors and SMT will either transition the club into a higher plane, or not. But if we waste our time on gossip then that's time NOT spent upon defining what the next level looks like! For sure promotion = ambition, but somewhere between 10 and 16 clubs have their eyes on the play-offs every season. And all those finishing in the top seven or eight might target two points per game next season. Here's an example: some wish to debate Dobson vs Coventry, and how Dobson hasn't been offered a gold plated contract. But they wish to discuss that with the lens of a failing Appleton. And with the intention of blaming the Technical Director. Why not watch a few games under our new manager and only then appraise the squad? What's the harm in holding fire until we have a better view. Ultimately, if the investors / owners and SMT fail then revenues will suffer - it will become more expensive to recover. They all need to learn on the job, but let's take a broad view of player talents, and what's required to compete. After we've escaped the bottom six! Jones gets it! That's obvious... and some will be curious why it took so long for him to land the job, given discussions last September 🤔 But gossip ain't gonna win us the games on Saturday and Tuesday! No, what we fans can do is watch the game at Reading...discuss... and then get everybody down to the Valley next Tuesday. It really doesn't get much bigger than the next couple of games! (Unless you were at any one of the play off games vs Leeds or Sunderland) And like our fellow fan from the Museum, you have a habit of attributing opinions to other fans that don’t exist. “Some will say Jones is crap, others will say he’s the new Pep” etc. With all due respect, you’ve been posting “lets watch the games” (which is trademark meaningless verbiage) for at least 15 years on ITTV. I am making the point that League One isn’t competitive. It’s full of under developed minnows and ex non league teams, with budgets often less than half of ours. To even attempt to justify us being 19th in this league is nothing more than loquacious self indulgence - something you know a bit about. |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Feb 8, 2024 7:56:21 GMT
Like our fellow fan in Prague, you have a tendency to refer to individuals, whilst being selective about events and completely sidestepping concepts. This is all one big puzzle but many of the pieces are out in the open for all to see. Some elsewhere speculate about share holdings rather than understand the basic structures at play. I genuinely believe that it will assist both fanbase and club if we take a deep breath, watch the games, and then assess both the management as well as the squad. Bottom line: the investors and SMT will either transition the club into a higher plane, or not. But if we waste our time on gossip then that's time NOT spent upon defining what the next level looks like! For sure promotion = ambition, but somewhere between 10 and 16 clubs have their eyes on the play-offs every season. And all those finishing in the top seven or eight might target two points per game next season. Here's an example: some wish to debate Dobson vs Coventry, and how Dobson hasn't been offered a gold plated contract. But they wish to discuss that with the lens of a failing Appleton. And with the intention of blaming the Technical Director. Why not watch a few games under our new manager and only then appraise the squad? What's the harm in holding fire until we have a better view. Ultimately, if the investors / owners and SMT fail then revenues will suffer - it will become more expensive to recover. They all need to learn on the job, but let's take a broad view of player talents, and what's required to compete. After we've escaped the bottom six! Jones gets it! That's obvious... and some will be curious why it took so long for him to land the job, given discussions last September 🤔 But gossip ain't gonna win us the games on Saturday and Tuesday! No, what we fans can do is watch the game at Reading...discuss... and then get everybody down to the Valley next Tuesday. It really doesn't get much bigger than the next couple of games! (Unless you were at any one of the play off games vs Leeds or Sunderland) And like our fellow fan from the Museum, you have a habit of attributing opinions to other fans that don’t exist. “Some will say Jones is crap, others will say he’s the new Pep” etc. With all due respect, you’ve been posting “lets watch the games” (which is trademark meaningless verbiage) for at least 15 years on ITTV. I am making the point that League One isn’t competitive. It’s full of under developed minnows and ex non league teams, with budgets often less than half of ours. To even attempt to justify us being 19th in this league is nothing more than loquacious self indulgence - something you know a bit about. League One is obviously competitive. It's a competition FFS! Just happens that our club has not been truly competitive at this level for five years. Many of us choose to examine why that might be when we have a top six playing budget. Whereas others simply blame and waffle on about how many games they go to! Bottom line is that we need at least one win from the next couple of games. Ideally we can all unite around that and backing the lads. And if that win does come, then perspectives will change. All the rest is noise! |
|
|
|
Post by watameires on Feb 8, 2024 8:52:09 GMT
Definition of Competitive:
As good as or better than others of a comparable nature.
Suggest people don’t confuse competitive with quality. This division imo is competitive- anyone can beat anyone on any given day
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 8, 2024 9:16:58 GMT
And like our fellow fan from the Museum, you have a habit of attributing opinions to other fans that don’t exist. “Some will say Jones is crap, others will say he’s the new Pep” etc. With all due respect, you’ve been posting “lets watch the games” (which is trademark meaningless verbiage) for at least 15 years on ITTV. I am making the point that League One isn’t competitive. It’s full of under developed minnows and ex non league teams, with budgets often less than half of ours. To even attempt to justify us being 19th in this league is nothing more than loquacious self indulgence - something you know a bit about. League One is obviously competitive. It's a competition FFS! Just happens that our club has not been truly competitive at this level for five years. Many of us choose to examine why that might be when we have a top six playing budget. Whereas others simply blame and waffle on about how many games they go to! Bottom line is that we need at least one win from the next couple of games. Ideally we can all unite around that and backing the lads. And if that win does come, then perspectives will change. All the rest is noise! Are you at Reading on Saturday Kevin ? Very easy to criticise the way other fans support the club, when they actually pay to go to the games each week, rather than watch them on a computer screen like you do. |
|
|
|
Post by jonkool on Feb 8, 2024 9:21:13 GMT
From memory , Methven said he put £75,000 of his own money. Incidentally Mundell it’s disappointing to see your style of supporting CAFC attracting criticism on other forums. As you know , I don’t agree with your lack of ambition for the club, but the fanbase is a broad church, and you have every right to express it. #SolidarityWithMunders You might want to read the link I shared when replying to one of your posts a couple of days ago Occam’s Razor It was about the parable of the blindmen and an elephant. It’s highly relevant here and metaphorically both you and I are amongst the blindmen, though you don’t accept it. I don’t lack ambition for the club anymore than you do. I simply have a different perspective. From my perspective, as one of the blindmen, I simply have a different understanding to yours about what the club needs to do succeed. From that perspective, if the club does the things I hope it will do, it will be successful. And that means getting into the Championship and staying there, before challenging to win promotion to the Premier League. You have a different perspective and that’s fair enough. I know I might be wrong and can recognise you might be right, even though I don’t think you are. You seem to assume that simply because I have a different perspective, I must, by definition, have the wrong motivation or don’t really care. You’re wrong. Take a look at the parable. It’s a thirty second read. Re Methven, he owns a minimum of 5% of the club. On the assumption GFP paid circa £12m, that stake cost him a minimum of £600,000. The stake might easily have cost £750,000, instead of £75,000, which would have bought him 6.25% of the company. se7sm ‘s question was what happens going forward? If the club needs £10m of additional funding, say, is Methven on the hook for another £625,000 and so on? The answer is we don’t know. It’s possible he isn’t though. Maybe CM purchased another class of shares compared to the other shareholders? |
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 8, 2024 9:22:23 GMT
Definition of Competitive: As good as or better than others of a comparable nature. Suggest people don’t confuse competitive with quality. This division imo is competitive- anyone can beat anyone on any given day The real issue is why we have the 2nd highest annual budget in Division 3 (second only to Derby), but the 19th best team. Some of it is a legacy of Martin and Thomas Sandgaard spaffing lots of money on Aneke, Kirk and Fraser - all of whom the new owners have tried to get off the books, with mixed results as we have seen. The rest is the current owners repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot, mainly due to the incompetence of the Technical Director. Kilkenny Bonne Penney Kane Tedic Abankwah Campbell Camara To which it now looks like we can add Fiorini and possibly Ladapo. All poor loans. Then you add McGrandles, Hector, Jones, Taylor, Watson x 2 and Edun and you start to understand better why the 2nd highest budget translates into the 19th highest performance. Our recruitment - with the notable exception of Alfie May - has been crap. And that all points to one person …who certain posters still want to give another chance to 🤦♂️ |
|
|
|
Post by watameires on Feb 8, 2024 9:33:19 GMT
Hard to disagree with any of that ☝️
|
|
|
|
Post by se7sm on Feb 8, 2024 10:25:08 GMT
Definition of Competitive: As good as or better than others of a comparable nature. Suggest people don’t confuse competitive with quality. This division imo is competitive- anyone can beat anyone on any given day The real issue is why we have the 2nd highest annual budget in Division 3 (second only to Derby), but the 19th best team. Some of it is a legacy of Martin and Thomas Sandgaard spaffing lots of money on Aneke, Kirk and Fraser - all of whom the new owners have tried to get off the books, with mixed results as we have seen. The rest is the current owners repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot, mainly due to the incompetence of the Technical Director. Kilkenny Bonne Penney Kane Tedic Abankwah Campbell Camara To which it now looks like we can add Fiorini and possibly Ladapo. All poor loans. Then you add McGrandles, Hector, Jones, Taylor, Watson x 2 and Edun and you start to understand better why the 2nd highest budget translates into the 19th highest performance. Our recruitment - with the notable exception of Alfie May - has been crap. And that all points to one person …who certain posters still want to give another chance to 🤦♂️ which sort of leads back to my original question as we are signing crap and that list proves it Why haven’t we spent this half 1 million that keeps floating around and would the Yanks have to fund any more? if you owned a third of a business wouldn’t be happy, forking out 100% To fund investment? I know we’re probably never know, but I’m scratching my head on this one. |
|
|
|
Post by clarky on Feb 8, 2024 10:29:17 GMT
Definition of Competitive: As good as or better than others of a comparable nature. Suggest people don’t confuse competitive with quality. This division imo is competitive- anyone can beat anyone on any given day The real issue is why we have the 2nd highest annual budget in Division 3 (second only to Derby), but the 19th best team. Some of it is a legacy of Martin and Thomas Sandgaard spaffing lots of money on Aneke, Kirk and Fraser - all of whom the new owners have tried to get off the books, with mixed results as we have seen. The rest is the current owners repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot, mainly due to the incompetence of the Technical Director. Kilkenny Bonne Penney Kane Tedic Abankwah Campbell Camara To which it now looks like we can add Fiorini and possibly Ladapo. All poor loans. Then you add McGrandles, Hector, Jones, Taylor, Watson x 2 and Edun and you start to understand better why the 2nd highest budget translates into the 19th highest performance. Our recruitment - with the notable exception of Alfie May - has been crap. And that all points to one person …who certain posters still want to give another chance to 🤦♂️ Bang on mate. In addition, although it is to early to judge the latest two of the other new recruits you haven't mentioned I am yet to see anything to suggest any from the other five are top six material. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Feb 8, 2024 11:10:22 GMT
I think that’s a very good question se7sm and we may never know the answer with any certainty. A reasonable expectation might be that all shareholders would make a proportionate contribution to the funding of losses, so that if £5m is needed to fund a season’s cash deficit a 1% shareholder would be required to contribute £50,000, for example. However, this may not necessarily be the case. There are lots of possibilities here and all are speculative. It’s possible, for example, that Charlie Methven will not need to provide 5% plus of each year’s call for funding, in recognition of his role in putting the consortium together. The same may apply if other Directors or employees have small stakes. It’s possible, though less likely, that other minority investors are involved for their expertise in some area seen as potentially valuable going forwards and that they too have a different status to the major investors. It’s worth bearing in mind here that lenders (those providing ongoing funding) will get their money back before the other equity investors (like Methven). All this having been said, my guess is that all the investors, including any with less than a 5% stake, will be on the hook for their share of funding with the likely exception of Methven and any other members of the management team who have stakes. That is just a guess. It’s a good question, but not one I’d be unduly concerned about. Just my perspective of course. From memory , Methven said he put £75,000 of his own money. Incidentally Mundell it’s disappointing to see your style of supporting CAFC attracting criticism on other forums. As you know , I don’t agree with your lack of ambition for the club, but the fanbase is a broad church, and you have every right to express it. #SolidarityWithMunders Just to be clear Nick, I don't think anyone on here, myself included, gives a monkies about fans on other forums. The only connection any of us have is we all support the same football club, beyond that I couldn't care less. ITTV has always had critics, but that says more about them than any of us on here. I find it childish and extremely embarrassing that there are saddo's out there who spend their day posting running commentaries about what goes on over here. I take it you are referring to the 'forum' that contains a member base of a moronic half dozen and Millwall numpty? |
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 8, 2024 11:52:21 GMT
From memory , Methven said he put £75,000 of his own money. Incidentally Mundell it’s disappointing to see your style of supporting CAFC attracting criticism on other forums. As you know , I don’t agree with your lack of ambition for the club, but the fanbase is a broad church, and you have every right to express it. #SolidarityWithMunders Just to be clear Nick, I don't think anyone on here, myself included, gives a monkies about fans on other forums. The only connection any of us have is we all support the same football club, beyond that I couldn't care less. ITTV has always had critics, but that says more about them than any of us on here. I find it childish and extremely embarrassing thar there are saddo's out there who spend their day post running commentaries about what goes on over here. I take it you are referring to the 'forum' that contains a member base of a moronic half dozen and Millwall numpty? I think Ellsberg would relent with his criticism of ITTV if his lifetime ban was lifted 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by Occam’s Razor on Feb 8, 2024 11:54:01 GMT
The real issue is why we have the 2nd highest annual budget in Division 3 (second only to Derby), but the 19th best team. Some of it is a legacy of Martin and Thomas Sandgaard spaffing lots of money on Aneke, Kirk and Fraser - all of whom the new owners have tried to get off the books, with mixed results as we have seen. The rest is the current owners repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot, mainly due to the incompetence of the Technical Director. Kilkenny Bonne Penney Kane Tedic Abankwah Campbell Camara To which it now looks like we can add Fiorini and possibly Ladapo. All poor loans. Then you add McGrandles, Hector, Jones, Taylor, Watson x 2 and Edun and you start to understand better why the 2nd highest budget translates into the 19th highest performance. Our recruitment - with the notable exception of Alfie May - has been crap. And that all points to one person …who certain posters still want to give another chance to 🤦♂️ Bang on mate. In addition, although it is to early to judge the latest two of the other new recruits you haven't mentioned I am yet to see anything to suggest any from the other five are top six material. It is too soon to properly judge Ladapo and Fiorini, but I don’t think anyone who has seen either play would deny that neither player looks remotely fit …which again begs the question of why sign them ? I hold my hands up on Ladapo, I wanted us to sign him when he was at Rotherham. Not sure what has happened there. |
|
|
|
Post by jonkool on Feb 8, 2024 14:34:51 GMT
Bang on mate. In addition, although it is to early to judge the latest two of the other new recruits you haven't mentioned I am yet to see anything to suggest any from the other five are top six material. It is too soon to properly judge Ladapo and Fiorini, but I don’t think anyone who has seen either play would deny that neither player looks remotely fit …which again begs the question of why sign them ? I hold my hands up on Ladapo, I wanted us to sign him when he was at Rotherham. Not sure what has happened there. Two + seasons sitting on a bench at Portman Road! Chuks allowing players have to play regularly to stay match fit. A half fit Fiorini may have been an interesting ‘short term on approval’ loan with an option to purchase but he appears to be only 10% fit and I cannot see how he can provide any upside for us this season. Chuks just could make a difference whereas Fiorini will only play if we have major injuries in midfield. |
|
