Dunc
New Member
Because it in this case it continues the cartoonish characterisation of the board as the bad guys and MM as the goodie.
Official Statement - Taylor Steps Down
- Thread starter Leigh
- Start date
- Status
Because it in this case it continues the cartoonish characterisation of the board as the bad guys and MM as the goodie.
homer
Well-Known Member
Well if the great Plan B is to flog everybody off in the summer in order to balance the books and avoid going bust, then that is probably correct
Dunc
New Member
Like I say I'd like MM to come but not if there is huge risk involved.
A lot of clubs wheel and deal to survive until they reach the promised land and the sale of players that you continue to describe as being crap shouldn't be much of a concern should it?
Its not like they wouldn't be replaced and if they are as crap as most posters say then the new players can't be any worse so whats the problem?!
homer
Well-Known Member
No one says Kisnorbo is crap
Ditto Hume
Ditto McAuley
Ditto Porter
Tiatto is off anyway
And they are the only ones of any value (Stearman aside)
And without them we are relegation fodder
Dunc
New Member
Surely that would depend on who we brought in?
homer
Well-Known Member
Behave yourself !
Naughty Fox
New Member
I do not know if that has already been suggested, but why does'nt the board (or what left of them) send out the current bid to the shareholders and see what happens. It can not hold anything up anymore than it already is??
The standing of the board has now been reduced and suspect some of its creditabilty, so why not see how far away MM is from taking over. If it falls flat on its arse at least we will know where we stand and can move on.
The standing of the board has now been reduced and suspect some of its creditabilty, so why not see how far away MM is from taking over. If it falls flat on its arse at least we will know where we stand and can move on.
Granite Fox
Active Member
Another GUESS Drew as this is the theme of this thread!
I suggest that if one of the current shareholders wanted out every now and again, then the others would stump up the funds to buy them out, alternatively they may attract a new investor to become a shareholder (likely to be a fan because it does not make good business sense under the current set-up). As long as the Board manage the finances so that we do not go back into administration, then everyhting will be OK (not sure what would happenin League 1 though).
If MM fails with city and wants his money back after four years it could be good by to the club (unless he finds another Gaydemark). he could sell-off anyone worth selling, asset strip where he can (training ground, etc) and take the club into receivership. I hope he would not consider this, but we don't know do we?
The level of guarantees would be much greater with MM than with any of the other individual shareholders to match the level of risk (all eggs in one basket). It would make decision making very straight forward though!
Things have got to change one way or another, the fans are (generally) sick of the way things are, very anti the Board and Shareholders and the Board and Shareholders have had enough and want to get out.
newtonfox
Active Member
drew
Active Member
I said weeks ago that the club has a huge debt. FT said something along the lines of the cut backs would no where meet the loss of the parachute payment.
I envisage a debt of £4.5-£6 million this year. Now people have said that MM will come in, gamble on the clubs future and run up big debts, haven't the board already done that? What makes them any better than MM apart from being fans?
Administration is a distinct possibility unless MM comes in and bails the club out. Why should the shareholders get a majority of their money back? Many businesses are sold for a minimum when an investor takes over the debt, why is this situation any better.
Its clear the current lot do not intend to bail the club out and several people stand to gain a lot by buying the club off the administrators, which i think is disgraceful. By disrupting the current buyout certain board members could takeover the club for a pittance.
Whether the creditors would allow this or force the club into liquidation remains to be seen. A very dodgy time for LCFC.
I envisage a debt of £4.5-£6 million this year. Now people have said that MM will come in, gamble on the clubs future and run up big debts, haven't the board already done that? What makes them any better than MM apart from being fans?
Administration is a distinct possibility unless MM comes in and bails the club out. Why should the shareholders get a majority of their money back? Many businesses are sold for a minimum when an investor takes over the debt, why is this situation any better.
Its clear the current lot do not intend to bail the club out and several people stand to gain a lot by buying the club off the administrators, which i think is disgraceful. By disrupting the current buyout certain board members could takeover the club for a pittance.
Whether the creditors would allow this or force the club into liquidation remains to be seen. A very dodgy time for LCFC.
he didnt leave pompy in a mess now did he
If he didn't swallow his pride and re-appoint Redknapp, then he would have done.
Dour
Well-Known Member
Going by Pompey's experience, MM will run up a debt at least triple that.
he didnt leave pompy in a mess now did he
If Gaydamak hadn't gone in when he did they were likely to get relegated. MM had stopped putting money in and he'd been hinting that he'd wanted out for a while, so if they had gone down he'd have had to sell assets to get his money back.
As I keep saying, the ONLY time MM has been successful in this country has been when he's had Redknapp as manager, he's failed dismally with all the other managers he's appointed. So why do people assume it's MM that was the man behind Portsmouth's success - he just got lucky in appointing the right manager - someone who he originally got in just to be director of football!
When Redknapp was appointed manager he wasn't given money to spend on players - he had to sell Peter Crouch to finance his promotion winning squad.
So why do so many people think there's no danger of MM failing here?
Yorkshire Vixen
Active Member
M17TT C
Well-Known Member
You got it now Joe!
Last edited:
Polar Bear
Well-Known Member
Desperation. Fans are fed up to the back teeth of declining status and dull, losing football and will grab at anyone who pretends to be a saviour. Perhaps we should try getting Gadaffi's son on loan and getting his dad's oil millions to back the club. At least that money actually exists!
Real Sharapova
Well-Known Member
How much is this debt, and to whom is it owed?
Yorkshire Vixen
Active Member
- Status
| P | Pld | Pts | |
| 1 | Manchester C | 4 | 12 |
| 2 | Chelsea | 5 | 10 |
| 3 | Arsenal | 4 | 10 |
| 4 | Newcastle | 4 | 10 |
| 5 | Liverpool | 4 | 9 |
| 6 | Aston Villa | 4 | 9 |
| 7 | Brighton | 4 | 8 |
| 8 | Nottm F | 4 | 8 |
| 9 | Brentford | 4 | 6 |
| 10 | Manchester U | 4 | 6 |
| 11 | Bournemouth | 4 | 5 |
| 12 | Fulham | 4 | 5 |
| 13 | Tottenham | 4 | 4 |
| 14 | West Ham | 5 | 4 |
| 15 | Leicester | 4 | 2 |
| 16 | Palace | 4 | 2 |
| 17 | Ipswich | 4 | 2 |
| 18 | Wolves | 4 | 1 |
| 19 | Southampton | 4 | 0 |
| 20 | Everton | 4 | 0 |
