Have the board made big mistakes?

[byf]

Every season we read in the argus about how much falmer is costing,how much players wages have cost us. Agent fee's and now the lack of season ticket sales will be costing us a furthur 100k.

Now surely Knight and perry more or less knew that not giving decent funding to mcghee in the relegation season would cause losses. It surely would have been better to invest back then to keep us in the higher level, attracting better players and making us as an overall brand in a better position. Bigger gates and a club screaming out for a new staduim, due to the fact we were selling out every week and looking like we were bursting at the seams.

Instead, we avoided investment...we went down...didnt give him much of a budget in the summer, used him as a scape goat and scrape to survival may just gone...with gates struggling to reach 5k people.

It screams you reap what you sow....I know about the financial constraints that playing at withdean and the falmer application are on the club...But we are surely losing more by playing at this level with smaller gates than we would be at the higher level..looking like a club that need a new ground..

I proberly havent put my point across well enough...But I just think sometimes the club isnt looking at the bigger picture when it comes to finances...I knwo falmer is the bigger picture..but 100k loss here and there...that could have been a decent striker that could have kept us up...the guy will not even take a risk with 100k strikers...

 

[CHAPPERS]

I proberly havent put my point across well enough...But I just think sometimes the club isnt looking at the bigger picture when it comes to finances...I knwo falmer is the bigger picture....

What?

So the bigger picture is Falmer and you reckon the club aren't looking at the bigger picture when it comes to finances, even though that's where the vast majority of our pitiful income is going?


Have you gone wrong in the brain or something?

 

[El Presidente]

I hear what you say but you are assuming that the club has the money in the first place. We are losing £10,000 a week BEFORE gambling on new players, Constantine was offered a £3,000 a week rise and turned us down, and the consensus is that he is a bit shite anyway.

Look at how much Leeds have spent on players in the last two years and where they ended up.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

I

Look at how much Leeds have spent on players in the last two years and where they ended up.

Debt-free and looking at a bright future under new owners?

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

this is a big pitcher - if it helps.

 

[byf]

I hear what you say but you are assuming that the club has the money in the first place. We are losing £10,000 a week BEFORE gambling on new players, Constantine was offered a £3,000 a week rise and turned us down, and the consensus is that he is a bit shite anyway.

Look at how much Leeds have spent on players in the last two years and where they ended up.

Well even if the club hasnt got the money...now we have losses of 100k that didnt need to happen..im not running the club and by no means have a decent business head on me,...but....if we all sat down and said...if we go down...gates will drop to 5k and we will lose x amount...lets invest some so we dont lose that....

 

[severnside gull]

Debt-free and looking at a bright future under new owners?

Now if only we had a crook in charge

 

[Rangdo]

but....if we all sat down and said...if we go down...gates will drop to 5k and we will lose x amount...lets invest some so we dont lose that....

Thats a gamble though, not a guarantee. Many clubs much richer than us have come spectacularly unstuck chasing this philosophy.

 

[rool]

If mistakes have been made it was during the shambles of the preseason before our first in the Championship.

It is my belief that things are worse than they might have been as a direct result of that period.

 

[Woodchip]

The only board to make a mistake is this one for letting you post.

 

[Rangdo]

The only board to make a mistake is this one for letting you post.

*snigger*

 

[brunswick]

i completely agree with the first post here.

other big mistakes.

torenzo - does a any1 really know the truth about this? did we really spend 100k on him?

oatway, mayo etc loyalty contracts - for fecks sake.

 

[Brovion]

To be fair to byf he does admit he doesn't have a buiness head on his shoulders. That's a lot better than the 'back of a fag packet' brigade who list out the money we've got from everything from the sale of Zamora to the WHU tickets and then wonder where it all went. Such are the times we live in there are some that would believe that it's been illegally pocketed by Dick Knight as opposed to just disappearing into running the club.

As as been pointed out the club lose money hand over fist simply by existing. The question is should we live even further beyond our means and gamble on players who are out of our price range? The hope of course is that these players can bring success and thus increased income to 'cover the bet' as it were.

My answer is 'no'. I am concerned with the long-term survival of the club rather than any short-term success and I would rather see us relegated with a smaller debt than promoted with a bigger one. Also investing in 'better' players does not guarantee success and we could be worse off than we are now!

However I do accept that others have the exact opposite view.

 

[The Large One]

Oatway, mayo etc loyalty contracts - for fecks sake.

Are you opposed to Mayo having a loyalty contract, or are you against loyalty contracts per se? If it's the latter, I'd give you this as a consideration... it's highly possible that Kuipers would not have re-signed without one.

Oatway, on the other hand, is only on a month-to-month contract.

 

[RexCathedra]

If Dick Knight would just step aside, one of the queue of Belorussian cement billionaires who are just dying to invest in a business with a negative return-on-investment and no fixed base of operations would come in, drop a packet and get everything sorted.

Selfish git.

 

[Superphil]

Not really a lot of money, £100K. Equates to about 230 STH not buying, and we still have a few weeks for some to change their minds, I know one person who will be buying his ST next month.

This smacks of daily mail reporting in the argus really, it's bugger all compared to the other costs we have to incur.

 

[byf]

To be fair to byf he does admit he doesn't have a buiness head on his shoulders. That's a lot better than the 'back of a fag packet' brigade who list out the money we've got from everything from the sale of Zamora to the WHU tickets and then wonder where it all went. Such are the times we live in there are some that would believe that it's been illegally pocketed by Dick Knight as opposed to just disappearing into running the club.

As as been pointed out the club lose money hand over fist simply by existing. The question is should we live even further beyond our means and gamble on players who are out of our price range? The hope of course is that these players can bring success and thus increased income to 'cover the bet' as it were.

My answer is 'no'. I am concerned with the long-term survival of the club rather than any short-term success and I would rather see us relegated with a smaller debt than promoted with a bigger one. Also investing in 'better' players does not guarantee success and we could be worse off than we are now!

However I do accept that others have the exact opposite view.

good post