Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The Argus on line
- Thread starter vulture
- Start date
London Irish
Well-known member
Brovian said:
I think a lot of people agree with you. I think it's the case that if we were riding high at the top of the Conference, we would be getting bigger crowds than we have seen at some of our games this season, check out Oxford's crowds this season as an example.
People just want to see a winning team - didn't everyone go crazy on here when we whacked a couple of poor Conference sides in the cup.
It would be very demoralising and it could cause more boardroom disagreements but there would be no financial disater if we went down, and nor would it impact on Falmer because the talking on that is now virtually over.
Last edited:
portslade seagull
Well-known member
El Presidente said:
Its just that 'head buried in the sand ' mentality response the board well dick tight loves...if you like watching pretty poor football and enjoy your team dropping like a stone i feel sorry for you.
fosters headband
Well-known member
Seagull73 said:
I thought the artical in the paper about the dad trying to get hes son to support the albion rather than chelsea and what naylor put was quite intressting.
Gates are going to be down with the lure of the premiership, chelsea are trying to poach kids as young as 7 to support them
Gates are going to be down with the lure of the premiership, chelsea are trying to poach kids as young as 7 to support them
Simster said:
The board had a business plan, which involved being at Falmer within 5 years of moving to Withdean. Thanks to then NIMBY's that 5 years is now 10 at the very least.
The board IS subsidising the club to the tune of about £10,000 a week, without the Blooms, DK, FBS and co, there would not be an Albion.
As for making cash out of the stadium, you are way off track. DK will GIVE his shares to a fans trust at some point in the future, and not make a penny out of it.
The other directors will still have their shares, but they are worthless unless someone is prepared to buy them at a premium.
Only a luniatic or a lottery winner would be that foolish.
The only money to be made out of football is in the Prem. Just having Falmer is not enough to either get us to the Prem without a huge investment in the playing staff. Falmer is not big enough to sustain a long run in the Prem, so they are in it for love rather than money.........just like the rest of us......and the culprits are (in the following order)
1. Greg Stanley
2. LDC
3. Bill Archer
Stinky Kat said:
Would you rather have the Peter Ridsdale school of Chairmanship?
Seagull73 said:
It costs £1 to download the accounts from Companies House to find it out.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
El Presidente said:
It costs nothing to be honest with the fans or is this some sort of game. DK says we have the money but only the brighter fans are able to work out that it's a lie to keep the less iintelligent quiet?
Whichever way you dress it up we've been lied to if there really is no money for transfers.
Knotty
Well-known member
Icy Gull said:
If you think DK is a liar, fair enough.
If you say he is a liar, prove it or don't say it.
London Irish said:
Unfortunately, even that appears to be something of a smokescreen. Rotherham signed a good young striker (Chris O'Grady from Leicester) for 65k. I KNOW that this player had a respect for Brighton (at least under Magoo strangely enough!) and would have been interested in joining us when he was not wanted by Leicester. This is a player who Leicester believed CKR was too similar to when they had him on trial before we signed him.
Deportivo Seagull
I should coco
Stinky Kat said:
A good job too, without a ground we have no assets, which means if we go into receivership it is very unlikely that we would come out of it in one piece. We simply don't have the luxury of using receivership as a 'get out of jail free card'. Every club that has gone into receivership has used there ground as a bargaining piece, it's the once assets that you can use to appease the creditors, in most cases the ground is sold then leased to raise cash, we can't!!! Get a ground and then things change but until then we're screwed. It's very simple when you actually think about it.
Dave the OAP
Well-known member
Brovian said:
"sniff"
I love you old man
Day 47...peace breaks out in the NSC household
London Irish
Well-known member
Icy Gull said:
There is another theory - that we do have a small amount of money but Dick Knight is just scared stiff to spend it in case we make another mistake like Turienzo.
I think the huge criticism that has been directed at the club for its mistakes in the transfer market over the past 2 or 3 years has now had this effect of making him totally shot shy in taking a risk on a player.
Stinky Kat
Tripping
El Presidente said:
In a word no. Your point is?
Stinky Kat
Tripping
Yes - thats why I said he wont risk putter the club int (further) debtDeportivo Seagull said:
London Irish
Well-known member
3gulls said:
"Strangely enough" eh?
Well, fair play to the Rotherham directors on that. BUT - I'm not saying they're financial troubles are better than ours, but they have just sold among their two best players for a combined £1.2m, including their leading scorer - so I'm not clear how they are any better off playing wise now, care to explain?
Despite all the talk, at least it looks so far as we are not losing any of ours.
Cadiz Seagull
Grey bearded old man
Help me out here, guys.
I've never understood why some people seem to believe that DK is lying when he says that there is money available for transfers.
First question - why would he say that if it wasn't true? He could just as easily say we don't have any money available - we are making an operating loss each month and any extra money we can raise has to go into covering that and to getting Falmer.
People might not like that but I don't see any downside for DK if he said that, if it was the truth.
Second question - why do you disbelieve him? What evidence do you have that he's lying, if he has no motive. And just because the money hasn't been spent it doesn't mean it's not available. There are lots of reasons why it may not have been spent, many of which we have heard.
If it was an Archer or a Stanley or a Risdale in charge then I'd be one of the first to suspect an ulterior motive or a hidden agenda. But DK is a fan - AND has been for longer than most of us AND has put a lot more money into the club than most of us - do you think he's happy with the way things are?
I've never understood why some people seem to believe that DK is lying when he says that there is money available for transfers.
First question - why would he say that if it wasn't true? He could just as easily say we don't have any money available - we are making an operating loss each month and any extra money we can raise has to go into covering that and to getting Falmer.
People might not like that but I don't see any downside for DK if he said that, if it was the truth.
Second question - why do you disbelieve him? What evidence do you have that he's lying, if he has no motive. And just because the money hasn't been spent it doesn't mean it's not available. There are lots of reasons why it may not have been spent, many of which we have heard.
If it was an Archer or a Stanley or a Risdale in charge then I'd be one of the first to suspect an ulterior motive or a hidden agenda. But DK is a fan - AND has been for longer than most of us AND has put a lot more money into the club than most of us - do you think he's happy with the way things are?