Vive_La_Villa Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 What constitutes as serious investment though? If people are expecting any new owner to splash out straight away I must admit it just won't happen whilst they haven't got their man in place as manager and are getting used to him in place in my opinion. It's not a dig at Sherwood or anything like that it's just how it is, they will back him but not to the extent of what I feel people are talking about here. And rightly so in my opinion. I like Sherwood but I think past experience has taught us that trusting a manager with a big transfer kitty to soon can be quite damaging in the long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Which part doesn't look serious? That you can't spend money if you don't have it, or that if your worth £20B you've actually got the money to spend and the choice to spend it, rather than no choice at all? Seems like common sense to me. If we're taken over by mega rich owners there's no guarantee that they're going to spend big but at least the possibility is there. That wasn't what I was disputing. What I was disputing was this idea that if owner A has $2bn and owner B has $5bn then owner B will automatically spend more. As I said, go and look at the net worths of all the different Premier League owners - you'd be surprised at how some of the richer owners spend relatively little and how some of the "poorer" owners (e.g. Coates at Stoke) have spent quite a bit. Edited June 17, 2015 by Mantis 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 You could have Bill Gates take over us but if all he wants to do is spend what the club generates itself then having all his billions in his bank account is irrelevant to us. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Which part doesn't look serious? That you can't spend money if you don't have it, or that if your worth £20B you've actually got the money to spend and the choice to spend it, rather than no choice at all? Seems like common sense to me. If we're taken over by mega rich owners there's no guarantee that they're going to spend big but at least the possibility is there. That wasn't what I was disputing. What I was disputing was this idea that if owner A has $2bn and owner B has $5bn then owner B will automatically spend more. As I said, go and look at the net worths of all the different Premier League owners - you'd be surprised at how some of the richer owners spend relatively little and how some of the "poorer" owners (e.g. Coates at Stoke) have spent quite a bit. I never mentioned a figure of $5B and it isn't my idea that an owner with that wealth would automatically spend more than an owner with a wealth of $2B. So basically if your not disputing what you've emboldened then your not disputing me at all, or at least anything I've actually written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Which part doesn't look serious? That you can't spend money if you don't have it, or that if your worth £20B you've actually got the money to spend and the choice to spend it, rather than no choice at all? Seems like common sense to me. If we're taken over by mega rich owners there's no guarantee that they're going to spend big but at least the possibility is there. That wasn't what I was disputing. What I was disputing was this idea that if owner A has $2bn and owner B has $5bn then owner B will automatically spend more. As I said, go and look at the net worths of all the different Premier League owners - you'd be surprised at how some of the richer owners spend relatively little and how some of the "poorer" owners (e.g. Coates at Stoke) have spent quite a bit. I never mentioned a figure of $5B and it isn't my idea that an owner with that wealth would automatically spend more than an owner with a wealth of $2B. So basically if your not disputing what you've emboldened then your not disputing me at all, or at least anything I've actually written. I just gave the $5bn figure as an example. Jesus Christ... Of course how much someone will spend is proportional to their wealth. That was what I was disputing. What you said there implies that the more money an owner has, the more they'll spend, which we know often isn't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NurembergVillan Posted June 17, 2015 Moderator Share Posted June 17, 2015 i want us to be owned by the richest bankrupt guy 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Which part doesn't look serious? That you can't spend money if you don't have it, or that if your worth £20B you've actually got the money to spend and the choice to spend it, rather than no choice at all? Seems like common sense to me. If we're taken over by mega rich owners there's no guarantee that they're going to spend big but at least the possibility is there. That wasn't what I was disputing. What I was disputing was this idea that if owner A has $2bn and owner B has $5bn then owner B will automatically spend more. As I said, go and look at the net worths of all the different Premier League owners - you'd be surprised at how some of the richer owners spend relatively little and how some of the "poorer" owners (e.g. Coates at Stoke) have spent quite a bit. I never mentioned a figure of $5B and it isn't my idea that an owner with that wealth would automatically spend more than an owner with a wealth of $2B. So basically if your not disputing what you've emboldened then your not disputing me at all, or at least anything I've actually written. I just gave the $5bn figure as an example. Jesus Christ... Of course how much someone will spend is proportional to their wealth. That was what I was disputing. What you said there implies that the more money an owner has, the more they'll spend, which we know often isn't the case. I can assure you I don't think I'm Jesus or have any sort of Messiah complex, just trying to explain my opinion. Basically if we get taken over by say Dalian Wanda, they're more likely to do a lot more for us financially than say someone worth $2B or $5B. Edited June 17, 2015 by useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
powell91 Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 You could have Bill Gates take over us but if all he wants to do is spend what the club generates itself then having all his billions in his bank account is irrelevant to us. True however someone with that kind of money could then do what citeh have done and get amazing sponsorship deals to generate their millions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Anyone seriously think we are going to be taken over with serious investment in team strengthening this summer? If the new owners coming in want us to stay in the premier league then yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjbilling Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Did we ever find out who was on the plane that trees mentioned last week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 It was owned by Valero Energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enda Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Anyone seriously think we are going to be taken over with serious investment in team strengthening this summer? Despite it not having worked out, I don't think Randy is a scumbag. I trust him enough to pick the best of the (possibly bad) bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 You could have Bill Gates take over us but if all he wants to do is spend what the club generates itself then having all his billions in his bank account is irrelevant to us. If Bill Gates took over....I would crawl 50 miles over broken glass just to stick pins in his poo 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 You could have Bill Gates take over us but if all he wants to do is spend what the club generates itself then having all his billions in his bank account is irrelevant to us. If Bill Gates took over....I would crawl 50 miles over broken glass just to stick pins in his poo I don't know how to process that...... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I wouldn't take to much credence from that document. TBH though, I think the whole exclusity thing is a spin, I don't beleive we are remotely close to a sale. (IMO of course) what a weird assumption, why would anyone at the club bother to spin something like that, usually they are more than happy to make us disappointed and devoid of any hope, i don't see how that would tempt other buyers out of that hotel room they've been holed up in with Dale Stevens and that other Asian player from Germany that i can't remember the name of either. And Defoe and JulieB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 Both Percy and Pat Murphy have said we're in Due Diligence, that's good enough me, hopefully we hear something soon. My fear is that we'll be sold to someone completely underwhelming like Joshua Harris. I think he knew naff all and just leapt on the band wagon after the story broke. I long ago stopped giving any weight to what 'the voice of Midlands football' 'understands' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 (edited) Both Percy and Pat Murphy have said we're in Due Diligence, that's good enough me, hopefully we hear something soon. My fear is that we'll be sold to someone completely underwhelming like Joshua Harris. I think he knew naff all and just leapt on the band wagon after the story broke. I long ago stopped giving any weight to what 'the voice of Midlands football' 'understands' Going back to useless' post here, I don't see why someone like Joshua Harris would be underwhelming. He's worth around 2bn, around double what Lerner is, so is definitely wealthy enough. As someone mentioned above, an owner with 2bn wealth could prove to be a better owner than one with 3bn, 4bn or 5bn of wealth. Mike Ashley is worth 3bn and I wouldn't want him. Edited June 17, 2015 by AvfcTheObsession 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dounavilla Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 You could have Bill Gates take over us but if all he wants to do is spend what the club generates itself then having all his billions in his bank account is irrelevant to us. If Bill Gates took over....I would crawl 50 miles over broken glass just to stick pins in his poo I don't know how to process that...... You could use Windows 8. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I wouldn't want Ashley either. I want an owner worth around £20B or more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcTheObsession Posted June 17, 2015 Share Posted June 17, 2015 I wouldn't want Ashley either. I want an owner worth around £20B or more. LOL. You do realise the only owner in the Premier league with that kind of wealth is Sheikh Mansour and the Abu Dhabi group? Even Roman Abramavich is 'only' worth around 5-6bn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts