Richard Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 If that's what you want to have suggested to you, then that's fine. It's not the only, or the most logical conclusion. When 2 parties start off "you owe me a full years pay off, you forced me to go" versus "we owe you nothing, you resigned" and end up meeting in the middle, it is the case that both parties have accepted that they are in part right and in part wrong. To me your analysis is the polar opposite extreme of the one that would say "One side persistently claiming entitlement for full salary, over and over then dropped that claim, instead effectively saying "well just give me something, then, and I'll go stop pestering you" " .Bit in bold right back at you. It is also entirely plausible that the party who eventually received the compensation saw the damage that a long term drawn out case would ultimately do to his chances of securing further employment and decided to accept a lesser amount to help that along. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Whilst the £25m Randy has put in cant really be counted as revenue it does cover losses so, I bet we arent far off. You've just countered your own point. Lerner putting money in doesn't mean we're breaking even, it's just means that we can pay our creditors which we wouldn't be able to do if he didn't. If we were solvent that money could have been spent on improving the team, rather than just covering losses. And how do you think ManCity will cope? Because their owner will do the exact same thing. Just like every single club who dont have a wealthy owner will either issue shares, take out a loan or refinance the debt. I really dont know what people expect. As I said before, it's fine to make losses if your owner is happy to keep financing things and you've had the benefit of the improved performances as a result. It's just clear that there's no plan in place. Man City who you cite, have spent a lot on initial investment, but will soon get the bounce from increased turnover, and they still have a squad full of players who they could get at least their money back on (eg Tevez). Other than maybe Bent, we've very few saleable assets left, and our squad is a mix of oldish has beens (Dunne, Warnock, Petrov) and mostly inconsistent kids (Albrighton, Bannan, Herd) none of whom look to be top class. I bet in the next three years, none of the big teams (Man City, Chelsea, Man U) will have fallen foul of the Uefa financial rules, whereas even if we do comply, it won't matter anyway as the chances of us qualifying for Europe any time soon look bleak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Whilst the £25m Randy has put in cant really be counted as revenue it does cover losses so, I bet we arent far off. You've just countered your own point. Lerner putting money in doesn't mean we're breaking even, it's just means that we can pay our creditors which we wouldn't be able to do if he didn't. If we were solvent that money could have been spent on improving the team, rather than just covering losses. And how do you think ManCity will cope? Because their owner will do the exact same thing. Just like every single club who dont have a wealthy owner will either issue shares, take out a loan or refinance the debt. I really dont know what people expect.Their owner's wealth puts them in a completely different position. That is he can afford to cover it. Ours cannot afford a pot to piss in currently. Is this a serious comment? So £25m isnt enough for a pot to piss in? As I've already mentioned City have a far wealthier owner but they are also running at a far heavier loss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Not being patronising pr having a dig at all but just to ask, do you understdand the accounting procedures involved in the treatment of Lerner's £25M and the player sales? No I dont Richard, I just choose to comment on it and pretend I know all the ins and outs just like nearly every single poster on this thread. You don't have to know every single in and out to be able to understand and interpret a set of accounts. Some of us do it for a living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 29, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 29, 2012 The finances show me a couple of things. Randy put a lot into getting into the CL, which if we'd done so would make this look a lot rosier. The cost cutting procedures we're experiencing now are entirely necessary, whether Lerner can cover our losses or not, we can't run the club like this long term. The people running the club are not totally useless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Houlston, in relative terms when tcomparing us to man citeh, then yes it is a serious comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis_B Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Stevo985 said The people running the club are not totally useless. I beg to differ! How on earth can they let the finances get into such a mess that we can't afford the proverbial to piss in? No plan, no idea, no direction and no leadership - other than RLs mate coining in £250k a year for this mess! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 As I said before, it's fine to make losses if your owner is happy to keep financing things and you've had the benefit of the improved performances as a result. It's just clear that there's no plan in place. Man City who you cite, have spent a lot on initial investment, but will soon get the bounce from increased turnover, and they still have a squad full of players who they could get at least their money back on (eg Tevez). Other than maybe Bent, we've very few saleable assets left, and our squad is a mix of oldish has beens (Dunne, Warnock, Petrov) and mostly inconsistent kids (Albrighton, Bannan, Herd) none of whom look to be top class. I bet in the next three years, none of the big teams (Man City, Chelsea, Man U) will have fallen foul of the Uefa financial rules, whereas even if we do comply, it won't matter anyway as the chances of us qualifying for Europe any time soon look bleak. Thats a reasonable comment Risso, but its also something that will only tell with time. You say its clear that there is no plan in place well I have to disagree and I'm also not sure how happy or unhappy Lerner is to keep bailing us out. For me this summer is going to be very telling but also worrying because any investment made will be done with McLeish in charge. But I think these results are nowhere near as bad as the reaction in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Is this a serious comment? So £25m isnt enough for a pot to piss in? As I've already mentioned City have a far wealthier owner but they are also running at a far heavier loss. Their losses aren't affecting their league position, ours are. I think the "pot to piss" in comment refers to the fact that Randy hasn't spent much other than on emergency cash injections to stop us going bust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Not being patronising pr having a dig at all but just to ask, do you understdand the accounting procedures involved in the treatment of Lerner's £25M and the player sales? No I dont Richard, I just choose to comment on it and pretend I know all the ins and outs just like nearly every single poster on this thread. You don't have to know every single in and out to be able to understand and interpret a set of accounts. Some of us do it for a living. Oh right I see so that makes you a professional in guessing? You also seem to think that perhaps some of us dont do it for a living? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Thats a reasonable comment Risso, but its also something that will only tell with time. You say its clear that there is no plan in place well I have to disagree and I'm also not sure how happy or unhappy Lerner is to keep bailing us out. For me this summer is going to be very telling but also worrying because any investment made will be done with McLeish in charge. But I think these results are nowhere near as bad as the reaction in this thread. Yes they absolutely are. They're dreadful results. And the fact that we've sold our best players and nto replaced them, and have installed a dreadful manager content not to have cash to spend leads me to suspect that suggests that Lerner isn't happy to keep spending money. If he was, O'Neill would still be here. The General said two years ago that they were looking to reduce expenditure after year three. There either isn't a plan, or if there is, it's a really, really bad one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houlston Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Is this a serious comment? So £25m isnt enough for a pot to piss in? As I've already mentioned City have a far wealthier owner but they are also running at a far heavier loss. Their losses aren't affecting their league position, ours are. I think the "pot to piss" in comment refers to the fact that Randy hasn't spent much other than on emergency cash injections to stop us going bust. No and neither are our losses affecting our league position. Our league position is being affected by our manager and some players. And of course your post also suggests that you wouldnt be that bothered about our losses if we were much higher up the league, which again is something I mentioned a few pages back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 29, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 29, 2012 The people running the club are not totally useless. I beg to differ! How on earth can they let the finances get into such a mess that we can't afford the proverbial to piss in? No plan, no idea, no direction and no leadership - other than RLs mate coining in £250k a year for this mess! If they were totally useless, they wouldn't be sorting the mess out now. They'd be carrying on while Randy can cover the losses until he can't anymore and then we'd be completely ****. At least they're taking the measures needed to steady the ship and not letting us getting into real financial turmoil. There's obviously been some irresponsible spending, and naievity as to our ability to sustain a high league position and how quick they could cut the costs again. But I still think once the wage bill is brought back down we'll be better off than we were under Ellis. As long as Randy can cover the losses to a manageable level until the spending is under control then we'll be ok in the long term. The tragedy is that we had to experience a peak and a bit of false hope as to where we could get to in the middle of all this, and the long term improvement of the club's position will actually be much smaller than we were led to believe when the takeover happened. Essentially the big downfall was that shot for the champions league that we never made count. But previous clubs have shown us that those shots can be a lot more disastrous than ours has been and will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted February 29, 2012 Moderator Share Posted February 29, 2012 It is also entirely plausible that the party who eventually received the compensation saw the damage that a long term drawn out case would ultimately do to his chances of securing further employment and decided to accept a lesser amount to help that along. Barely plausible. Tribunals don't go on long at all. Usually done with less than a week. MO'N is/was at no risk of poor employment prospects due to a tribunals duration. Much greater was the risk of him losing. If his team could negotiate something, he could "save face" and get a few quid, too. It worked - Many people, you included, were wrongly claiming "he won his case at a tribunal" before being corrected by someone or other. That he dropped his claim against the club we do know. We can speculate how much of a concern for him the thought of losing would have been. Surely more than "it going on a bit long" He may have noted that though Keegan won his case, way back, the details of the case showed Keegan in an extraordinary bad light. Details about greed, behaviour patterns and so on. He did alright out of it, he got some money and a chance to say "I'm happy" and none of his dirty laundry aired. Equally the club did alright - no dirty laundry and a case against them dropped. It's not a clear case of the Club being seen or found to have been "guilty". There's enough they've got genuinely wrong to go on without picking on instances where there's at worst equal blame with another party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Essentially the big downfall was that shot for the champions league that we never made count. But previous clubs have shown us that those shots can be a lot more disastrous than ours has been and will be. this is true. It was worth the shot as well, and we were so so close to doing it. i'd rather have had that go and failed, than stayed mid-table forever under Ellis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Is this a serious comment? So £25m isnt enough for a pot to piss in? As I've already mentioned City have a far wealthier owner but they are also running at a far heavier loss. Their losses aren't affecting their league position, ours are. I think the "pot to piss" in comment refers to the fact that Randy hasn't spent much other than on emergency cash injections to stop us going bust. No and neither are our losses affecting our league position. Our league position is being affected by our manager and some players. And of course your post also suggests that you wouldnt be that bothered about our losses if we were much higher up the league, which again is something I mentioned a few pages back. The losses are symptomatic of our overall poor financial state that has necessitated the sale of players like Young and Downing, so yes, our finances are of course impacting our on field performance and league position. If we could have spent all of the money from Milner, Young and Downing on like for like replacements and a decent manager, we'd be much better off than we are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted February 29, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted February 29, 2012 Essentially the big downfall was that shot for the champions league that we never made count. But previous clubs have shown us that those shots can be a lot more disastrous than ours has been and will be. this is true. It was worth the shot as well, and we were so so close to doing it. i'd rather have had that go and failed, than stayed mid-table forever under Ellis. Exactly. These results aren't good. I'm not trying to say that at all. But I think we'll come out the other end better off than we were before. It just feels worse now because we've gone backwards from 2 years ago. We won't have gone backwards from 5 years ago (I don't think) As I said, the real tragedy is that we took a big risk in shooting for the CL and it gave us a taste of what we could have gotten, and some false hope that things would carry on that way. Randy could have just as easily kept all his money in his pocket and kept us mid table Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 End of the day Peter, the club paid him some money. If they were 100% sure of their case an offer would not have been made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risso Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 But I think we'll come out the other end better off than we were before How? To get players as good as Carew (at his best), Young and Downing again we'd have to spend approaching £50m probably, with the accompanying high wages. Where's the sign that Lerner is going to be able to spend that again? Cutting the wage bill isn't going to magically get the money back that has been pissed up the wall on the likes of Beye, Heskey and N'Zogbia etc. The only way that this situation is possibly going to improve is if Lerner sells. It's clear that while he remains in charge we're on a downward spiral. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 The only way that this situation is possibly going to improve is if Lerner sells. It's clear that while he remains in charge we're on a downward spiral. 100%, been saying similar for approaching 3 years now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts