Search results

Quality :D:D:D

You mean, you're not interested in feeding the club so we don't have to rely on freebee's and loans. (as sisu haven't withdrawn a penny or charged interests on their loans, you can't mean them)

Wow! It can actually happen!:D Let's see how far this can go ... Now, about sisu ... you do realise now, that they are the good guys, right? :D

Give it 12 months and almost everybody on this forum will claim they said that all along.

I am more amazed people are hoping for Hoffman to come back.

... and Tommy, can I turn your attention to FAQ-1, The Beginning? The second post in that thread:

We can't put all the blame on him ... he couldn't have blown it without Hoffmann and Elliott.

Look in the mirror ... I am pretty sure you will see a very bright light bubble over your head :D.

Missed your response Tommy, but now I've seen it so let me explain: You cannot believe sisu didn't set up the show initially holding full control themself. Well, you need to remember that there were actually two parties injecting values at the take over - sisu and Ranson. It would be a...

You could argue that with the financial situation the club finds itself, they could have left the acadamy budget where it was. It's not like the acadamy hasn't produced decent youngsters over the past few years - is it? So it was doing ok with the funding it had. Putting more money into the...

Funding the academy is really about developing assets that the club can sell, the best players will be sold after making first team appearances and raising their value so the club can survive and stop the money keep rolling out.

Yes, I get it now - was a bit too fast to reply. (But it's still one ugly building!). BTW - in my younger days I spend a few summer vacations on my uncles farm. I actually learned to drive their red MF work horse.

It's one ugly building - demolision was the right strategy.

I don't think they have written off the £8m - I think you misunderstood OSB. He says the £21m of the loans were to cover for operational losses, while the £8m was to 'buy' the club. The total loan is £29m ... and as you (and OSB) have said: A long way from £54m.

The plan was upset very early, but in my oppinion not by the selling of players. The financial realities changed and the inabillity to get enough people through the gates and therefor not getting the budgeted income meant the board had to cover by selling players. The owners are not...

No need to be sorry for disagreeing - that's what forums are for (and I can take it ... mostly). Hedge funds are not evil entities - they are a necessary investment vehicle with a useful and legal place in the financial world. You have a pension plan, right? I bet you that some of your money...

True. It's not fair. But a few points needed to be addressed as well: 1) The club has no realistic alternative place to play. There's no competition for the rent, so it's not like we can either pay or relocate. That's not fair either. 2) The interest rates have come down since the financial...

Don't worry about disagreeing with OSB - he actually likes a good debate and value different oppinions.

The rent shouldn't be directly dependant on which division we are playing in, but a reflection of the income on matchdays.

Sorry, what would be illigal and how does the tax-rate play any role? The club pays rent to ACL - not the council.