D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
No we weren't. He'd actually pulled it down by the amount McGinnity claimed to have done. The reduction was made by Richardson, before he left.
No we weren't. He'd actually pulled it down by the amount McGinnity claimed to have done. The reduction was made by Richardson, before he left.How much in todays money was 1m worth 20 years ago?
And yes we were about 60m in debt when they got rid of Richardson. And do you agree with how much he paid himself?
It was vastly reduced once they got rid of Richardson. And as I have been saying we were 60m in debt when we got rid of himNo we weren't. He'd actually pulled it down by the amount McGinnity claimed to have done. The reduction was made by Richardson, before he left.
Nope, it wa the great myth that it was reduced afterwards, the reduction was actually while Richardson was there.It was vastly reduced once they got rid of Richardson. And as I have been saying we were 60m in debt when we got rid of him
Coventry force out Richardson
Did you get that from what Richardson had said? Like recently when he tried to say that he bought the land where the Ricoh is built and sold the land to Tesco?Nope, it wa the great myth that it was reduced afterwards, the reduction was actually while Richardson was there.
Nope.Did you get that from what Richardson had said?
Show us then.Nope.
Check the accounts, and when the players were sold that McGinnity took the credit for.Show us then.
Go for it. You can be a myth busterCheck the accounts, and when the players were sold that McGinnity took the credit for.
I've done it repeatedly over the years (other sources too) and you were on GMK too, so why should I do it yet again when it's ignored?Go for it. You can be a myth buster
If I would have seen any proof before I would look at it differently.I've done it repeatedly over the years (other sources too) and you were on GMK too, so why should I do it yet again when it's ignored?
I've shown it before umpteen times, you were on GMK.If I would have seen any proof before I would look at it differently.
So if the article was so wrong why is it still available?
Yeah, you're talking complete bollocks again
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
Like I said I have never seen anything before that wasn't a quote from Richardson. You say that you have shown it umpteen times. So should be easy for you to find.I've shown it before umpteen times, you were on GMK.
Because it's a journalistic throwaway comment, referencing the state of play before the player sales happened.
Or are you now saying you believe everything Les Reid writes?
Anyway this is the past and boring as it's been done before and it's intransigent circles.
Yeah, you're talking complete bollocks again
Sent from my D6603 using Tapatalk
The biggest reduction in debt was in the summer of 2001 with all the player sales after relegation - Hadji, Kirkland, Bellamy et al, Richardson was not removed until the following year.It was vastly reduced once they got rid of Richardson. And as I have been saying we were 60m in debt when we got rid of him
Coventry force out Richardson
I suppose with the phenomenal turnout at Wembley our potential as a decent club was underlined which must have pissed Sisu off as they clearly do not want to play their part in realising that potential.
The question is do we potter along accepting their lamentable stewardship of Ccfc or force their hand.
We couldn't agree about Northants and were shafted.
We are now at another crossroads with another relegation.
So what to do?
Do what you feel is right - but accept that not everyone agrees.
However if you're basing it on an unsubstantiated rumour as you did in the OP ("Sisu are about to negotiate a tactical withdrawal") then I suspect that you're not going to get huge support, sorry.
1) I accept that fan unity is a pipe dream
2) Nevertheless 'fan unity' remains the one thing we haven't tried.
3) Divide and rule permits our owners to take the piss
4) My OP did start with "if"..... ;-)
If you think we are down to the hardcore fans you not seen nothing yet wait till next season I thought I was 1 of those(going for 60 plus years+) but they have kill me just take a look at the season ticket thread I don't think I am alone.Fair enough dadgad, but I honestly don't think you're going to get unity on trying to stop fans going to games.
You're down to the hardcore already and they're not going to stop attending on (politely) a pretty flimsy premise - in fact they're not going to stop attending at all in most cases, it's a central part of their lives. I can't think of anything that's going to create 'unity' based on something like this. Indeed, it could be argued that you're actively causing disunity by trying to push it forward in the face of all of the evidence.
The biggest reduction came in 2002. Robinson joined January 2002. By the end of the year our debt had been reduced to 23m. Yes players were sold before Robinson joined. But it never reduced the debt much as even the crap players we had were on too much money. We were losing well over 1m a month when Richardson got voted off the board.The biggest reduction in debt was in the summer of 2001 with all the player sales after relegation - Hadji, Kirkland, Bellamy et al, Richardson was not removed until the following year.
We sold over £20m worth of players in summer 2001. How was the debt reduced in 2002?The biggest reduction came in 2002. Robinson joined January 2002. By the end of the year our debt had been reduced to 23m. Yes players were sold before Robinson joined. But it never reduced the debt much as even the crap players we had were on too much money. We were losing well over 1m a month when Richardson got voted off the board.
Our debt was going up by over 1m a month. So most of the money raised went towards running costs. What players were brought in during that period?We sold over £20m worth of players in summer 2001. How was the debt reduced in 2002?
I still think the debt was reduced more by Richardson (and i'm no fan of his) but McGinnity took the creditOur debt was going up by over 1m a month. So most of the money raised went towards running costs. What players were brought in during that period?
Robinson obliterated the squad that was left which brought more money in and reduced the wage bill. Our debts went down to 23m by the end of 2002 but because we were still making a loss of about 600k a month it went back up. IIRC it had gone back up to about 38m when SISU took over.
Mike McGinnity said:Fleshing out the statement, chairman McGinnity, who replaced the ousted Bryan Richardson three weeks ago, said: 'I haven't joined the magic circle! It was unfair to be tagged with the £60million figure, although possibly it was factual at the time. A lot has been done since then, we've put a new business plan into place and I've had some very good meetings with out bankers. We're heading in the right direction and the thing I would like to stress most is that the figure of £30m does not involve selling any members of the first-team squad.'
McGinnity agreed that £13m was owed to directors who were not likely to be calling for it back soon, making the realistic 'in the red' figure around £17m - "and that could be wiped out in one year back in the Premiership."
He added that former chairman Richardson had stressed the club's debt was far less intimidating than the headline figure suggested before he was forced out in a boardroom coup.
'That's fair comment,' he said.
Richardson (and i'm no fan of his)
But the damage was already done by the time they got rid of Richardson. Seriously in debt and HR sold. Richardson even paid himself a large amount of money from our clubs funds for selling retail space in 2001. But as we didn't own the land he had nothing to sell on our clubs behalf. It is all there in black and white on the link I put up.Who is?
But the issue then was the other board members got off scott free, and continued to wreck the club. It'd be similar to now, if Fisher went, a new chair came in saying the right things, and people thinking the work had been done and all would be well.
It wouldn't.
Clean slate is needed.
what is to be gained by going over something that happened a generation ago. We berate Sunderland fans but are we any different?But the damage was already done by the time they got rid of Richardson. Seriously in debt and HR sold. Richardson even paid himself a large amount of money from our clubs funds for selling retail space in 2001. But as we didn't own the land he had nothing to sell on our clubs behalf. It is all there in black and white on the link I put up.
Yes the other two could have done a better job. But they did take over a right mess. They managed to halve our losses. And it has taken years for SISU to continue to get us to break even. Robinson lost at least 10m of his own money.
Richardson also saw us relegated. SISU have now done it twice. So I see it fair that Richardson got more blame than the other two. If he hadn't mismanaged us so badly we wouldn't be where we are now.
So visionary is spending over 1m a month that we didn't have?what is to be gained by going over something that happened a generation ago. We berate Sunderland fans but are we any different?
Surely it's what happens next that is crucial to our future not the accounts from 2002?
My take on Richardson is that he tried to take us to the top table as a club and the dice rolled against us with the tv deal and relegation and the stadium. I found him to passionate and engaging and visionary. All the things we accuse our owners of lacking.
Not asking anything Astute, I just don't see any benefit in going over the past.So visionary is spending over 1m a month that we didn't have?
Should we forget about our FA cup win? That was 30 years ago now. Twice as long ago as when they finally got rid of Richardson.
No. I can't forget or forgive what he did to our club.
1) I accept that fan unity is a pipe dream
2) Nevertheless 'fan unity' remains the one thing we haven't tried.
3) Divide and rule permits our owners to take the piss
4) My OP did start with "if"..... ;-)
Thing is, it's far easier not to notice those who don't bother going to Wembley, than those who don't bother to boycott a game.The problem with fan unity is that one side of the argument wants the other to change its mind and vice versa. "We will all have fan unity if you do what I say". It'll never work. You either need everyone to boycott or everyone to buy a ST and support the team. Obviously, never going to happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?