What would you pay for a loss making organisation without assets and ladened with outstanding debt?
Million dollar (?) question seems to be how much/little sisu would accept as an offer now. I've seen lots of different figures bandies about but I have no idea what would be acceptable to sisu. Also, someone else pointed out on another thread that given the current dispute could you imagine what it would be like to negotiate a buyout with sisu...
Million dollar (?) question seems to be how much/little sisu would accept as an offer now. I've seen lots of different figures bandies about but I have no idea what would be acceptable to sisu. Also, someone else pointed out on another thread that given the current dispute could you imagine what it would be like to negotiate a buyout with sisu...
It strikes me as very odd too.. why they didn't move to buy it as soon as Ranson was gone & the punt of getting into the prem. had failed. I don't think raising money was the issue.
Torchy....
Got to the point where I don't give a flying fuck what you, Grenduffy, and SBTaylor think anymore. You talk shit, SBTaylor talks facts and figures but can't substantiate them...Grenduffy....well look to SBTaylor for the answer to that one!:facepalm:
Then we're at a standstill. Short of finance I can't think of any other reason. I'm pretty sure they stated intent on buying in and logically it was the only route to reducing week-to- week costs.
No, you are mistaken, I'm just saying they have both acted immorally, and I was generally having a dig at capitalism to be frank with you. To set the record straight however, SISU are the more immoral of the two, by a large margin, but as I say, morality doesn't exist in the boardroom.
Not sure how it would affect the rent agreement-I assume that the need to pay rent would disappear too?
Maybe so, or perhaps we'd have had to payout part based on the other 50%; either way it would still have been a logical progression move if affordable.
What would you pay for a loss making organisation without assets and ladened with outstanding debt?
Well as we would be moving from tenant to landlord I assume the rent would disappear. Either way I agree, simply buying the option would make a lot of sense (though where we'd get the cash from now is anyone's guess).
As a rational human being the answer has to be zilch. But this is football so isn't rational. My personal wealth extends to about a grand so not going to get far with that but if someone came along with say £5m would sisu have any interest in that?
Opinions will differ on here Michael. Personally, I think SISU may take your grand!
Seriously though, SISU would probably jump ship at any offer that would give a route out of this; unfortunately, there is nothing to attract any potential buyer short of a very wealthy city fan.
You can say what you like but I won't have it said that a lady faints in Pride and Prejudice! Get your facts straight. Jane Austen's women do not faint!
To be honest Taylor you should completely discount shaw reign as he as not fit manage and but including him you're not comparing like for like in terms of management capacity or players (i.e no moussa, bailey, etc) so that discounts matches 1-4 on your list.
So that makes it
4-4-2 40% (6 of 15)
Should I though? I could also move the goalposts to suit my argument, but I won't.
Should I also discount MR's 1st game because of the damage done by Shaw's regime!? ... Making it... 40% also? (9 of 22).
The facts tell the story.
You can do what you want, and if you do and it makes it 40% then that shows that post shaw they have been equally effective at getting 3 points.
But to be honest I wasn't moving the goalposts to suit my argument, i think the majority of posters would agree that Shaw reign should be discounted from your stats.
Ah-rounding it up to make it look better. Even so a 1% difference is negligible.
:guitar2::claping hands:Torchy....
Got to the point where I don't give a flying fuck what you, Grenduffy, and SBTaylor think anymore. You talk shit, SBTaylor talks facts and figures but can't substantiate them...Grenduffy....well look to SBTaylor for the answer to that one!:facepalm:
Although I have no idea of what you think I'm mistaken about, I tend to agree with you!
So SISU are the lesser of 2 evils? That's as much as I can get from what you're saying, unless I'm mistaken.
Sorry, but that still doesn't cut it, many people blamed the diamond for our shortcomings (the way Thorn utilised it, yes it is to be blamed) and before the season people were saying 4-4-2 would be our strength, so I will not allow that to distort the facts. Also, SBK says 4-4-2 trumps any formation with win ratio, I included 4-3-3 and the diamond and he did not say anything about Shaw's reign - in fact, the idiot thought we played the diamond for that period :facepalm: - I have conducted this in a fair manner and in fact made dubious decision against 4-5-1, for example, I gave 4-4-2 the W v Sheffield United, but the change to 4-5-1, I believe, save us from losing and we actually ended up winning. Look, if I was bias, the results would've shown it.
If Shaw had won his 4 games and I had not included them, you'd scrutinise that, and it's not my fault he lost all 4 games play, for 3.5 games, 4-4-2.
You was being picky, so was I, as I have said, the results, although mathematically correct are somewhat dubious. I rounded it up from 40.9.
Fine Taylor - but most posters they will look at the figures and ignore the shaw period, just like they do when we ignore the first 8 games when we considered how well we've done this season.
49 pages of mostly hot air (from both sides)....yikes is this gonna beat the portsmouth thread ?...another fabulous read !
Barely...more about the owner/landlord we supportWell, at least this is about the team we support. It'll pop up again when ccfcway decides he wants to revive it again.
Maybe Hoffmans bid of a pound and the debts paid off over time linked to success and a return to the premier league sounds tempting now
Interesting posts last night by Brighton, Dude and this one from Bennet (no disresepct to points about Jane Austen and Taylor needing a girlfriend!) Asking from a point of complete ignorance, is the approach Bennet mentions one that might interest sisu, and how would it work? If it's about offering sisu an exit option would the emphasis need to be on money upfront or would the possibility of a greater return but in the long run/maybe never (eg a higher amount if we ever get into the Prem) be more attractive?
or would the possibility of a greater return but in the long run/maybe never (eg a higher amount if we ever get into the Prem) be more attractive?
You need a girlfriend SBT.
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?