BackRoomRummermill
Well-Known Member
This reminds me of the ACL thread back in the day. Remember those who supported the ACL stance and that ' the Ricoh could survive on hosting events like the midland carp festival and mystic sally '
For me the last two windows have been markedly different from the ones before. All we needed was Jan/Summer windows like the last few years: a couple of loans in Jan, slowly improving the quality of the squad in the summer. Neither happened.
Just gone back and looked at the full game. The only one of our goals where there could have been a case for offside is our 3rd, where McNulty who played the ball to Max looks fractionally offside.3 offside goals as well wasn’t it. Beautiful.
They can't win though...
People were going mental on here at the very prospect of O'Hare or Gyokores leaving.
Then when we had the difficulties at the start of the season with the pitch/stadium, it was all their fault for not offloading a player for £6-10m
The day you actually work out what people are saying, and stop ascribing meanings to them that suit your one-man crusade to smash the system is the day you're entitled to behave like a spoiled infant who thinks the world is against him.Aucune idée
From what I remember Forte wasn't offside when he headed in to make it 2-2, then there was a case for the goal that made it 3-1 to us being offside. We hammered them for most the game really but those were big moments. Also seem to recall the pen in the first leg being soft.Just gone back and looked at the full game. The only one of our goals where there could have been a case for offside is our 3rd, where McNulty who played the ball to Max looks fractionally offside.
Our 1st goal, again McNulty was in an offside position but not interfering.
Spot on. The problem was we couldn’t get some players off the payroll that we’d hoped. Walker, Waghorn and Hilssner cost us (according to some) 28k per week (£1.5m per year with extras).Who was?
All the sensible posters on here were saying we needed to sell this window.
This constant portrayal of fans who aren’t happy as some unrealistic morons who want us to spunk cash we don’t have is frankly insulting.
Most fans are bought into the idea of buying low selling high and incremental improvement. But the last two windows that’s not what’s happened. We’ve undersold at the last minute and failed to bring in the bare minimum needed for the squad.
Spot on. The problem was we couldn’t get some players off the payroll that we’d hoped. Walker, Waghorn and Hilssner cost us (according to some) 28k per week (£1.5m per year with extras).
Dom went for £1.4.
All of these things are easily overcome if both sides agree a framework - as you well know.Sell 51% and the proceeds go first to sbs&l technically as that is who owns 90.1% of otium ordinary shares. But
The funds, due to the ARVO charge over the otium shares, would have to be applied to the high interest rate loans due to them. From what we can calculate that is now sitting at around 30m.
The problem with that is that means sbs&l is making a loan to otium, which most likely means a new loan at high interest rate and probably secured on all otium assets
Anyone therfore investing at 51% would be investing in a debt laden company no different to how it looks now. Just moving from one sisu entity to another.
Sell a player and it would require sisu permission to leave any of the funds in otium hardly 51% control for the investors
As I’ve said before, yes.Hyam went because of cash flow, not budget deficit.
And what do you think they want or need?No one is saying that sisu want to sell at 20m. Just about everyone is saying they won't get offered what they want or need.
What that means is that we are stuck with them for the foreseeable future. Unless Ashley can twist sisu's arm once he owns the stadium. He won't make a move on that though until he has control of the stadium first.
I expect ACL to be out of administration by the end of this month but certainly before Xmas
No one is saying that sisu want to sell at 20m. Just about everyone is saying they won't get offered what they want or need.
What that means is that we are stuck with them for the foreseeable future. Unless Ashley can twist sisu's arm once he owns the stadium. He won't make a move on that though until he has control of the stadium first.
I expect ACL to be out of administration by the end of this month but certainly before Xmas
As I’ve said before, yes.
Not saying he did.
But I’m sure it CCFC has said to SISU “got the bills down by 1.5m. Here’s the cash flow forecast, can you bridge the pitch money” they might have had some success.
You in ‘Spoons right now?The day you actually work out what people are saying, and stop ascribing meanings to them that suit your one-man crusade to smash the system is the day you're entitled to behave like a spoiled infant who thinks the world is against him.
All of these things are easily overcome if both sides agree a framework - as you well know.
Not sure your point gets us anywhere other than highlighting the technical set up.
What?
Thank you for your clarity.I will keep it simple for you.
Having received 30m it means sisu entities will still be owed 60m just that all the debt will be sitting in sbs&l
And if this is the case is it what the co-sponsers for the stadium purchase would have expected, wanted or accepted?Thank you for your clarity.
If SISU receive £30m it is well within their gift to move their debt around to show in the Arvo master fund (or whatever) holds controlling stake in a venture that has a 49% stake in an entity which yields x% per annum and can be settled for £30m at a time to be agreed.
Tell me it’s not possible, without the phrase “it’s not easy”
It’s an asset swap. It’s not particularly difficult.
And if this is the case is it what the co-sponsers for the stadium purchase would have expected, wanted or accepted?
I’ve no idea.And if this is the case is it what the co-sponsers for the stadium purchase would have expected, wanted or accepted?
You really must go to SpecsaversLots on here are suggesting alternate scenarios (SISU prefer relegation because it suits their model) being my comedy fave.
Well this is where their hand has been shown as to what's acceptable.IMOI wouldn't recommend such a deal but who knows.
Nobody has said this…. Best way to describe it is - we have a model that works in league one or two. They have no intention of deviating from that model in the Championship regardless of the consequencesLots on here are suggesting alternate scenarios (SISU prefer relegation because it suits their model) being my comedy fave.
Who was?
All the sensible posters on here were saying we needed to sell this window.
This constant portrayal of fans who aren’t happy as some unrealistic morons who want us to spunk cash we don’t have is frankly insulting.
Most fans are bought into the idea of buying low selling high and incremental improvement. But the last two windows that’s not what’s happened. We’ve undersold at the last minute and failed to bring in the bare minimum needed for the squad.
If you think this place wasn't absolutely apoplectic at the thought of O'Hare going to Burnley, particularly after the "bigger club" comments, you're trying to re-write history.
And if you think people will be behind a potential sale of Gyokeres in January you're equally in dreamland (incidentally i also think it would be a disaster for the club)
If they wanted pl money they've got a very funny way of going about itThe league is irrelevant?
They want PL money - anyone that thinks they don’t has no grasp of reality.
L1 is further away from the PL
I’ll say it again:
Clueless
I’ve no idea.
Who put 10p in you?At last a moment of self realisation
CluelessIn the first championship season they had a relatively low wage structure and had cash flow funding via the EFL loan and transfer sales netting £1.7 million
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?