weebil64
Striker
We'll never know will we?Some short memory's on here, the club was an absolute clusterfuck, I wonder what shape we would have been in if they hadn't stepped up to the plate.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We'll never know will we?Some short memory's on here, the club was an absolute clusterfuck, I wonder what shape we would have been in if they hadn't stepped up to the plate.
Like being really ambiguous when being transparent6/10
We're on a more solid financial footing, they are transparent with the fans, but they have made some silly mistakes. Don't think I can deduct marks for them having nee money.
But wouldn’t that potential owner need to fund the running costs of the club themselves or have the ability to finance that ?Possibly bought by someone who ported the internal debt across. Then did a sale and leaseback to another of their own companies, using the proceeds to clear the debt they ported across. Leaving them £70-80m better off, and us without a ground. You think it's an accident that Short sold to the only buyers who didn't want that debt?
7/10 debt free, fan engagement, broke league one attendance record, 2 wembley trips, 3 points lost because of Ross and his single tactic, should have sacked him
I'm going to be generous and say a 7. I think last season they gave us a side capable of going up, they've also seemingly done well further reducing the cost base and I have liked the communication (podcasts and the likes). I think financially we won't be at risk with them here, which is a positive after what went before.
Prior to this preseason I'd probably have given an 8 or maybe a 9 though. At the minute I'm a bit pissed off by the lack of clarity about whether this £25m gets paid back to the club (sometimes they suggest it will, others that it won't), that's a major amount of money in any league but especially here. I'd be confident if we have that money available when we need it, if we don't I'll be anxious about how we can be sustainable whilst still competing. Also not happy with Donald saying that Short had security over the parachute payments just in case Donald didn't pay his installments, when seemingly that was never the case, Short only ever got £15m and the parachute payments went straight to SBC. Also frustrated that we have publicly targeted 100 points but have, thus far, done very little to improve the squad with, mainly, minor tinkering of a side who were nowhere near the automatic promotion pace after Maja left
Like being really ambiguous when being transparent
But wouldn’t that potential owner need to fund the running costs of the club themselves or have the ability to finance that ?
My point is that they would be asset strippers if they did so . Saying that they were the only deal in town who wouldn’t asset strip is saying a lot about the other interested parties especially those with SAFC connectionsThat wouldn't concern them greatly. Their primary motivation would be getting the value in the SoL out of the club for themselves. That's what asset strippers do - they don't care about the rump of their investment left behind. The scale of the internal debt left us wide open to that. Think SISU on steroids. Once the debt wasn't ported, that option went away. Because of the accumulated losses, there's simply no other easy way of getting cash out of the club. At least the current owners have the best interest of the club at heart, even if that's only because it's the only way they can come out of this with any kind of profit.
My point is that they would be asset strippers if they did so . Saying that they were the only deal in town who wouldn’t asset strip is saying a lot about the other interested parties especially those with SAFC connections