Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I know they are solvent Stop whining on and get over me then, Mr Lemming. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Well done for presenting that report, it is honest, very interesting and very informative with most of the unanswered queries about the project being dealt with. It is yet more positive work and structured comments again being spoiled by the constant NEGATIVE remarks by some of the more REGULAR posters who appear to be intent on destroying everything decent and good about the club. When the main culprit of these ongoing very negative comments actually does something to find a way of making at least one POSITIVE remark on OWTB I personally will recommend him for the the position of Sergeant ! Well done SW and thanks again. Anytime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Which they very nearly did...... And could very easily do within the next five years. Or even worse scenario If Bolton get relegated, and do not win promotion on their first two seasons back in the championship (hence lose their parachute payments) Better for Latics to stay as we are then, just in case some success brings something terrible in its wake. Best to stay in bed in the morning, just in case you get knocked down by a car when crossing the road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) It's quite simple. You stated we should try and emulate Bolton. Bolton were £40m in debt in 2003, and are now over £50m in debt. I donlt think that is a good plan. Gordon Brown has spent trillions trying to get us out of a hole( of his making) buy spending aboe his means to get us out of trouble. You seemt o be advocating spending beyond our means to get us out of this level. It's very easy to spend other people's money. The similarities are uncanny. For (again hopefully) the last time, I'm not advocating anything. I'm questioning why, overnight, 25% was lopped off the proposed capacity for the BP redevelopment, and suggesting that this represents a downscaling of ambition. Edited August 11, 2009 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertie_Dugger Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 £100 to a charity of your choice, and vice-versa, if we are not still in this division or below in five years time, new stadium or not? Edit to add: as long as we don't veer wildly off the road on which we presently seem set, that is, and TTA don't accept a surprise bid from a Ukrainian mafia boss or some such. I don't know if I'll be around in five years time. However it's not seats or stadiums that win football matches, it's what happens on the pitch that will determinw which division we are in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) Who has suggested we say no to anything? What's being questioned, at least by me, is the clear lack of ambition inherent in the proposal. Ok...so even though it shows a lack of ambition we should still say yes you think ? Edited August 11, 2009 by oafc0000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) and shame on scunthorpe settling for lower league mediocrity in their 9k capacity stadium, and blackpool with their 9.5k two sided stadium (expansion is irrelevant remember) oh wait a minute..... Remember how Blackpool were used as an example of how a club can come out of nowhere and gain promotion, by people who suggested that Latics were likely to do the same? It didn't happen, did it? And Blackpool's stadium wasn't designed to be as small as it is-they ran out of money before completion. Edited August 11, 2009 by Corporal_Jones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Well done for presenting that report, it is honest, very interesting and very informative with most of the unanswered queries about the project being dealt with. It is yet more positive work and structured comments again being spoiled by the constant NEGATIVE remarks by some of the more REGULAR posters who appear to be intent on destroying everything decent and good about the club. When the main culprit of these ongoing very negative comments actually does something to find a way of making at least one POSITIVE remark on OWTB I personally will recommend him for the the position of Sergeant ! Well done SW and thanks again. You can't destroy anything by asking (valid) questions on a message board. In fact, negative remarks (or even NEGATIVE ones) never destroyed anything either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I don't know if I'll be around in five years time. However it's not seats or stadiums that win football matches, it's what happens on the pitch that will determinw which division we are in. So you're not so confident that I'm wrong, after all, then? The offers there if you want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Remember how Blackpool were used as an example of how a club can come out of nowhere and gain promotion, by people who suggested that Latics were likely to do the same? It didn't happen, did it? And Blackpool's stadium wasn't designed to be as small as it is-they ran out of money before completion. Would that not be a lesson for us to learn from? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Would that not be a lesson for us to learn from? Didnt they run out of money partly due to the chairman going jail ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Ok...so even though it shows a lack of ambition we should still say yes you think ? If the only choice is between third or fourth division football in a crumbling BP and third or fourth divison football in a new stadium, then probably yes. I don't think we should be so hasty as to accept that it is the only choice, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corporal_Jones Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Would that not be a lesson for us to learn from? It's a different situation. We can't use every other club where something's gone wrong as an excuse to be mediocre. Anyway, I'm off out for my dinner. Anybody want owt? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 The club's owner, the Isle of Man-based Edwin Davies, loaned a further £4.5m, apparently at annual interest of 10%, for which the club paid a £623,000 arrangement fee. Wish I had a sugar daddy like that... JUesus, and people worry about TTA making a profit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) Eureka! I've found a winning formula. All you need to do before reading one of CJ's posts is to prefix it with the words: "I think." Doesn't half make it easier and puts everything beautifully into context. Bingo. E2a: So CJ, are you actually going out for dinner or is that just an opinion? Edited August 11, 2009 by Ketsbaia Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 For (again hopefully) the last time, I'm not advocating anything. I'm questioning why, overnight, 25% was lopped off the proposed capacity for the BP redevelopment, and suggesting that this represents a downscaling of ambition. It was not over night though was it, it was somepoitn between getting plannig permission and the launch of this new stadium plan ie btween Dec 2007 & Jul 2009 It's obviosly escaped you, but I have to inform you there have been a few financial difficulties, for both the owners and wider economy, and in both Britain and the US, during the same time scale. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Wish I had a sugar daddy like that... JUesus, and people worry about TTA making a profit... Well said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downender2 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 Another view : http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/ju...ier-league-debt Blimey, O'Reilly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpmarko Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 (edited) He might be a major investor, but he isn't a Jack Walker-style sugar daddy, is he? He probably wouldn't have invested if the club hadn't done significant groundwork and got themselves into a worthwhile position in the first place. Financially, Bolton were nowhere when they began their climb. They were getting an average 7000 or so in a ground that was falling down about their ears, part of which had been sold off to a supermarket. The question was "Did Bolton need a Jack Walker?" And the answer quite simply is yes, they did. He's not just a major investor, but a saviour of the club. Just because he has less money than Jack Walker doesn't lessen the fact that without him Bolton were doomed. Similar to us in fact. "He probably wouldn't have invested if the club hadn't done significant groundwork and got themselves into a worthwhile position in the first place" Where did this nugget come from, and what facts is it based upon. My understanding of the facts is that Davies (personally and via his company Strix) has been saving Bolton from financially ruin since 1999, only two years after the Reebok stadium was built, and strangely enough whilst Bolton were in the Premier League. The fact that Bolton have prospered has nothing much to do with them building a good sized stadium, more the opposite in fact, and more the case of a certain mister Allardyce, and the aforementioned fan-come-good Mr Davies. The truth is that building the Reebok, so nearly sent Bolton into oblivion given the debt they ended up saddled with. I could go on, but there's not much point really...... Edited August 11, 2009 by bpmarko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downender2 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I don't know. The point is they got their glory years back. They got the Sky millions. Debt or not, I'd back them to survive long-term before I'd back Latics. flannel... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 The question was "Did Bolton need a Jack Walker?" And the answer quite simply is yes, they did. He's not just a major investor, but a saviour of the club. A fan actually, and nothing from what I've seen shows he has not taken anything from the club in return. Just because he has less money than Jack Walker doesn't lessen the fact that without him Bolton were doomed. Similar to us in fact. "He probably wouldn't have invested if the club hadn't done significant groundwork and got themselves into a worthwhile position in the first place" Where did this nugget come from, and what facts is it based upon. My understanding of the facts is that Davies (personally and via his company Strix) has been saving Bolton from financially ruin since 1999, only two years after the Reebok stadium was built, and strangely enough whilst Bolton were in the Premier League. The fact that Bolton have prospered has nothing much to do with them building a good sized stadium, more the opposite in fact, and more the case of a certain mister Allardyce, and the aforementioned fan-come-good Mr Davies. The truth is that building the Reebok, so nearly sent Bolton into oblivion given the debt they ended up saddled with. I could go on, but there's not much point really...... There is much sense in this post. I will add also, that a Jack Walker wouldn't have been able to bankroll Blackburn to anything like the levels of success they achieved if he were coming into it today, so much of the revenue comes from TV that you need to be mega-rich to even think about funding success on that scale, and if it comes to the point where every Premiership club is owned by a billionaire they will just be throwing more and more money into agents and players pockets as they compete with each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OAFCKeepTheFaith Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 What happened to the £20m development, how come were now talking about £14m? Looking at other models, £20m would go quite far and give us a smart new ground, although £14m (when you take into account the non-stadium investments i.e. pitches etc) wouldn't. Apologies if I've missed something in the previous 10 pages!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc0000 Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 What happened to the £20m development, how come were now talking about £14m? Looking at other models, £20m would go quite far and give us a smart new ground, although £14m (when you take into account the non-stadium investments i.e. pitches etc) wouldn't. Apologies if I've missed something in the previous 10 pages!! Barry Owen mentioned 12 million to quickly correct himself... 14 million mentioned by SC... Its all a bit of a muddle... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FyldeBlue Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 You can't destroy anything by asking (valid) questions on a message board. In fact, negative remarks (or even NEGATIVE ones) never destroyed anything either. Just had a quick look through at least 11 pages of comments on this same subject, and guess what ?... the good old Corp has at least half of the postings !... same answers, same negativity, same old rubbish, same old moaning, same old subjects, same old twisted fairy stories. Quite clearly from your comments YOU believe that having a new stadium, with an initial capacity of 12,000, plus all the other good things that will naturally come with a new development, as this is !... will be a negative move by the Club, the TTA and indeed anyone who disagrees with YOU ! For once Corporal just think about how many other people, who in their lifetimes have NEVER seen anything other than Boundary Park in it's state of dilapidation, I have have seen it this way for over 55 years and to be honest it's a palace compared with what it has been in many years gone by. You are decrying almost everything the Club and Owners are trying to do, I don't see you or any of the other Negatives coming forward with a couple of million to plough into the club and then see it disappear over the next few years, as quite clearly S.C. has stated and proved many times now!....and as things remain at B.P.... what is the point of continuing to spend money on deterioration ?......Would you ?...of course not !... but then again your letters suggest I may be wrong there! It IS a positive move forward and most of us welcome the TTA, and their plans, most of them have been explained quite clearly and in language we can - well most of us !... can understand, somehow you appear to be living the life of a Business or Club owner who knows sod all about the facts. The move to Lancaster Park or whatever it may be called, is in my opinion and I have to add the opinion of many others ! ...a totally positive move under present world conditions, the fact that the TTA are still here after all the uncalled for suggestive flak is in my opinion a miracle and one we should be grateful for.....We still have a football club, however I fear for the future should yourself and the minority of similar ilk ever get the power that your horrendous comments suggest... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chaddy the owl Posted August 11, 2009 Share Posted August 11, 2009 I'm sure that we were told it was down to £10-15 grand a month not long ago. £40,000 a month isn't far from what we were said to be losing under Chris Moore. When TTA took over the club was losing close to £45k per week from the Chris Moore era. I was told they were losing £15k per week about 2 years ago but have since brought it down further to £10k per week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.