deyres42 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Sports Direct are paying to be there are they not? OEC so what future percentage of income/ profits will they be taking & what percentage did they pay to fund the stand? Same as now, as much or as little as they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 On Deal or no Deal I reckon SC would settle for 50p. Regardless of Micah Richards, you're on a hiding to nothing. 1) Brentford know you're skint when you approach them for cash. 2) Brentford know what previous offers they've had for the player. 3) Brentford know their likelihood to sell or run down the contract. 4) Brentford are run by a statistical genius who knows exactly how to exploit the situation. Latics were never going to get good value trading the option in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Sports Direct are paying to be there are they not? OEC so what future percentage of income/ profits will they be taking & what percentage did they pay to fund the stand? You wanted them to give ALL their profits earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickjagger Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Don't twist things i think everybody wants to know the following 1 How the stand was funded? 2 Where will any future revenue go? The building of the new stand has had an effect on the playing side & if it transpires the new stand has been built mostly consisting of revenue coming from the club & once the new stand is completed revenue is then diverted to different companies you can understand why people will not be happy and want answers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I twisted nothing. Latics borrowed money and sold players to fund it. Tenants will pay rent. I'd hazard a guess that cash flow is tight and that has affected the playing budget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddySmoker Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I twisted nothing. Latics borrowed money and sold players to fund it. Tenants will pay rent. I'd hazard a guess that cash flow is tight and that has affected the playing budget. But O4U this stand was supposed to be saving us-not putting us on life support Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I twisted nothing. Latics borrowed money and sold players to fund it. Tenants will pay rent. I'd hazard a guess that cash flow is tight and that has affected the playing budget. And yet so hard for simple minds to understand... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yarddog73 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Regardless of Micah Richards, you're on a hiding to nothing. 1) Brentford know you're skint when you approach them for cash. 2) Brentford know what previous offers they've had for the player. 3) Brentford know their likelihood to sell or run down the contract. 4) Brentford are run by a statistical genius who knows exactly how to exploit the situation. Latics were never going to get good value trading the option in. At least when we sold him we got him back on the season long loan they promised..... Oh hold on. They knew they were dealing with amateurs, been done up like a kipper big time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I twisted nothing. Latics borrowed money and sold players to fund it. Tenants will pay rent. I'd hazard a guess that cash flow is tight and that has affected the playing budget. What happens in future? there's no more players to sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 What happens in future? there's no more players to sell. Find some more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 What happens in future? there's no more players to sell. Don't build another stand? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickjagger Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 But O4U this stand was supposed to be saving us-not putting us on life support And yet so hard for simple minds to understand... I twisted nothing. Latics borrowed money and sold players to fund it. Tenants will pay rent. I'd hazard a guess that cash flow is tight and that has affected the playing budget. Obviously which has had a significant effect on the playing side You seem to have the answers, i'm asking again will any future revenue go back into the club or be redirected to a seperate company with the two amigos reducing any liability we have to them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deyres42 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Obviously which has had a significant effect on the playing side You seem to have the answers, i'm asking again will any future revenue go back into the club or be redirected to a seperate company with the two amigos reducing any liability we have to them? The way I see it nothing much has changed, OEC is owned by the same folk who own the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 (edited) Obviously which has had a significant effect on the playing side You seem to have the answers, i'm asking again will any future revenue go back into the club or be redirected to a seperate company with the two amigos reducing any liability we have to them? Rent will increase football club revenue. But part of that extra revenue will be spent on repaying the increases in debt. I'm making assumptions on some of this but "normal" business practices would be pretty close to what I'm describing. Of course, if the OEC fails, we are fooked. So supporting the venue you support the club. Edited February 2, 2016 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scapegoat Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I think the almost total lack of home games and therefore income in December may have been a key factor in looking for alternative cash sources in Decemeber. Take less cash from Brentford in December but pay players and other critical bills? Desperate times, desperate measures. Would any business want to publicise this kind of financial tightrope situation.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 And it's not as if the money went back into the club. The lengths some people will go to to defend these shysters is truly baffling. Exactly! An asset of OAFC has raised money to go into the stand project that is completely not owned by OAFC! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! ASSET STRIPPING!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I wouldn't put it past this lot to scrap the youth team set up, the savings being used to further fund the North Stand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Regardless of Micah Richards, you're on a hiding to nothing. 1) Brentford know you're skint when you approach them for cash. 2) Brentford know what previous offers they've had for the player. 3) Brentford know their likelihood to sell or run down the contract. 4) Brentford are run by a statistical genius who knows exactly how to exploit the situation. Latics were never going to get good value trading the option in. This being a club that a handful of years ago was as much on its knees as we were Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boundaryblue80 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I wouldn't put it past this lot to scrap the youth team set up, the savings being used to further fund the North Stand. You don't remember him trying to scrap the youth team a couple of years ago then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 (edited) You don't remember him trying to scrap the youth team a couple of years ago then? Yes, but didn't SC yield to fans pressure to keep it? He will scrap it now anyway is my belief. Edited February 2, 2016 by BP1960 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Yes, but didn't SC yield to fans pressure to keep it? He will scrap it now anyway is my belief. He yielded to fans' pressure not to switch the Chaddy and the RRE for a while... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hometownclub Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Yes, but didn't SC yield to fans pressure to keep it? He will scrap it now anyway is my belief. Yep, a youth team is very much related to the future of the club, the current owners are not overly concerned with the future, they are more concerned with making what they can in the immediate, while trying to sell what has already become unsaleable due to the asset stripping that has already taken place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevie_J Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 Selling players and clauses to support the football club is fine. I think the vast majority of fans understand that that's how it works for a club at our level, with our fanbase. But diverting money from these things to build a stand which I would proffer will have little benefit to the club itself (it's nice to have but gates haven't exactly spiralled, have they?), whilst the club are failing to compete in League One and heading for relegation, seems completely wrong. If that money is going to go anywhere other than back into the running of the club, it should be to chip away at the debt that TTA have hung around the club's neck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aarondo Westy Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 I had a question about the money from the stand going back into the club read out on gmr last week. Neil Joy answered it and to put it bluntly he basically said of course money will be going back into the club we have invested x amount in biildin it. I think they may of only read part of my question because although I would expect match day revenue to go to the club that is all I suspect we will see. Their are loads of unawsered question that need answers. I hear conflicting stuff all the time. We pay oec rent then they pay us rent etc the club could end it all by answering and being honest ffs. The lies will only make it worse. From where am standing it seems the club have paid/loaned the money to build the stand.Leaving the OEC to start up and make money in vast amounts using the stand 6/7 days the football club does not. The business model is brilliant for the club i OEC pays a fair share to the club and should increase our playing budget l. What I suspect is happening is OEC is going to make a :censored: load of money pay little as possible into the club not being arsed if its in league one or two and leave the club saddled with the debt we owe to the OEC owners. Its win win for them. If anyone wants to buy us we still are saddled with the debt. I guess it will take another 12/18 months before we will see if the new stand and oec really will make us more competative as a club. Although as I say above I doubt it the money will be all going to the oec. I will gladly hold my hands up if I am wrong. I remember Simon Corney saying something along the lines of the sports direct deal would make us one of the bigger budgets in the league or a bigger fish in the division. Since then all we have seen on the playing side of things is cost cutting. I feel the damage between fans and club (owners)at the moment is fast becoming irepairable. When season tickets are being renewed we will get the people who have a blind loyalty auto renewing (not a dig at anyone there btw) but Simon corney take not there are a lot and I mean a lot of fans adiment they will not be renewing and that is down to you and only you. Last week I felt we was all going to pull together and things would get better. Yet again the çlub have :censored:ed it within a week. If the clause has gone tell us so we can all accept it and stop the speculating sometimes I think the club love it when the fans are on one. Anyway thats my thoughts on the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted February 2, 2016 Share Posted February 2, 2016 The moot point for me will be looking at the finances of Brassbank. I think Chaddy Smoker best versed, but has there been any reduction in the debt? Aas far as I can see/recall, it has only been increased. The key is if there is any reduction in the debt with revenue from the new stand. That is crucial. If the new stand starts to reduce that debt, that will be a good thing. And SC has said in 2017 it will start contributing (taken that at face value rather than opening up the debate about whether it will be or not). Again, the inference is that it will be contributing to the operating budget, but again money may be diverted to pay down debt. Saying that, the first hurdle seems to be this £250k approx to the dodgy Liverpudlians. One would assume it is incurring interest as opposed to Brass Bank sitting there. 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.