|
|
Post by Colin the Caterpillar on Nov 6, 2024 16:49:58 GMT 1
Loans are legally recoverable - the “calling in” of loans for a company for which solvency depends on those loans would mean assets would need to be disposed of. As long as the loans are outstanding then they can be called in, and the assets of the club are ultimately at risk of being liquidated. As opposed to equity funding (I.e. through buying shares) where the only route to recouping the money put in is by selling the shares for whatever you can get for them. No one ‘gifts’ money to companies.
Nagle using loan rather than equity finance indicates (along with the fact that the money put in on the playing side has clearly been too little) that he is less “all-in” with the club that his pronouncements might make us believe. That’s why it matters.
|
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Nov 6, 2024 18:08:01 GMT 1
Town fans: “this team is complete shit, the club is in dire need of investment. The new owner is a miser, I thought he was supposed to be a bilionaire? he needs to put a lot more money in than this if he’s going to get my trust”
Also Town fans: “he better introduce the money in a way I like with no possibility of recouping it. I don’t really understand how businesses work, but I won’t trust him unless he does it in a way that sounds good. I reckon he could be trying to asset strip us”
|
|
|
|
Post by twyford on Nov 6, 2024 18:41:37 GMT 1
Loans are legally recoverable - the “calling in” of loans for a company for which solvency depends on those loans would mean assets would need to be disposed of. As long as the loans are outstanding then they can be called in, and the assets of the club are ultimately at risk of being liquidated. As opposed to equity funding (I.e. through buying shares) where the only route to recouping the money put in is by selling the shares for whatever you can get for them. No one ‘gifts’ money to companies. Nagle using loan rather than equity finance indicates (along with the fact that the money put in on the playing side has clearly been too little) that he is less “all-in” with the club that his pronouncements might make us believe. That’s why it matters. The loans could be subject to a loan agreement which covers the repayment terms eg it may state that they are only repayable subject to say 12 months notice. This would mean they are classed in the balance sheet as long term liabilities rather than current liabilities. No idea if that is the case with Nagle's loans - we'll probably need to await the next set of accounts to see how they've been classified. I believe that Hoyle's remaining loans are shown as long term liabilities as they only become repayable on return to the PL. |
|
|
|
Post by shawsie on Nov 6, 2024 20:11:53 GMT 1
Loans are legally recoverable - the “calling in” of loans for a company for which solvency depends on those loans would mean assets would need to be disposed of. As long as the loans are outstanding then they can be called in, and the assets of the club are ultimately at risk of being liquidated. As opposed to equity funding (I.e. through buying shares) where the only route to recouping the money put in is by selling the shares for whatever you can get for them. No one ‘gifts’ money to companies. Nagle using loan rather than equity finance indicates (along with the fact that the money put in on the playing side has clearly been too little) that he is less “all-in” with the club that his pronouncements might make us believe. That’s why it matters. Directors loans can be withdrawn tax free and debentures taken though……..no astute businessman would inject equity and be at the back of the queue if the worst occurs. |
|
|
|
Post by terriersyndrome on Nov 6, 2024 20:41:39 GMT 1
Town fans: “this team is complete shit, the club is in dire need of investment. The new owner is a miser, I thought he was supposed to be a bilionaire? he needs to put a lot more money in than this if he’s going to get my trust” Also Town fans: “he better introduce the money in a way I like with no possibility of recouping it. I don’t really understand how businesses work, but I won’t trust him unless he does it in a way that sounds good. I reckon he could be trying to asset strip us” He's the club owner who talks a good game. So far he's delivered relegation and a mediocre start to the season in league 1. Let's not question him though, eh? 🤔 |
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Nov 6, 2024 20:58:47 GMT 1
Town fans: “this team is complete shit, the club is in dire need of investment. The new owner is a miser, I thought he was supposed to be a bilionaire? he needs to put a lot more money in than this if he’s going to get my trust” Also Town fans: “he better introduce the money in a way I like with no possibility of recouping it. I don’t really understand how businesses work, but I won’t trust him unless he does it in a way that sounds good. I reckon he could be trying to asset strip us” He's the club owner who talks a good game. So far he's delivered relegation and a mediocre start to the season in league 1. Let's not question him though, eh? 🤔 Not saying don’t question him, just not sure there’s any answers he could give that would please everyone. I agree it’s been a tricky start, but he comes across like a good guy, who is willing to invest and is trying to sort things out behind the scenes. Personally hoping the owner/fan relationship doesn’t turn sour as it has done at lots of other clubs like Blackburn & Wednesday and others. |
|
|
|
Post by ruggedivy on Nov 6, 2024 21:04:14 GMT 1
Funny how none of this would matter if we where at the top of the league.
Can't recall anyone picking apart our former owners funding model when we got promoted in 2012 and 2017.
I just hope our luck turns on the pitch soon so we can finally stop this scientific deconstruction of our operating model every time we have a shit run of results.
|
|
|
|
Post by softboy on Nov 6, 2024 21:21:41 GMT 1
I consider myself to be a reasonably successful business person (not being big headed) but to re develop a struggling business you have to go back to square one. Throwing money at something (particularly in football) might give you a short term success that that is not sustainable. Look at Reading. Infrastructure is vital which in Towns case it might take 3/4 years. KN will not make any money out of Town directly but the wider investment opportunities in the area may will do. If people look at business issues you will see that Huddersfiield is considered a top place to invest in the North of England. Just look at the new NHS building at the top of Leeds Road and another being built next door . If people are looking for a quick fix built on sand you are going to be disappointed. Longer term let’s see. I don’t see KN as somebody who wants to loose money every
|
|
|
|
Post by Wagner Uber Alles on Nov 6, 2024 21:40:11 GMT 1
He's the club owner who talks a good game. So far he's delivered relegation and a mediocre start to the season in league 1. Let's not question him though, eh? 🤔 Not saying don’t question him, just not sure there’s any answers he could give that would please everyone. I agree it’s been a tricky start, but he comes across like a good guy, who is willing to invest and is trying to sort things out behind the scenes. Personally hoping the owner/fan relationship doesn’t turn sour as it has done at lots of other clubs like Blackburn & Wednesday and others. That’s the problem with us “northern clubs”. We the fans have experienced decades and even centuries of being shafted by mill / pit / factory owners in our working lives, that’s why we don’t immediately trust new owners of our workplaces, football clubs, etc. Even our own loyal supporters who have taken over our club and said one thing, but then done the complete opposite. Kev, if you’re reading this, it’s not that people don’t like you nor appreciate you, but they’ve been shafted so many times in their working class lives by owners, managers, politicians, etc that they’re instinctively cautious, even to some extent paranoid, for obvious reasons. Most of us do appreciate you, do want you, but we’ve also got many scars on our backs that warrant scepticism. We really hope that you can pull of this Mission Impossible. |
|
|
|
Post by philatrickstarbuck on Nov 6, 2024 21:56:57 GMT 1
😳
|
|
goodbet
Jimmy Glazzard Terrier
Posts: 4,602
|
Post by goodbet on Nov 6, 2024 22:21:06 GMT 1
Funny how none of this would matter if we where at the top of the league. Can't recall anyone picking apart our former owners funding model when we got promoted in 2012 and 2017. I just hope our luck turns on the pitch soon so we can finally stop this scientific deconstruction of our operating model every time we have a shit run of results. What do you think people would be doing if we were relegated in 2012 & 2017. You can't compare winners with someone who has got us relegated. It has been a shit run of results from before KN took us over. When we get back to the Championship he should find it a little easier if we can start competing at that level. |
|
|
|
Post by mickydombat on Nov 6, 2024 23:02:39 GMT 1
Kev I love you, ignore the haters and enjoy your night celebrating the New President, then look at the darkness and see the stars,as Kamila does 😃
|
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 7,241
|
Post by ben1987 on Nov 7, 2024 8:49:59 GMT 1
Funny how none of this would matter if we where at the top of the league. Can't recall anyone picking apart our former owners funding model when we got promoted in 2012 and 2017. I just hope our luck turns on the pitch soon so we can finally stop this scientific deconstruction of our operating model every time we have a shit run of results. Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. |
|
|
|
Post by andyboothscat on Nov 7, 2024 9:20:35 GMT 1
Funny how none of this would matter if we where at the top of the league. Can't recall anyone picking apart our former owners funding model when we got promoted in 2012 and 2017. I just hope our luck turns on the pitch soon so we can finally stop this scientific deconstruction of our operating model every time we have a shit run of results. Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. Absolutely this. The amount of fans who dont like others holding owners to account absolutely astonishes me. It’s literally our job. I don’t care whose name is above the door, we were here before them and we’ll be here after them and if they’re not doing right by the football club then hell yeah there are questions to answer. |
|
|
|
Post by richhtfc on Nov 7, 2024 10:19:16 GMT 1
Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. Absolutely this. The amount of fans who dont like others holding owners to account absolutely astonishes me. It’s literally our job. I don’t care whose name is above the door, we were here before them and we’ll be here after them and if they’re not doing right by the football club then hell yeah there are questions to answer. I agree with that, but the suggestion that introducing funds using directors loans is “not doing right by the football club” is not true to my mind. |
|
|
|
Post by andyboothscat on Nov 7, 2024 10:49:59 GMT 1
Absolutely this. The amount of fans who dont like others holding owners to account absolutely astonishes me. It’s literally our job. I don’t care whose name is above the door, we were here before them and we’ll be here after them and if they’re not doing right by the football club then hell yeah there are questions to answer. I agree with that, but the suggestion that introducing funds using directors loans is “not doing right by the football club” is not true to my mind. Yeah absolutely. It was more aimed at those who don't believe we should question anything and should just feel grateful that someone has chosen to 'invest' in the club. |
|
|
|
Post by dugnet on Nov 7, 2024 11:36:58 GMT 1
The debate about how the club is being funded is important. It is right that fans are able to challenge/question what this means for the long term future of the club. What the debate does is highlight some real questions about the overall plan for HTAFC.
There can be no doubt that investment has been made into the team, managerial appointments, player recruitment. For all the positive rhetoric no one, and I don't just mean the fan base, can be content with the progress made.
Off the, 1st team, pitch money has also been spent. Academy expansion, stadium infrastructure and appointments made. This won't have been an insignificant cost.
For all of the above, irrespective of your opinion of what it has delivered, has cost money. It is money Mr Nagle has had to "invest". So the question is how does Mr Nagle get his money back? There are a couple of routes I can see:
The development of the stadium and the surrounding area: There is an opportunity here, residential and leisure development will be the the "big ticket" that could generate revenue but that is a long term strategy.
Investment in the team in order to climb the pyramid and ultimately return to the Premier League. For the handful of clubs that have successfully navigated that strategy there are many more that have spectacularly failed. There has been no suggestion that the "spend, spend, spend" is part of the plan. We then have to assume, given our revenue streams are far from maximised at the moment, investment (in the team) will be controlled. It maybe, and this isn't an easy message for Mr Nagle to explicitly sell, that we shouldn't expect more than what we are currently seeing until the revenue streams start delivering more leeway.
So if we have a "limited/controlled" budget, which I personally would like to be expressly stated (it has been heavily implied to be fair), then every penny that Mr Nagle "lends" to Town has to be used as well as possible. As result those in charge of 1st footballing decisions will be under pressure to deliver - that is a debate that continues on other threads and across the fan base.
I do think Mr Nagle intends to be successful on and off the pitch. In which order that comes, assuming that you think it ultimately will (I currently do), and how long it takes might be a real problem as the fan base are so desperate for something to support. I think off and and on the pitch success goes hand in hand to a degree. The immediate challenge is making the team better as that attracts attention for other investment opportunities (but I would say that as a fan of the football club).
The risk of Mr Nagle supporting the club with director loans means that he is potentially making the club less attractive to any other interested investors. The other issue is Mr Nagle, unlike our previous owner, has not suggested that he wouldn't expect to get a return on his investment. I think it is a fair question to ask (what he expects to realise from his involvement at HTAFC). It is equally fair to note that is he does make a return HTAFC, and the surrounding area, are likely to be significantly better off than when he arrived. If you could look into the future and be sure that would be the case, and I only make the point as nothing is guaranteed, I think most would be happy.
Of course we can't see into the future and the past messages of "step changes" and a brighter future haven't proved to be anything other than vacuous soundbites. It is that background, and some pretty dire football, that Mr Nagle really needs to understand when he is communicating with fans.
Personally I prefer a straight tale. If we are on a longer term plan that might see a slow improvement on the pitch. If I know that I can work with it. I have been a fan for a long time and I don't expect that to change. I can also challenge what I see on the pitch with a longer term view. As it stands I am having to draw my own conclusions, which may not be accurate.
The real truth of course is football is viewed in the "now". Right now none of us, and I accept opinions vary, are really happy with what matters to most ie the team we watch week in week out. There's a balance to be struck here, between the development of the club and the quality of the team, and at the moment that isn't happening.
All in all much for Mr Nagle and his team to accept and address.
|
|
|
|
Post by townarentbest on Nov 7, 2024 11:49:14 GMT 1
Funny how none of this would matter if we where at the top of the league. Can't recall anyone picking apart our former owners funding model when we got promoted in 2012 and 2017. I just hope our luck turns on the pitch soon so we can finally stop this scientific deconstruction of our operating model every time we have a shit run of results. Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. Curious as to what end it's necessary, other than for 'comfort' ? Its not as though anything can actually be done about whatever mechanism an owner decides to fund his club as long as it remains within the law. |
|
|
|
Post by softboy on Nov 7, 2024 11:58:15 GMT 1
And how exactly are we going to put a mechanism in place to guarantee the long term future of the club? Expect the owner to put cash in now to fund the club forever. Any owner could put the club into Administration tomorrow if they wanted to get rid. It’s Voluntary Administration. There is nothing that suggests to me KN is not committed to taking the club forward and develop long term business interests in the area. Anybody expecting a short term answer to what is a deep rooted longer term problem will be disappointed. Just leave to the guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by mosher on Nov 7, 2024 12:24:01 GMT 1
Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. Absolutely this. The amount of fans who dont like others holding owners to account absolutely astonishes me. It’s literally our job. I don’t care whose name is above the door, we were here before them and we’ll be here after them and if they’re not doing right by the football club then hell yeah there are questions to answer. Completely agree with you and ben1987 owners should be scrutinised, but some of the posts on here and Twatter and elsewhere aren't scrutinising, they're advocating things akin to conspiracy theories. Some not even saying IMO, but saying it's clear he's asset-stripping (what assets, Deano already took/sold everything/one worth owt  ) or using us as some kind of cash cow to get the land and business opportunities. |
|
ben1987
Mental Health Support Group
Posts: 7,241
|
Post by ben1987 on Nov 7, 2024 12:49:53 GMT 1
Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. Curious as to what end it's necessary, other than for 'comfort' ? Its not as though anything can actually be done about whatever mechanism an owner decides to fund his club as long as it remains within the law. Well, I suppose in a sense you’re right. At the moment, nothing can be done to change the funding model or to prevent it leading to a bad outcome for the club in the future. We can’t do any more than what is available to us as fans and fans’ groups. What we can do is ask the right questions so that the relevant parties — including fans, staff, regulators, politicians, etc. — are aware of the facts and the potential problems. And these problems do arise again and again and again. You don’t need to look any further than this club. Being aware of the facts means we can all can plan and influence people and events in a way that protects the long-term interests of the club. And this is important, because it is fans who are there when things go tits up — not Mr. Rubery, Mr. Davy, Mr. Hodgkinson, or Mr. Hoyle. It was the Survival Trust — volunteers giving their own time and money — that saved this club. So, if we’re going to be in that position again, which we may well be, then it’s best that we know as many facts on the governance side as possible. That is exactly why structured dialogue, which the ATT is a function of, exists. Because policymakers concluded that many club owners act in a short-term way, either to chase glory or line their own pockets or boost their own ego. This often led — and still leads to — catastrophic consequences for football clubs, especially smaller ones. Policymakers therefore decided that fans should have more ability to ask the difficult questions because of all the stakeholders, they are the ones with a cast iron interest in the long-term survival of their clubs. And structured dialogue is soon to be replaced by the fan engagement rules of the independent regulator, which will include fan advisory boards. I mean, case in point: Kevin Nagle initially said he wouldn’t answer the funding question. He was asked again. He said he wasn’t funding the club via directors’ loans (could have been an honest misunderstanding of the question). He was asked again and the club clarified that his investment takes the form of directors’ loans. I get the point that we can’t change anything now. But they said the same about away ticket price caps in the premier league (‘you don’t know what you’re talking about’), safe standing (‘waste of time’), and an independent regulator (‘you’re having a laugh’). |
|
|
|
Post by four4two on Nov 7, 2024 13:49:59 GMT 1
Sorry but that’s just not the case at all. One of the biggest reasons the ATT panel and fans of the club have questioned the way in which the owner is funding the club is because of the deal under Phil Hodgkinson and Dean Hoyle. It’s absolutely necessary to know and ensure the future of the club is safe from further potentially issues down the line like when the threat of administration under Dean Hoyle was waved over the clubs head. Absolutely this. The amount of fans who dont like others holding owners to account absolutely astonishes me. It’s literally our job. I don’t care whose name is above the door, we were here before them and we’ll be here after them and if they’re not doing right by the football club then hell yeah there are questions to answer. But do we get any answers at these meetings? Seems like lip service only. Where’s Jake Edwards? |
|
|
|
Post by ChelmsfordTerrier on Nov 7, 2024 15:24:58 GMT 1
Funny how none of this would matter if we where at the top of the league. Can't recall anyone picking apart our former owners funding model when we got promoted in 2012 and 2017. I just hope our luck turns on the pitch soon so we can finally stop this scientific deconstruction of our operating model every time we have a shit run of results. As some have said on here, get it right on the pitch and fans will be happy, it really is that simple. Do Man City fans care where the money came from to fuel their rise, or do Birmingham fans care where the money came from to most likely walk this league… not a jot and if we are all being honest neither would any of us. |
|
|
|
Post by harri54 on Nov 8, 2024 11:49:10 GMT 1
Loans are legally recoverable - the “calling in” of loans for a company for which solvency depends on those loans would mean assets would need to be disposed of. As long as the loans are outstanding then they can be called in, and the assets of the club are ultimately at risk of being liquidated. As opposed to equity funding (I.e. through buying shares) where the only route to recouping the money put in is by selling the shares for whatever you can get for them. No one ‘gifts’ money to companies. Nagle using loan rather than equity finance indicates (along with the fact that the money put in on the playing side has clearly been too little) that he is less “all-in” with the club that his pronouncements might make us believe. That’s why it matters. Not quite the only route, making profit & taking dividends is another. |
|
|
|
Post by harri54 on Nov 8, 2024 11:56:05 GMT 1
The debate about how the club is being funded is important. It is right that fans are able to challenge/question what this means for the long term future of the club. What the debate does is highlight some real questions about the overall plan for HTAFC. There can be no doubt that investment has been made into the team, managerial appointments, player recruitment. For all the positive rhetoric no one, and I don't just mean the fan base, can be content with the progress made. Off the, 1st team, pitch money has also been spent. Academy expansion, stadium infrastructure and appointments made. This won't have been an insignificant cost. For all of the above, irrespective of your opinion of what it has delivered, has cost money. It is money Mr Nagle has had to "invest". So the question is how does Mr Nagle get his money back? There are a couple of routes I can see: The development of the stadium and the surrounding area: There is an opportunity here, residential and leisure development will be the the "big ticket" that could generate revenue but that is a long term strategy. Investment in the team in order to climb the pyramid and ultimately return to the Premier League. For the handful of clubs that have successfully navigated that strategy there are many more that have spectacularly failed. There has been no suggestion that the "spend, spend, spend" is part of the plan. We then have to assume, given our revenue streams are far from maximised at the moment, investment (in the team) will be controlled. It maybe, and this isn't an easy message for Mr Nagle to explicitly sell, that we shouldn't expect more than what we are currently seeing until the revenue streams start delivering more leeway. So if we have a "limited/controlled" budget, which I personally would like to be expressly stated (it has been heavily implied to be fair), then every penny that Mr Nagle "lends" to Town has to be used as well as possible. As result those in charge of 1st footballing decisions will be under pressure to deliver - that is a debate that continues on other threads and across the fan base. I do think Mr Nagle intends to be successful on and off the pitch. In which order that comes, assuming that you think it ultimately will (I currently do), and how long it takes might be a real problem as the fan base are so desperate for something to support. I think off and and on the pitch success goes hand in hand to a degree. The immediate challenge is making the team better as that attracts attention for other investment opportunities (but I would say that as a fan of the football club). The risk of Mr Nagle supporting the club with director loans means that he is potentially making the club less attractive to any other interested investors. The other issue is Mr Nagle, unlike our previous owner, has not suggested that he wouldn't expect to get a return on his investment. I think it is a fair question to ask (what he expects to realise from his involvement at HTAFC). It is equally fair to note that is he does make a return HTAFC, and the surrounding area, are likely to be significantly better off than when he arrived. If you could look into the future and be sure that would be the case, and I only make the point as nothing is guaranteed, I think most would be happy. Of course we can't see into the future and the past messages of "step changes" and a brighter future haven't proved to be anything other than vacuous soundbites. It is that background, and some pretty dire football, that Mr Nagle really needs to understand when he is communicating with fans. Personally I prefer a straight tale. If we are on a longer term plan that might see a slow improvement on the pitch. If I know that I can work with it. I have been a fan for a long time and I don't expect that to change. I can also challenge what I see on the pitch with a longer term view. As it stands I am having to draw my own conclusions, which may not be accurate. The real truth of course is football is viewed in the "now". Right now none of us, and I accept opinions vary, are really happy with what matters to most ie the team we watch week in week out. There's a balance to be struck here, between the development of the club and the quality of the team, and at the moment that isn't happening. All in all much for Mr Nagle and his team to accept and address. Good post, however, "So if we have a "limited/controlled" budget, which I personally would like to be expressly stated (it has been heavily implied to be fair), then every penny that Mr Nagle "lends" to Town has to be used as well as possible." making the budget known puts you in a week negotiating position, likely to lead to "every penny" not "being used well as possible"! |
|
|
|
Post by The Sheriff Strikes Back on Nov 10, 2024 6:46:38 GMT 1
Whilst I respect his (KN's) obvious tendency towards patience, and giving the maximum amount of time possible for the people in his employ to achieve the task set to them, there is no avoiding the fact that we currently sit 8th in a league which is topped by Wycombe Wanderers, and based off the last two matches, look to be at the start of another backwards slide.
This season is not beyond saving, but ruthless decisions must be made without further delay. Remove Cartwright now, and replace him with someone who actually has a modicum of ability in that role, so that we can make effective use of the January window.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Nov 10, 2024 9:03:29 GMT 1
Town fans: “this team is complete shit, the club is in dire need of investment. The new owner is a miser, I thought he was supposed to be a bilionaire? he needs to put a lot more money in than this if he’s going to get my trust” Also Town fans: “he better introduce the money in a way I like with no possibility of recouping it. I don’t really understand how businesses work, but I won’t trust him unless he does it in a way that sounds good. I reckon he could be trying to asset strip us” He's the club owner who talks a good game. So far he's delivered relegation and a mediocre start to the season in league 1. Let's not question him though, eh? 🤔 With the mess the club was left in, I really don't know what people expect. He has put millions in both on and off the field. As an owner he has done what we want. It's those he has employed to run it (MC) |
|
|
|
Post by oneneilwarnock on Nov 10, 2024 10:35:00 GMT 1
He's the club owner who talks a good game. So far he's delivered relegation and a mediocre start to the season in league 1. Let's not question him though, eh? 🤔 With the mess the club was left in, I really don't know what people expect. He has put millions in both on and off the field. As an owner he has done what we want. It's those he has employed to run it (MC) I really wish people would stop saying he’s put millions in like it’s not expected. If you have the ego to buy a football have the money to back it. We don’t actually know how he’s expecting the money back yet either. One area that needed millions spending was the playing squad and despite pocketing good cash off Rudoni, he’s failed to improve the squad in the summer as promised. Yes I agree however Hoyle is a big part of this problem too. |
|
|
|
Post by rockwall on Nov 10, 2024 10:38:31 GMT 1
With the mess the club was left in, I really don't know what people expect. He has put millions in both on and off the field. As an owner he has done what we want. It's those he has employed to run it (MC) I really wish people would stop saying he’s put millions in like it’s not expected. If you have the ego to buy a football have the money to back it. We don’t actually know how he’s expecting the money back yet either. One area that needed millions spending was the playing squad and despite pocketing good cash off Rudoni, he’s failed to improve the squad in the summer as promised. Yes I agree however Hoyle is a big part of this problem too. The Rudoni money has been explained to death too. That was used to cover the losses due to relegation. He will get his money back when he decides to sell I presume. The club will be worth a hell of a lot more than he bought it for if the redevelopment plans take place. Similar to SR, I can imagine he will sell shares to bigger fish but keep himself around in some capacity. |
|
|
|
Post by oneneilwarnock on Nov 10, 2024 11:10:14 GMT 1
I really wish people would stop saying he’s put millions in like it’s not expected. If you have the ego to buy a football have the money to back it. We don’t actually know how he’s expecting the money back yet either. One area that needed millions spending was the playing squad and despite pocketing good cash off Rudoni, he’s failed to improve the squad in the summer as promised. Yes I agree however Hoyle is a big part of this problem too. The Rudoni money has been explained to death too. That was used to cover the losses due to relegation. He will get his money back when he decides to sell I presume. The club will be worth a hell of a lot more than he bought it for if the redevelopment plans take place. Similar to SR, I can imagine he will sell shares to bigger fish but keep himself around in some capacity. Sorry but using the Rudoni money to pay for relegation isn’t acceptable. He was one of our key assets for the financial future of the club. Just because the owner and director of football naffed up completely doesn’t mean they can just use one of our best assets financial assets to bail themselves out. Fair play to you for believing in current leadership but all I see is a club going continuously backwards under them and will do so until we find an owner (probably a fan again) who understands the club and knows how to maximise the most out of a club like us. As much as Brighton and Brentford were very lucky in that respect having a data based model like their owners followed would be the start of it. |
|
) or using us as some kind of cash cow to get the land and business opportunities.