Jump to content
Wanderers Ways. Neil Thompson 1961-2021

Take Over


Kane57

Recommended Posts

Can't see that anyone else has posted this.  It is worth a read about what new owners are letting themselves in for.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

Rovers lost £17.5m in L1 last season

17 Championship clubs who have reported so far have losses totalling £366m,  with Fulham, Sunderland, Sheffield Wednesday, Brentford, Derby and Bolton still to report 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

look at bristol city .. 

no ones querying their future once their owner goes away. the words bristol city arent even mentoned in the article. amongst all the bar graphs and total lack of top flight football in the recent past. 

fucking hell its only five minutes ago when people were bucket shaking for brighton (at doncasters expense , who BTW were being fucked over by a crook at the time) because they got to an fa cup final once. 

Also wanna put this here-

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_(British_football) 

look at the amount of teams . 

I'm not really sure what my point is , but this focus on bolton seems funny, when theyve slept on (or cheerleaded for) the likes of brighton , bristol city at various times in the past. 

bolton have been in the shit moneywise for ages now, why these various economic thinkpieces now ?

I didnt give a fuck when Jay Jay were strolling round everyone , dont really give a crap now, sudden scaremongery from various quarters must mean a billionaire is coming.. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ani said:

Howard I asked earlier do you know who the bidders are ? 

And is UK based accurate ? 

I think Howard is getting a bit sick of answering that question, if he /she knew I don't think it would be wise to disclose at this stage 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TrickyTrotter said:

Can't see that anyone else has posted this.  It is worth a read about what new owners are letting themselves in for.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47691385

Rovers lost £17.5m in L1 last season

17 Championship clubs who have reported so far have losses totalling £366m,  with Fulham, Sunderland, Sheffield Wednesday, Brentford, Derby and Bolton still to report 

Thanks for pointing this out - just had a read 

Just looking at the graph of Bolton players costs as a % of income is pretty scary stuff  

 

image.png.99695271082edc191c970265ba14e54d.png

 

We may be lucky and get  bought out just in time , but there are only a finite number of  people with the means to invest in football clubs and the wider this  income divide between premiership and championship clubs grows , its surely only  a matter of time before some club goes to the wall 

From our perspective a couple of years in league one might prove to be a godsend  in the long run 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

Edited by Chris Custodiet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

I've read some mental things from you in the past but you've reached a new level with that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
6 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

 

Because this is where the true believers hang out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Kane57 said:

I've read some mental things from you in the past but you've reached a new level with that

I was really thinking about takeover negotiations but if I change the word usually to frequently would you like to expand on any other bits you think are incorrect?

Edited by Chris Custodiet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

Maybe he doesn't do Facebook or Twitter? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As we're all guessing, maybe Howard looked at Facebook, Twitter and a load of other forums, before deciding this was the most balanced/reasoned?

Even when people disagree on here, they explain why. (before offering a straightener, of course)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
57 minutes ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

Well, why the fuck are you on here??? There must be a reason. You left once but decided to return - why was that? I think it may be because yes, there are conflicting views about everything that's going on but there aren't the mindless levels of shite that you find on FB/Twitter. There are also many reasoned comments amongst all the tits & banter that you'll find wherever guys congregate, whether they be accountants, PR's, teachers, brickies etc. So fucking patronising of you...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Supporter
1 hour ago, Chris Custodiet said:

We all would have liked to have seen this resolved weeks, or better still months ago, but brinkmanship is usually two-sided. If Ken's a greedy so and so he's not short of company in professional football and,  from what H says, Ken isn't holding out for a lot in the wider context. Maybe the devil's in the detail.

WW is free of FIBS (Firth, Iles, Bower and Shortland) but not devoid of anti-Anderson sentiment and I can't be the only one wondering why H chose WW to brief against Anderson (and Basran) when there are potentially bigger audiences on Facebook and Twitter.

I guarantee that once the takeover saga is complete, we’ll hardly ever hear from you.

You chose WW to vomit your nonsense onto, I assume because you’ve clocked that the debate is fairly level headed and reasonable, and you got a bit sick of the us va them mentality of twitterbook.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.