Gartside

[Casino]

Wigan have made more money and spent less, HTH.

 

 

i think the biggest difference between us and wigan is the respective wage bills

 

transfers...there isnt actually that much in it

 

dunno how much the rugby lot pay in the pot

 

probably insignificant

[jules_darby]

I'm still non the wiser as to who the Gartside out Brigade would rather be in charge and if they want a full overhaul of the boardroom?

 

I'd happily see Gartside out, but don't have an answer as to who I would want in. So? I wanted Dougie out without an answer to the same question...

 

What these clowns dont get is that 'IF' we got rid of Gartside and the board and replaced them, ED would still own the club and therefore stil be in charge and nothing would change

If I'm one of those clowns (as I want Gartside out) then yes, I do not get it; of course ED would still own the club, but that doesn't mean that a different Chairman would mean it was not run differently. If that was the case, the job wouldn't pay so much

 

And for what it's worth, I believe it should be very well paid - I have no issue whatsoever with PG's wages

Edited October 8, 2014 by jules_darby

[Eddie]

Eddie, you're clearly a financial wizard...tell me why no other similar club has debts like ours. Wigan - with a bigger wage to turnover ratio - for example. I don't have the answer - I'm asking the question though. Unlike some on here, I didn't buy a season ticket to support our "non football activities"...and refuse to put my faith in a man who's overseen this mess.

I don't known anything about how Wigan operate. What I do know is that we have spent above our means for a number of years, ED has been happy to cover this in the same way that Abramovic has at Chelsea. It has not negatively affected any of us apart from ED who has stumped up the cash. That £163m still doesn't effect us today, the relegation and subsequent loss of revenue does. Our lack of spending now has nothing to do with how the finances of the football club have been run, it's nothing to do with our previously losses and it's nothing to do with our 'debt' to ED which I've said before, as has Gartside, is actually just equity. It is 100% due to our loss of the tv revenue by being relegated and not being promoted again, if you blame this on PG for not picking a manager to either keep us up or get us promoted then fine, I can accept that, but you seem to be of the opinion that there has been money taken out of the club by either PG or ED and that now means we're skint and can't afford anything. It's absolute bollocks and there are accounts to prove it. You seem like you have a vendetta against ED and no matter how much I tell myself not to bite when you post about the finances I do every time because I don't like to see our owners name be dragged through the mud when he is nothing short of a saint.

[Guest]

Eddie, you're clearly a financial wizard...tell me why no other similar club has debts like ours. Wigan - with a bigger wage to turnover ratio - for example. I don't have the answer - I'm asking the question though. Unlike some on here, I didn't buy a season ticket to support our "non football activities"...and refuse to put my faith in a man who's overseen this mess.

 

 

Then you need to look at the accounts.

 

It is all in there

 

Big wages

Not recouping transfer fees paid

 

 

It really is simple

 

And if then you continue to be unclear, go and ask someone who can answer you. There is nobody here.

[Guest]

I don't known anything about how Wigan operate. What I do know is that we have spent above our means for a number of years, ED has been happy to cover this in the same way that Abramovic has at Chelsea. It has not negatively affected any of us apart from ED who has stumped up the cash. That £163m still doesn't effect us today, the relegation and subsequent loss of revenue does. Our lack of spending now has nothing to do with how the finances of the football club have been run, it's nothing to do with our previously losses and it's nothing to do with our 'debt' to ED which I've said before, as has Gartside, is actually just equity. It is 100% due to our loss of the tv revenue by being relegated and not being promoted again, if you blame this on PG for not picking a manager to either keep us up or get us promoted then fine, I can accept that, but you seem to be of the opinion that there has been money taken out of the club by either PG or ED and that now means we're skint and can't afford anything. It's absolute bollocks and there are accounts to prove it. You seem like you have a vendetta against ED and no matter how much I tell myself not to bite when you post about the finances I do every time because I don't like to see our owners name be dragged through the mud when he is nothing short of a saint.

 

It is really to do with financial fair play and being constrained by our revenue. Even if Eddie was ready to sink 3 billion into the football side, we'd still have the fair play obstacle to get around. And that isn't something that the club want to risk.

[tyldesley_white]

I'd happily see Gartside out, but don't have an answer as to who I would want in. So? I wanted Dougie out without an answer to the same question...

 

If I'm one of those clowns (as I want Gartside out) then yes, I do not get it; of course ED would still own the club, but that doesn't mean that a different Chairman would mean it was not run differently. If that was the case, the job wouldn't pay so much

 

And for what it's worth, I believe it should be very well paid - I have no issue whatsoever with PG's wages

the reason Gartside is still in the job is because hes doing the the job ED asks of him, so what the point of ED getting shut of him to bring some one else in that will not do that

[davidjack]

Yes, made more money by not giving their best players away...or letting their contracts run down. If you can't get that stuff right what the fuck are you getting paid half a million pounds a year for?

[Guest]

It is really to do with financial fair play and being constrained by our revenue. Even if Eddie was ready to sink 3 billion into the football side, we'd still have the fair play obstacle to get around. And that isn't something that the club want to risk.

 

 

I don't think it is to do with FFP

[Guest]

Yes, made more money by not giving their best players away...or letting their contracts run down. If you can't get that stuff right what the fuck are you getting paid half a million pounds a year for?

 

 

Whatever ED wants him to do, just like you get paid for what your employer wants you to do

[tyldesley_white]

Yes, made more money by not giving their best players away...or letting their contracts run down. If you can't get that stuff right what the fuck are you getting paid half a million pounds a year for?

you cant make players sign a contract and you cant make other team pay more just because you want it, we could have ask 100 million for Cahil and we would have stil got wnat we want, its not what you ask its what other teams are willing to pay

[Guest]

I don't think it is to do with FFP

 

Well I agree that I don't think Eddie wants to put extra cash in now. But FFP is still something that causes issues. I know that the club are very keen to look like they have done everything they can to comply.

[Guest]

Yes, made more money by not giving their best players away...or letting their contracts run down. If you can't get that stuff right what the fuck are you getting paid half a million pounds a year for?

 

What? We've spent too much on players that have had no sell on value. That is the fault of managers not Gartside. Wigan have managed to sign players who they have then sold on for big fees.

 

Gartside cannot force clubs to bid for players or force them to extend their deals.

[Guest]

 

 

Gartside cannot force clubs to bid for players or force them to extend their deals.

 

 

Then he should resign and appoint someone who can manage time and tides

[gonzo]

I'd happily see Gartside out, but don't have an answer as to who I would want in. So? I wanted Dougie out without an answer to the same question...

 

 

It's a massive difference between a change of manager and a change of chairman.

 

Like I've said previously,there's a board of directors behind Phil Gartside that have should be bought to task equally,not forgetting Eddie either.

 

I just don't see how a change would make any difference as the only viable candidate to take his positions would be someone off the board I.e Brett Warburton.

 

Would Brett Warburton be a better chairman? Would he even want the job? Would anyone else on the board want the job?

 

We all know Phil Gartisde is partly responsible for the position we find ourselves in,he knows it himself.

 

If we start winning football matches all this bull shit will be forgotten about and the m0ngs in crazy corner can go back to singing Boltons a shithole.

[Zico]

i think the biggest difference between us and wigan is the respective wage bills

 

transfers...there isnt actually that much in it

 

 

aye, there maybe more to it

 

depends if you're arsed about DWs opinion but there was that soundbite of him saying something must be "wrong" here because of they debt we're in - whether he knew more or not than he was letting on I don't know - but he probably knows the general differences between the 2 clubs to a rough degree, and couldn't see how we'd got into this "mess"

 

but again, PG in that interview, says it's not a mess - it's EDs money and yet again I'm not sure if we need to pay it back or what, so I don't care much

 

generally thought that it was a decent interview but I didn't go into it thinking he's a liar - I think you either accept what he's saying, or presume it's all lies - don't think he'll be changing anyone's opinions of him

[davidjack]

A judge recently found him to be less than trustworthy.

[tyldesley_white]

A judge recently found him to be less than trustworthy.

But not guilty

[Guest]

A judge recently found him to be less than trustworthy.

 

 

So what, then?

 

If you have suspicions, let's hear them;

 

 

Fraud?

Money laundering?

Falsifying accounts?

Embezzlement?

 

 

Don't just snipe and accuse, get your research out

Edited October 8, 2014 by boltondiver

[Traf]

We only owe money to the owner of the club.

And if he's not making any fucking noises about it, nor should we.

 

That might sound a tad simplistic, but still probably far too complicated for some of the thick twats who claim to support our club.

[Guest]

We only owe money to the owner of the club.

And if he's not making any fucking noises about it, nor should we.

 

That might sound a tad simplistic, but still probably far too complicated for some of the thick twats who claim to support our club.

 

 

Must be some other agenda being followed

[frank_spencer]

We only owe money to the owner of the club.

And if he's not making any fucking noises about it, nor should we.

 

That might sound a tad simplistic, but still probably far too complicated for some of the thick twats who claim to support our club.

Abramovic and Mansour are multi billionaires and can afford to write off the losses pumped into their football clubs.

Davies is no where near as rich and so cannot.

 

That's where the figure comes from.

[jules_darby]

the reason Gartside is still in the job is because hes doing the the job ED asks of him, so what the point of ED getting shut of him to bring some one else in that will not do that

Of course he is. But it doesn't mean that ED Is happy with him; it means he's happy enough not to sack him. Won't or can't. Either way it does not mean that he's doing a good job as a fact. I concede that his employment in the role is the best indicator there is mind.

 

And you make an assumption that another Chairperson wouldn't do a better job. That is based upon nothing whatsoever

[jules_darby]

It's a massive difference between a change of manager and a change of chairman.

 

Like I've said previously,there's a board of directors behind Phil Gartside that have should be bought to task equally,not forgetting Eddie either.

 

I just don't see how a change would make any difference as the only viable candidate to take his positions would be someone off the board I.e Brett Warburton.

 

Would Brett Warburton be a better chairman? Would he even want the job? Would anyone else on the board want the job?

 

We all know Phil Gartisde is partly responsible for the position we find ourselves in,he knows it himself.

 

If we start winning football matches all this bull shit will be forgotten about and the m0ngs in crazy corner can go back to singing Boltons a shithole.

I don't know why you assume that a likely candidate would have to be internal.

 

Or that it wouldn't impact change; if that was the case what would the big deal about being a chairperson be?

 

I agree with the rest of it; in particular winning games.

 

But for that to happen the Chairman must pick the right Manager for a start....see where I'm going?!

[Traf]

Abramovic and Mansour are multi billionaires and can afford to write off the losses pumped into their football clubs.

Davies is no where near as rich and so cannot.

 

That's where the figure comes from.

 

It still has fuck all to do with anyone, bar Eddie.

[gonzo]

I don't know why you assume that a likely candidate would have to be internal.

 

Or that it wouldn't impact change; if that was the case what would the big deal about being a chairperson be?

 

I agree with the rest of it; in particular winning games.

 

But for that to happen the Chairman must pick the right Manager for a start....see where I'm going?!

It certainly appears to be shit or bust this time that's for certain.

 

If this one is a fuck up we will be getting giddy about your 50th birthday bash in colchester next season.