Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Thursday, May 28, 05:57:32pm

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

• Ego.Pity Marco doesn’t seem to reciprocate. (NT) -- HemelRog, Thursday, May 21, 05:45:34am (NoHost/109.180.156.25)

  ---

• This is all a stretch for me. Yes, they've spent loads, but getting on for half of that is on asset spend, that they would likely get back on the sale of the club, and half of the rest was due to poor ownership decisions which put us in the championship for 4 years, missing out on circa half a billion of revenue. They've provided Silva with getting on for the maximum investment allowed under the existing rules. I'm not sure how much conspiracy we need to look into for motive, here. (NT) -- Same Old Story, Thursday, May 21, 08:45:58am (NoHost/90.241.79.67)
  • Completely agree. Find it odd that so many miss what's happening to the game, how it relates to how our club is being run and conclude that we're incompetently run. We are being very competently run in the context of a drawbridge being raised and a moment in time where being on the right side of that bridge is all that matters. It's horrible. I don't like what's happening. But to paint Ali Mac, SK and TK as fools who don't know what they're doing is all sorts of wrong. (NT) -- eganonoa, Thursday, May 21, 09:01:46am (244.190.5.85.dynamic.cust.swisscom.net/85.5.190.244)

  ---

• "loss making" is a red herring. Loss-making companies can have huge asset growth potential based on future expected income. There's a reason so many Americans buy English clubs and why they are comfortable with things like SCR (proxy for no relegation) and VAR (ad break potential). Add to that CC real estate potential, Fulham as part of a sporting investment portfolio, and this portfolio as a good way to develop the younger Khan for bigger business, and you have all you need to know. (NT) -- eganonoa, Thursday, May 21, 08:50:08am (244.190.5.85.dynamic.cust.swisscom.net/85.5.190.244)
  • I just don't get the insinuation that they are spending the bare minimum possible to maintain 'status quo'. Honestly, how much money should they spend. Is a 1 billion spend in a 13 year period honestly not enough for some? What would we need to spend for people to be happy? How many PSR charges should we incur? Argue all day long about board decisions, and i'll likely often agree, but this narrative that they're somehow doing the bare minimum financially is ludicrous (NT) -- Same Old Story, Thursday, May 21, 09:16:38am (NoHost/90.241.79.67)
    • I think people are angry about the last few months and need to decide who to blame. I see bad tactics and poor motivation where others see an inadequate squad caused by poor recruitment no matter the spend. The extent to which Marco gets the players he wants is essentially unknown. In total spend the Khans have been wonderful owners. In quality of decision making not so much. (NT) -- The Man With No Name, Thursday, May 21, 09:28:51am (host81-147-140-82.range81-147.btcentralplus.com/81.147.140.82)
    • Completely agree. I don't think I was insinuating that they are spending the bare minimum to maintain the status quo. I'm suggesting they are investing as much as permissible to do that and arguing that they can stomach those losses because there's big upside gain around the corner in terms of asset growth. My beef isn't with the Khan's spending on the club, but with the wider picture of what the new ownership class is aiming to achieve with the sport. (NT) -- eganonoa, Thursday, May 21, 09:49:39am (244.190.5.85.dynamic.cust.swisscom.net/85.5.190.244)
      • I'd also add that to me then question isn't how much they spend but how, and why? My belief is that the transfer strategy is deliberately a limited upside play based on where they think there are market inefficiencies (late signings; older, experienced players; now smaller, technical ones) that they think is best attuned to creating stability in the league vs higher-risk/reward strategies that could lead to big seasons, but also to really bad ones. (NT) -- eganonoa, Thursday, May 21, 09:56:05am (244.190.5.85.dynamic.cust.swisscom.net/85.5.190.244)
        • My comment wasnt aimed at you, more the OP. I think we're pretty much aligned on our thinking on this one. (NT) -- Same Old Story, Thursday, May 21, 10:58:18am (NoHost/90.241.79.67)
          • Ah yeah gotcha! (NT) -- eganonoa, Thursday, May 21, 11:04:37am (244.190.5.85.dynamic.cust.swisscom.net/85.5.190.244)

  ---

• Spend aside, much to do with quality and timing and first choice achieved in good time not final hours signing of make do for appearing to be willing. (NT) -- Eerwah, Thursday, May 21, 09:33:01am (116-251-29-183.pool.activ8me.net.au/116.251.29.183)
  • I don't think its a lack of 'wiling'. Its clearly a tactic. They've consistently signed people late. Whether they see it as more possible to get a bargain, whether they want to save a couple of months of wages, whatever the reason behind it, its clearly a tactic. Its not a tactic i agree with, and i think its costs us several places in a number of seasons, but its nothing to do with willing. (NT) -- Same Old Story, Thursday, May 21, 09:39:28am (NoHost/90.241.79.67)