|
|
Post by djduncanjames on Oct 31, 2013 17:13:49 GMT
Thinking down the road with our new "bargain buy" transfer policy and the aim of the Coates family for the club to become self sufficient, will we in effect just become a premier league feeder club? Would hate to think the plan is to shift on players (like Bego, Butland, Arnie, N'zonzi, Muni etc) down the road for profit, just to simply balance the books with no real ambition beyond that league wise. Of all the owners in the Prem, you would think we have one of the wealthiest, who himself is a proper fan of the club himself, who would always want us to remain competitive first and foremost?
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 31, 2013 17:21:05 GMT
I don't see anything wrong with it tbh. It's the sensible way for any football club to be run and especially one like us. The problem of course is finding the cheap talent to keep selling, if You can crack that then You're set. Coates ploughing x million a year is no way to run the club imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 17:26:43 GMT
That's the reality for everyone outside the top six. Sometimes inside it too, as Arsenal's top players regularly leaving illustrates.
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Oct 31, 2013 17:42:00 GMT
Tony Waddington often signed players whose careers were on the turn and also was able to bring through young local lads. In both cases these players were often loyal to Stoke, although for different reasons.
The idea of finding young players and selling them on for profit sounds ok in theory but very difficult to do in reality, unless people are happy for results to suffer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 17:43:38 GMT
Tony Waddington often signed players whose careers were on the turn and also was able to bring through young local lads. In both cases these players were often loyal to Stoke, although for different reasons. The idea of finding young players and selling them on for profit sounds ok in theory but very difficult to do in reality, unless people are happy for results to suffer. Most teams manage to do it to some degree. |
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Oct 31, 2013 17:46:14 GMT
Name them rob, and what honours they have won.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 17:57:24 GMT
Name them rob, and what honours they have won. How many teams outside the top 6 regularly win honours Geoff? Don't stitch me up with a straw man from the get-go. Swansea sold three of their most important players last season (and their manager) and won a cup. Wigan survived for years selling cheap players on for massive profits. Everton have sold various stars over the years and not been unduly affected. The season they sold Rooney they ended up qualifying for the Champions' League. Fulham have sold millions of pounds worth of talent and still finished around the same part of the table. |
|
|
|
Post by johnnysoul60 on Oct 31, 2013 18:15:34 GMT
i think it means accepting financial reality and moving to develop and sign players with a resale value no more no less
|
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Oct 31, 2013 18:30:51 GMT
In the majority of cases selling clubs win nothing and very often go backwards. If Begovic and Shawcross for instance are sold in January wouldn't that have potential consequences for the remaining seasons results?
Although times have changed dramatically from the 70's, I think the Waddo policy was great.
|
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Oct 31, 2013 18:37:15 GMT
I don't see anything wrong with it tbh. It's the sensible way for any football club to be run and especially one like us. The problem of course is finding the cheap talent to keep selling, if You can crack that then You're set. Coates ploughing x million a year is no way to run the club imo. Seems to work ok for Abramovich at Chelsea and Sheik Mansour at Man City.....by that I mean the plowing ridiculous amounts of money into a football club as a vanity project ( or other less clear and possibly more suspicious reasons )  |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Oct 31, 2013 18:37:53 GMT
Until there is a player wage cap set at a sensible level and applicable across all major leagues, all clubs below the English top six probably have to accept that survival means selling some players at a profit to keep the club afloat and/or bringing more of their own first teamers though their own academy. Peter Coates has always said he hoped the club would become self sustaining - that is now a necessity not a luxury in the current climate.
Self sufficiency is not a bad thing - no other type of "business" other than football has such a history of continuous losses by the majority of companies operating within it. Madness!
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 31, 2013 18:40:13 GMT
I don't see anything wrong with it tbh. It's the sensible way for any football club to be run and especially one like us. The problem of course is finding the cheap talent to keep selling, if You can crack that then You're set. Coates ploughing x million a year is no way to run the club imo. Seems to work ok for Abramovich at Chelsea and Sheik Mansour at Man City. Multi billionaires who are in a different league financially to the "family". |
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Oct 31, 2013 18:45:32 GMT
Seems to work ok for Abramovich at Chelsea and Sheik Mansour at Man City. Multi billionaires who are in a different league financially to the "family". yes I know, but I was only joking anyway, hence my edit to my original post. NB speedy reply, btw, I didn't even get a chance to add my edit!!  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 18:46:18 GMT
In the majority of cases selling clubs win nothing and very often go backwards. If Begovic and Shawcross for instance are sold in January wouldn't that have potential consequences for the remaining seasons results? Although times have changed dramatically from the 70's, I think the Waddo policy was great. Majority of cases Geoff? You can back that up can you? As I said, most other clubs sell one or two of their better players on once in a while. The way we were doing things was unsustainable. |
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Oct 31, 2013 18:49:27 GMT
Many British clubs believe the best young players can be found abroad and that is the way to go. The example of Athletic Bilbao though is a good one, where they concentrate their academy on local player development.
I have no knowledge of the Stoke academy, but are the scouts at the club adopting a policy of local player development, if they are that is good news.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 18:51:03 GMT
The best young players usually can be found abroad for relative peanuts and they're often sold on for big money.
|
|
|
|
Post by fortressbritannia on Oct 31, 2013 18:58:12 GMT
Yes.
But you need to make sure you have a steady stream of players of the same calibre coming in to replace those sold and you need to produce your own players as well as
|
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Oct 31, 2013 18:59:36 GMT
In the majority of cases selling clubs win nothing and very often go backwards. If Begovic and Shawcross for instance are sold in January wouldn't that have potential consequences for the remaining seasons results? Although times have changed dramatically from the 70's, I think the Waddo policy was great. Majority of cases Geoff? You can back that up can you? As I said, most other clubs sell one or two of their better players on once in a while. The way we were doing things was unsustainable. This unsustainability was an inevitable result of TP's approach, I would say, it is one thing to buy in Delap and Fuller types for a relatively low price with no sell,on value but it is quite another thing to buy in Peter Crouch and Palacios for over 20 million, 2 players we won't get anything for when they're sold. TP didn't start off by buying over priced potentially over-the-hill players but it seems that he got lost after Peter Coates offered as much money as he wanted to spend. So I would agree yes we do need to get in players who we can sell on at a big profit from time to time but I would draw the line at claiming that that is the same as being a "feeder club" it is more like good business for a smaller club. |
|
|
|
Post by nonameface on Oct 31, 2013 19:03:01 GMT
Fergi's book states that whilst he was at the club that with all of the players he had bought and sold that they only spent £5m per annum on players. So think its sensible that we are looking to keep the costs down and to develop players. We won't be able to compete financially with any of the top 6; they are bigger and more prosperous cities. If we can maintain our league status, develop players, improve the football, our city, bring through more stoke lads and have a chance of winning a cup then that would be fantastic!
|
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Oct 31, 2013 19:19:21 GMT
In the majority of cases selling clubs win nothing and very often go backwards. If Begovic and Shawcross for instance are sold in January wouldn't that have potential consequences for the remaining seasons results? Although times have changed dramatically from the 70's, I think the Waddo policy was great. It depends who they are replaced with. Spurs have managed to assemble practically a whole new team with the Bale money. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2013 19:19:42 GMT
Or we all move to the American Frnchise system with no promotion and no relegation.
Or if the premmiership keeps growing around the world How long will it bw before ALL the teams are bought by multi billionaires.
Is't that the aim of all companies to make them an attractive proposition for a takeover? making a FAT profit for all shareholders. That's what I expect to happen when PC has had enough, I don't expect the family to keep us.
|
|
|
|
Post by pulismaskreplica on Oct 31, 2013 19:31:58 GMT
Thinking down the road with our new "bargain buy" transfer policy and the aim of the Coates family for the club to become self sufficient, will we in effect just become a premier league feeder club? Would hate to think the plan is to shift on players (like Bego, Butland, Arnie, N'zonzi, Muni etc) down the road for profit, just to simply balance the books with no real ambition beyond that league wise. Of all the owners in the Prem, you would think we have one of the wealthiest, who himself is a proper fan of the club himself, who would always want us to remain competitive first and foremost? That is my understanding of 'self sufficient' basically a feeder club. I personally would love Red Bull or whoever to buy us and lead us to world domination even if it meant changing tradition to achieve it - I want to win and be the best no matter what. |
|
