|
Post by clintonbaptiste on Jan 13, 2018 23:27:18 GMT
Personally I have a rule in football - indeed in life generally - not to take strong positions unless you are both sure of all the facts, and sure of the outcome you are trying to achieve i.e whether that outcome will actually be helped by what you say, and the way that you say it. I may be in a minority on here - possibly even a minority of one - but I think that as well as the large amount of personal abuse in this thread, which on a public message board may well be counter-productive, there is a distinct lack of evidence in support of many of the things which are being said about the Stoke CEO. I don't think that anyone on here knows even a fraction of the truth about what has gone on with the negotiations with our managerial targets.One thing seems clear namely that the Flores negotiations were a complex matter involving not just salary and length of contract, but a move of country; the employment of other staff; personal family circumstances; contract compensation etc etc etc. I have seen no evidence to support, let alone prove, that the breakdown was entirely, or even in part, the fault of the CEO. It might have been, but it might not have been. None of us know. I think that Bayern's assumption that he because he is the CEO and a Director, that he had the authority to seal the deal, is, with respect, naive. He will have had the authority given to him by the Chairman on behalf of the owners. No less but certainly no more than that. That's where the power lies and that's how it works. In any case, if for whatever reason, the other party change their mind on whether they want a deal, all the authority in the world won't help you. Similarly with the comments about unspecified 'countless other examples' of failure to get deals over the line. Most prospective player deals also involve complex financial and contract negotiations with agents having a central role and usually strong competition with other clubs. I think nearly all clubs only land a minority of their targets. Is our record really that bad ? Certainly there have been some recent poor outcomes, Imbulla being perhaps the most spectacular example. Wimmer looks over-priced, but IMO is not nearly as poor as some claim; Jesse didn't work out, neither so far has Berahino, although if you recall many were praising his acquisition at the time. But in fairness criticism of the failures has to be balanced by the successes in getting very good players here. When Arnie, Shaq and Bojan were destroying Man City was the club's recruitment team being praised ? It isn't the CEO's fault that Arnie walked. Bojan's scintillating form was ruined by his injury. Supporters of other clubs ask me how on earth Stoke have managed to get as good a player as Shaq. N'Zonzi, Butland, Allen, Chupo, Ramandan are all IMO other examples of good captures. In short, I think it's a mixed picture, as I think it is at most PL clubs - the difference being that we don't tend to notice the transfer failures of other clubs because they aren't visible. I have never met Mark Cartwright, let alone looked at how he and his team do their job, so I can't comment on how good he is or isn't. One thing I am sure of is that the CEO is not involved in the football judgements on players. I have met Tony Scholes and have negotiated/discussed non-on-field matters with him. I can only take as I have found, and I have found him to be clear in his positions but willing to listen, and supportive on many issue which have been important to supporters, even though we have disagreed on some issues. For example, I know that he has been a consistent leading advocate at PL meetings for using PL money to help away fans, and we had first the away fans initiative, and our free coach travel which the club have continued after the initaive was replaced by the £30 away ticket cap across the Board, which TS and Stoke City supported. And of course we have had a 10-year freeze on home prices under his tenure. I am not in a position to comment on what he's like to work for. As for the club being a shambles under its present ownership and leadership, I think being involved in the national supporters movement gives me a wider perspective, but if you want to understand what bad ownership and leadership is really like, I'll introduce you to fans of Blackpool, Blackburn, Leeds, Coventry, Charlton, Hull, Pompey, Wimbledon, Leyton etc etc etc etc We have local ownership with a local Chairman who is a lifelong supporter, understands english football and is widely respected within it as I know from the FA Council. Do not underestimate the value of those things. If the Coates family sold up and we had foreign ownership and a new CEO, for example I personally wouldn't put any money on our current pricing levels continuing. The margins in the PL are incredibly small. If the 20 richest people in the world poured their wealth into the 20 PL clubs, and appointed the 20 best managers in the world, 3 of them would still be relegated and 1 would still come bottom. There are 19 other clubs, sets of supporters, owners, and managers who want the same as we do. It's tough and it's hard. We're not in a good place tonight but in my view that's all the more reason for us to stick together and support the team, starting on Monday, and the new manager whoever he is. We can get out of this. Come on Stoke ! So as you say then, he had the power to seal it, excellent. He had the power to seal it, he didn't have the power to make Flores want it. He didn't want it in the end it really is that simple.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 13, 2018 23:29:36 GMT
So as you say then, he had the power to seal it, excellent. He had the power to seal it, he didn't have the power to make Flores want it. He didn't want it in the end it really is that simple. He didn't but we allowed that to happen. As I've said I wouldn't be arsed if we hadn't done it before with players who would have made a real difference for us.
|
|
|
Post by professorplump on Jan 13, 2018 23:29:38 GMT
I asked because you described them as hugely successful. I see Denise coates as being a hugely successful business woman who is indulging her far less successful father and silver spoon brother. It's their love she is funding rather than her own. That may go someway to explaining why incompetence and an aversion to change is the order of the day at stoke city. How else do you explain that but for premier league money our commercial revenues are pretty much unchanged in 10 years? Lazy, complacent, incompetent and ridiculously arrogant are befitting descriptions of those that occupy the positions of power at stoke city and Tony scholes is right there at the heart of it all. A superb accountant he may be but a charismatic and infectious leader he most certainly is not. The arrogance they've shown over this whole debacle (starting in May) has been astounding. The irony of you accusing someone else of arrogance is rich.
|
|
|
Post by potterpaul on Jan 13, 2018 23:31:08 GMT
I fucking hate 'loose ends' To me these are minor issues that both parties can yield to and come to a favourable conclusion that both parties can work with. But not with Stoke no, time and time again the loose ends are the stumbling block.
It is not a coincidence
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2018 23:31:15 GMT
Personally I have a rule in football - indeed in life generally - not to take strong positions unless you are both sure of all the facts, and sure of the outcome you are trying to achieve i.e whether that outcome will actually be helped by what you say, and the way that you say it. I may be in a minority on here - possibly even a minority of one - but I think that as well as the large amount of personal abuse in this thread, which on a public message board may well be counter-productive, there is a distinct lack of evidence in support of many of the things which are being said about the Stoke CEO. I don't think that anyone on here knows even a fraction of the truth about what has gone on with the negotiations with our managerial targets.One thing seems clear namely that the Flores negotiations were a complex matter involving not just salary and length of contract, but a move of country; the employment of other staff; personal family circumstances; contract compensation etc etc etc. I have seen no evidence to support, let alone prove, that the breakdown was entirely, or even in part, the fault of the CEO. It might have been, but it might not have been. None of us know. I think that Bayern's assumption that he because he is the CEO and a Director, that he had the authority to seal the deal, is, with respect, naive. He will have had the authority given to him by the Chairman on behalf of the owners. No less but certainly no more than that. That's where the power lies and that's how it works. In any case, if for whatever reason, the other party change their mind on whether they want a deal, all the authority in the world won't help you. Similarly with the comments about unspecified 'countless other examples' of failure to get deals over the line. Most prospective player deals also involve complex financial and contract negotiations with agents having a central role and usually strong competition with other clubs. I think nearly all clubs only land a minority of their targets. Is our record really that bad ? Certainly there have been some recent poor outcomes, Imbulla being perhaps the most spectacular example. Wimmer looks over-priced, but IMO is not nearly as poor as some claim; Jesse didn't work out, neither so far has Berahino, although if you recall many were praising his acquisition at the time. But in fairness criticism of the failures has to be balanced by the successes in getting very good players here. When Arnie, Shaq and Bojan were destroying Man City was the club's recruitment team being praised ? It isn't the CEO's fault that Arnie walked. Bojan's scintillating form was ruined by his injury. Supporters of other clubs ask me how on earth Stoke have managed to get as good a player as Shaq. N'Zonzi, Butland, Allen, Chupo, Ramandan are all IMO other examples of good captures. In short, I think it's a mixed picture, as I think it is at most PL clubs - the difference being that we don't tend to notice the transfer failures of other clubs because they aren't visible. I have never met Mark Cartwright, let alone looked at how he and his team do their job, so I can't comment on how good he is or isn't. One thing I am sure of is that the CEO is not involved in the football judgements on players. I have met Tony Scholes and have negotiated/discussed non-on-field matters with him. I can only take as I have found, and I have found him to be clear in his positions but willing to listen, and supportive on many issue which have been important to supporters, even though we have disagreed on some issues. For example, I know that he has been a consistent leading advocate at PL meetings for using PL money to help away fans, and we had first the away fans initiative, and our free coach travel which the club have continued after the initaive was replaced by the £30 away ticket cap across the Board, which TS and Stoke City supported. And of course we have had a 10-year freeze on home prices under his tenure. I am not in a position to comment on what he's like to work for. As for the club being a shambles under its present ownership and leadership, I think being involved in the national supporters movement gives me a wider perspective, but if you want to understand what bad ownership and leadership is really like, I'll introduce you to fans of Blackpool, Blackburn, Leeds, Coventry, Charlton, Hull, Pompey, Wimbledon, Leyton etc etc etc etc We have local ownership with a local Chairman who is a lifelong supporter, understands english football and is widely respected within it as I know from the FA Council. Do not underestimate the value of those things. If the Coates family sold up and we had foreign ownership and a new CEO, for example I personally wouldn't put any money on our current pricing levels continuing. The margins in the PL are incredibly small. If the 20 richest people in the world poured their wealth into the 20 PL clubs, and appointed the 20 best managers in the world, 3 of them would still be relegated and 1 would still come bottom. There are 19 other clubs, sets of supporters, owners, and managers who want the same as we do. It's tough and it's hard. We're not in a good place tonight but in my view that's all the more reason for us to stick together and support the team, starting on Monday, and the new manager whoever he is. We can get out of this. Come on Stoke ! While I agree with lots on there I have to say my dealings with him were a very different experience. Unapproachable, self centred, arrogant... you can guess I’m no fan of his. I saw a side of that man I really didn’t like. This was all in his capacity of CEO and all issues were Stoke City related.
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 13, 2018 23:35:53 GMT
Personally I have a rule in football - indeed in life generally - not to take strong positions unless you are both sure of all the facts, and sure of the outcome you are trying to achieve i.e whether that outcome will actually be helped by what you say, and the way that you say it. I may be in a minority on here - possibly even a minority of one - but I think that as well as the large amount of personal abuse in this thread, which on a public message board may well be counter-productive, there is a distinct lack of evidence in support of many of the things which are being said about the Stoke CEO. I don't think that anyone on here knows even a fraction of the truth about what has gone on with the negotiations with our managerial targets.One thing seems clear namely that the Flores negotiations were a complex matter involving not just salary and length of contract, but a move of country; the employment of other staff; personal family circumstances; contract compensation etc etc etc. I have seen no evidence to support, let alone prove, that the breakdown was entirely, or even in part, the fault of the CEO. It might have been, but it might not have been. None of us know. I think that Bayern's assumption that he because he is the CEO and a Director, that he had the authority to seal the deal, is, with respect, naive. He will have had the authority given to him by the Chairman on behalf of the owners. No less but certainly no more than that. That's where the power lies and that's how it works. In any case, if for whatever reason, the other party change their mind on whether they want a deal, all the authority in the world won't help you. Similarly with the comments about unspecified 'countless other examples' of failure to get deals over the line. Most prospective player deals also involve complex financial and contract negotiations with agents having a central role and usually strong competition with other clubs. I think nearly all clubs only land a minority of their targets. Is our record really that bad ? Certainly there have been some recent poor outcomes, Imbulla being perhaps the most spectacular example. Wimmer looks over-priced, but IMO is not nearly as poor as some claim; Jesse didn't work out, neither so far has Berahino, although if you recall many were praising his acquisition at the time. But in fairness criticism of the failures has to be balanced by the successes in getting very good players here. When Arnie, Shaq and Bojan were destroying Man City was the club's recruitment team being praised ? It isn't the CEO's fault that Arnie walked. Bojan's scintillating form was ruined by his injury. Supporters of other clubs ask me how on earth Stoke have managed to get as good a player as Shaq. N'Zonzi, Butland, Allen, Chupo, Ramandan are all IMO other examples of good captures. In short, I think it's a mixed picture, as I think it is at most PL clubs - the difference being that we don't tend to notice the transfer failures of other clubs because they aren't visible. I have never met Mark Cartwright, let alone looked at how he and his team do their job, so I can't comment on how good he is or isn't. One thing I am sure of is that the CEO is not involved in the football judgements on players. I have met Tony Scholes and have negotiated/discussed non-on-field matters with him. I can only take as I have found, and I have found him to be clear in his positions but willing to listen, and supportive on many issue which have been important to supporters, even though we have disagreed on some issues. For example, I know that he has been a consistent leading advocate at PL meetings for using PL money to help away fans, and we had first the away fans initiative, and our free coach travel which the club have continued after the initaive was replaced by the £30 away ticket cap across the Board, which TS and Stoke City supported. And of course we have had a 10-year freeze on home prices under his tenure. I am not in a position to comment on what he's like to work for. As for the club being a shambles under its present ownership and leadership, I think being involved in the national supporters movement gives me a wider perspective, but if you want to understand what bad ownership and leadership is really like, I'll introduce you to fans of Blackpool, Blackburn, Leeds, Coventry, Charlton, Hull, Pompey, Wimbledon, Leyton etc etc etc etc We have local ownership with a local Chairman who is a lifelong supporter, understands english football and is widely respected within it as I know from the FA Council. Do not underestimate the value of those things. If the Coates family sold up and we had foreign ownership and a new CEO, for example I personally wouldn't put any money on our current pricing levels continuing. The margins in the PL are incredibly small. If the 20 richest people in the world poured their wealth into the 20 PL clubs, and appointed the 20 best managers in the world, 3 of them would still be relegated and 1 would still come bottom. There are 19 other clubs, sets of supporters, owners, and managers who want the same as we do. It's tough and it's hard. We're not in a good place tonight but in my view that's all the more reason for us to stick together and support the team, starting on Monday, and the new manager whoever he is. We can get out of this. Come on Stoke ! Very nicely put Malcolm, but be careful, such well thought out, rational and sensible posts don't go down too well with certain members of this MB.
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 13, 2018 23:37:49 GMT
Personally I have a rule in football - indeed in life generally - not to take strong positions unless you are both sure of all the facts, and sure of the outcome you are trying to achieve i.e whether that outcome will actually be helped by what you say, and the way that you say it. I may be in a minority on here - possibly even a minority of one - but I think that as well as the large amount of personal abuse in this thread, which on a public message board may well be counter-productive, there is a distinct lack of evidence in support of many of the things which are being said about the Stoke CEO. I don't think that anyone on here knows even a fraction of the truth about what has gone on with the negotiations with our managerial targets.One thing seems clear namely that the Flores negotiations were a complex matter involving not just salary and length of contract, but a move of country; the employment of other staff; personal family circumstances; contract compensation etc etc etc. I have seen no evidence to support, let alone prove, that the breakdown was entirely, or even in part, the fault of the CEO. It might have been, but it might not have been. None of us know. I think that Bayern's assumption that he because he is the CEO and a Director, that he had the authority to seal the deal, is, with respect, naive. He will have had the authority given to him by the Chairman on behalf of the owners. No less but certainly no more than that. That's where the power lies and that's how it works. In any case, if for whatever reason, the other party change their mind on whether they want a deal, all the authority in the world won't help you. Similarly with the comments about unspecified 'countless other examples' of failure to get deals over the line. Most prospective player deals also involve complex financial and contract negotiations with agents having a central role and usually strong competition with other clubs. I think nearly all clubs only land a minority of their targets. Is our record really that bad ? Certainly there have been some recent poor outcomes, Imbulla being perhaps the most spectacular example. Wimmer looks over-priced, but IMO is not nearly as poor as some claim; Jesse didn't work out, neither so far has Berahino, although if you recall many were praising his acquisition at the time. But in fairness criticism of the failures has to be balanced by the successes in getting very good players here. When Arnie, Shaq and Bojan were destroying Man City was the club's recruitment team being praised ? It isn't the CEO's fault that Arnie walked. Bojan's scintillating form was ruined by his injury. Supporters of other clubs ask me how on earth Stoke have managed to get as good a player as Shaq. N'Zonzi, Butland, Allen, Chupo, Ramandan are all IMO other examples of good captures. In short, I think it's a mixed picture, as I think it is at most PL clubs - the difference being that we don't tend to notice the transfer failures of other clubs because they aren't visible. I have never met Mark Cartwright, let alone looked at how he and his team do their job, so I can't comment on how good he is or isn't. One thing I am sure of is that the CEO is not involved in the football judgements on players. I have met Tony Scholes and have negotiated/discussed non-on-field matters with him. I can only take as I have found, and I have found him to be clear in his positions but willing to listen, and supportive on many issue which have been important to supporters, even though we have disagreed on some issues. For example, I know that he has been a consistent leading advocate at PL meetings for using PL money to help away fans, and we had first the away fans initiative, and our free coach travel which the club have continued after the initaive was replaced by the £30 away ticket cap across the Board, which TS and Stoke City supported. And of course we have had a 10-year freeze on home prices under his tenure. I am not in a position to comment on what he's like to work for. As for the club being a shambles under its present ownership and leadership, I think being involved in the national supporters movement gives me a wider perspective, but if you want to understand what bad ownership and leadership is really like, I'll introduce you to fans of Blackpool, Blackburn, Leeds, Coventry, Charlton, Hull, Pompey, Wimbledon, Leyton etc etc etc etc We have local ownership with a local Chairman who is a lifelong supporter, understands english football and is widely respected within it as I know from the FA Council. Do not underestimate the value of those things. If the Coates family sold up and we had foreign ownership and a new CEO, for example I personally wouldn't put any money on our current pricing levels continuing. The margins in the PL are incredibly small. If the 20 richest people in the world poured their wealth into the 20 PL clubs, and appointed the 20 best managers in the world, 3 of them would still be relegated and 1 would still come bottom. There are 19 other clubs, sets of supporters, owners, and managers who want the same as we do. It's tough and it's hard. We're not in a good place tonight but in my view that's all the more reason for us to stick together and support the team, starting on Monday, and the new manager whoever he is. We can get out of this. Come on Stoke ! So as you say then, he had the power to seal it, excellent. You're impossible. Are you my wife?
|
|
|
Post by claytonscrubs on Jan 13, 2018 23:39:46 GMT
The arrogance they've shown over this whole debacle (starting in May) has been astounding. The irony of you accusing someone else of arrogance is rich. I’ll second that ....
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 13, 2018 23:47:15 GMT
The ultimate parent company of Stoke City Football Club Limited is bet365 Group Limited. bet365 Group Limited is under the control of Denise Coates CBE and her family. Therefore I consider it to be the Coates Family. Why do you ask? I asked because you described them as hugely successful. I see Denise coates as being a hugely successful business woman who is indulging her far less successful father and silver spoon brother. It's their love she is funding rather than her own. That may go someway to explaining why incompetence and an aversion to change is the order of the day at stoke city. How else do you explain that but for premier league money our commercial revenues are pretty much unchanged in 10 years? Lazy, complacent, incompetent and ridiculously arrogant are befitting descriptions of those that occupy the positions of power at stoke city and Tony scholes is right there at the heart of it all. A superb accountant he may be but a charismatic and infectious leader he most certainly is not. Three points: 1. In my opinion you're being pretty disingenuous towards Peter and John. 2. I dare say that there are many clubs of our size and stature in the PL now or who have been within the past 10 years whose commercial revenues have followed a similar percentage change to ours. Obviously I don't have data, just a hunch. Happy to be proved wrong. 3. "Lazy, complacent, incompetent and ridiculously arrogant" - I imagine you have no idea what really goes on within the club to be sure about such a statement.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jan 14, 2018 0:09:28 GMT
Malcolm totally your prerogative my view is the polar opposite - The club failed to make a decision to Back or invest last summer or act in the autumn - The club had failed consistently failed to land first choice targets despite some being at Clayton wood - The club had constantly under invested and embarked on a badly executed self sufficiency plan with loans and free transfers - Where we have invested it’s been done badly imbula , Wimmer , berahino - we’ve sold our best assets arguably cheaply , but haven’t replaced them for sure - Gate receipts are down - Our PR is a nightmare Jesse true ambition the ultimate own goal - we’ve denied within the last month there is any issue - we’ve put £100m revenue at mortal risk under the banner of self sufficiency - my personal experience contrary to yours is he he is arrogant enough to completely ignore any customer big or small . All has happened on his watch as the clubs senior executive paid circa £1m a year as the most senior custodian of the club he is accountable for our current mess and is the root cause of our current position , the job is completely beyond him , we out grew him years ago and the only thing now is to remove him before he does any greater damage . All I would say is the Chairman and his family business, who own the club, have a huge emotional and financial commitment in the club doing well and remaining in the PL. They are in far better position that you or I to make an assessment of the performance of the CEO and I'm sure that if they agreed with your assessment, they would have taken the appropriate action.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:11:07 GMT
Malcolm totally your prerogative my view is the polar opposite - The club failed to make a decision to Back or invest last summer or act in the autumn - The club had failed consistently failed to land first choice targets despite some being at Clayton wood - The club had constantly under invested and embarked on a badly executed self sufficiency plan with loans and free transfers - Where we have invested it’s been done badly imbula , Wimmer , berahino - we’ve sold our best assets arguably cheaply , but haven’t replaced them for sure - Gate receipts are down - Our PR is a nightmare Jesse true ambition the ultimate own goal - we’ve denied within the last month there is any issue - we’ve put £100m revenue at mortal risk under the banner of self sufficiency - my personal experience contrary to yours is he he is arrogant enough to completely ignore any customer big or small . All has happened on his watch as the clubs senior executive paid circa £1m a year as the most senior custodian of the club he is accountable for our current mess and is the root cause of our current position , the job is completely beyond him , we out grew him years ago and the only thing now is to remove him before he does any greater damage . All I would say is the Chairman and his family business, who own the club, have a huge emotional and financial commitment in the club doing well and remaining in the PL. They are in far better position that you or I to make an assessment of the performance of the CEO and I'm sure that if they agreed with your assessment, they would have taken the appropriate action. You mean the ditherers who couldn't see how bad the manager was doing?
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jan 14, 2018 0:11:54 GMT
Personally I have a rule in football - indeed in life generally - not to take strong positions unless you are both sure of all the facts, and sure of the outcome you are trying to achieve i.e whether that outcome will actually be helped by what you say, and the way that you say it. I may be in a minority on here - possibly even a minority of one - but I think that as well as the large amount of personal abuse in this thread, which on a public message board may well be counter-productive, there is a distinct lack of evidence in support of many of the things which are being said about the Stoke CEO. I don't think that anyone on here knows even a fraction of the truth about what has gone on with the negotiations with our managerial targets.One thing seems clear namely that the Flores negotiations were a complex matter involving not just salary and length of contract, but a move of country; the employment of other staff; personal family circumstances; contract compensation etc etc etc. I have seen no evidence to support, let alone prove, that the breakdown was entirely, or even in part, the fault of the CEO. It might have been, but it might not have been. None of us know. I think that Bayern's assumption that he because he is the CEO and a Director, that he had the authority to seal the deal, is, with respect, naive. He will have had the authority given to him by the Chairman on behalf of the owners. No less but certainly no more than that. That's where the power lies and that's how it works. In any case, if for whatever reason, the other party change their mind on whether they want a deal, all the authority in the world won't help you. Similarly with the comments about unspecified 'countless other examples' of failure to get deals over the line. Most prospective player deals also involve complex financial and contract negotiations with agents having a central role and usually strong competition with other clubs. I think nearly all clubs only land a minority of their targets. Is our record really that bad ? Certainly there have been some recent poor outcomes, Imbulla being perhaps the most spectacular example. Wimmer looks over-priced, but IMO is not nearly as poor as some claim; Jesse didn't work out, neither so far has Berahino, although if you recall many were praising his acquisition at the time. But in fairness criticism of the failures has to be balanced by the successes in getting very good players here. When Arnie, Shaq and Bojan were destroying Man City was the club's recruitment team being praised ? It isn't the CEO's fault that Arnie walked. Bojan's scintillating form was ruined by his injury. Supporters of other clubs ask me how on earth Stoke have managed to get as good a player as Shaq. N'Zonzi, Butland, Allen, Chupo, Ramandan are all IMO other examples of good captures. In short, I think it's a mixed picture, as I think it is at most PL clubs - the difference being that we don't tend to notice the transfer failures of other clubs because they aren't visible. I have never met Mark Cartwright, let alone looked at how he and his team do their job, so I can't comment on how good he is or isn't. One thing I am sure of is that the CEO is not involved in the football judgements on players. I have met Tony Scholes and have negotiated/discussed non-on-field matters with him. I can only take as I have found, and I have found him to be clear in his positions but willing to listen, and supportive on many issue which have been important to supporters, even though we have disagreed on some issues. For example, I know that he has been a consistent leading advocate at PL meetings for using PL money to help away fans, and we had first the away fans initiative, and our free coach travel which the club have continued after the initaive was replaced by the £30 away ticket cap across the Board, which TS and Stoke City supported. And of course we have had a 10-year freeze on home prices under his tenure. I am not in a position to comment on what he's like to work for. As for the club being a shambles under its present ownership and leadership, I think being involved in the national supporters movement gives me a wider perspective, but if you want to understand what bad ownership and leadership is really like, I'll introduce you to fans of Blackpool, Blackburn, Leeds, Coventry, Charlton, Hull, Pompey, Wimbledon, Leyton etc etc etc etc We have local ownership with a local Chairman who is a lifelong supporter, understands english football and is widely respected within it as I know from the FA Council. Do not underestimate the value of those things. If the Coates family sold up and we had foreign ownership and a new CEO, for example I personally wouldn't put any money on our current pricing levels continuing. The margins in the PL are incredibly small. If the 20 richest people in the world poured their wealth into the 20 PL clubs, and appointed the 20 best managers in the world, 3 of them would still be relegated and 1 would still come bottom. There are 19 other clubs, sets of supporters, owners, and managers who want the same as we do. It's tough and it's hard. We're not in a good place tonight but in my view that's all the more reason for us to stick together and support the team, starting on Monday, and the new manager whoever he is. We can get out of this. Come on Stoke ! While I agree with lots on there I have to say my dealings with him were a very different experience. Unapproachable, self centred, arrogant... you can guess I’m no fan of his. I saw a side of that man I really didn’t like. This was all in his capacity of CEO and all issues were Stoke City related. Fair enough. We each take as we find, in different roles
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 14, 2018 0:17:51 GMT
All I would say is the Chairman and his family business, who own the club, have a huge emotional and financial commitment in the club doing well and remaining in the PL. They are in far better position that you or I to make an assessment of the performance of the CEO and I'm sure that if they agreed with your assessment, they would have taken the appropriate action. You mean the ditherers who couldn't see how bad the manager was doing? If you believe what's written in the press, apparently the board did realise a number of weeks ago and started to plan a managerial change accordingly behind the scenes. Of course their public stance was one of a United front behind Hughes, but did you expect them to come out and say "Yes Mark's days are numbered and we will announce his replacement asap...but stay motivated Mark and the team!" ???
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jan 14, 2018 0:19:01 GMT
Personally I have a rule in football - indeed in life generally - not to take strong positions unless you are both sure of all the facts, and sure of the outcome you are trying to achieve i.e whether that outcome will actually be helped by what you say, and the way that you say it. I may be in a minority on here - possibly even a minority of one - but I think that as well as the large amount of personal abuse in this thread, which on a public message board may well be counter-productive, there is a distinct lack of evidence in support of many of the things which are being said about the Stoke CEO. I don't think that anyone on here knows even a fraction of the truth about what has gone on with the negotiations with our managerial targets.One thing seems clear namely that the Flores negotiations were a complex matter involving not just salary and length of contract, but a move of country; the employment of other staff; personal family circumstances; contract compensation etc etc etc. I have seen no evidence to support, let alone prove, that the breakdown was entirely, or even in part, the fault of the CEO. It might have been, but it might not have been. None of us know. I think that Bayern's assumption that he because he is the CEO and a Director, that he had the authority to seal the deal, is, with respect, naive. He will have had the authority given to him by the Chairman on behalf of the owners. No less but certainly no more than that. That's where the power lies and that's how it works. In any case, if for whatever reason, the other party change their mind on whether they want a deal, all the authority in the world won't help you. Similarly with the comments about unspecified 'countless other examples' of failure to get deals over the line. Most prospective player deals also involve complex financial and contract negotiations with agents having a central role and usually strong competition with other clubs. I think nearly all clubs only land a minority of their targets. Is our record really that bad ? Certainly there have been some recent poor outcomes, Imbulla being perhaps the most spectacular example. Wimmer looks over-priced, but IMO is not nearly as poor as some claim; Jesse didn't work out, neither so far has Berahino, although if you recall many were praising his acquisition at the time. But in fairness criticism of the failures has to be balanced by the successes in getting very good players here. When Arnie, Shaq and Bojan were destroying Man City was the club's recruitment team being praised ? It isn't the CEO's fault that Arnie walked. Bojan's scintillating form was ruined by his injury. Supporters of other clubs ask me how on earth Stoke have managed to get as good a player as Shaq. N'Zonzi, Butland, Allen, Chupo, Ramandan are all IMO other examples of good captures. In short, I think it's a mixed picture, as I think it is at most PL clubs - the difference being that we don't tend to notice the transfer failures of other clubs because they aren't visible. I have never met Mark Cartwright, let alone looked at how he and his team do their job, so I can't comment on how good he is or isn't. One thing I am sure of is that the CEO is not involved in the football judgements on players. I have met Tony Scholes and have negotiated/discussed non-on-field matters with him. I can only take as I have found, and I have found him to be clear in his positions but willing to listen, and supportive on many issue which have been important to supporters, even though we have disagreed on some issues. For example, I know that he has been a consistent leading advocate at PL meetings for using PL money to help away fans, and we had first the away fans initiative, and our free coach travel which the club have continued after the initaive was replaced by the £30 away ticket cap across the Board, which TS and Stoke City supported. And of course we have had a 10-year freeze on home prices under his tenure. I am not in a position to comment on what he's like to work for. As for the club being a shambles under its present ownership and leadership, I think being involved in the national supporters movement gives me a wider perspective, but if you want to understand what bad ownership and leadership is really like, I'll introduce you to fans of Blackpool, Blackburn, Leeds, Coventry, Charlton, Hull, Pompey, Wimbledon, Leyton etc etc etc etc We have local ownership with a local Chairman who is a lifelong supporter, understands english football and is widely respected within it as I know from the FA Council. Do not underestimate the value of those things. If the Coates family sold up and we had foreign ownership and a new CEO, for example I personally wouldn't put any money on our current pricing levels continuing. The margins in the PL are incredibly small. If the 20 richest people in the world poured their wealth into the 20 PL clubs, and appointed the 20 best managers in the world, 3 of them would still be relegated and 1 would still come bottom. There are 19 other clubs, sets of supporters, owners, and managers who want the same as we do. It's tough and it's hard. We're not in a good place tonight but in my view that's all the more reason for us to stick together and support the team, starting on Monday, and the new manager whoever he is. We can get out of this. Come on Stoke ! So as you say then, he had the power to seal it, excellent. Now you are being deliberately disingenuous here, which doesn't help sensible discussion. I accept that taken in complete isolation, the 2nd second sentence of my 4th paragraph is arguably ambiguous, but it is crystal clear from the context that I was saying just the opposite, that none of us know the facts either about the degree of authority he had been given or what the issues were, which is without doubt the case.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:20:42 GMT
You mean the ditherers who couldn't see how bad the manager was doing? If you believe what's written in the press, apparently the board did realise a number of weeks ago and started to plan a managerial change accordingly behind the scenes. Of course their public stance was one of a United front behind Hughes, but did you expect them to come out and say "Yes Mark's days are numbered and we will announce his replacement asap...but stay motivated Mark and the team!" ??? There's no way he should have survived last season.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:22:54 GMT
So as you say then, he had the power to seal it, excellent. Now you are being deliberately disingenuous here, which doesn't help sensible discussion. I accept that taken in complete isolation, the 2nd second sentence of my 4th paragraph is arguably ambiguous, but it is crystal clear from the context that I was saying just the opposite, that none of us know the facts either about the degree of authority he had been given or what the issues were, which is without doubt the case. He is the CEO and a director who would have been sent over to finalise the negotiations. He will have known what he can and can't offer. He's paid a million quid year to do this.
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 14, 2018 0:26:30 GMT
If you believe what's written in the press, apparently the board did realise a number of weeks ago and started to plan a managerial change accordingly behind the scenes. Of course their public stance was one of a United front behind Hughes, but did you expect them to come out and say "Yes Mark's days are numbered and we will announce his replacement asap...but stay motivated Mark and the team!" ??? There's no way he should have survived last season. That's a matter of opinion. Plenty will say it would have been harsh to sack him after a 13th placed finish regardless of how the season felt.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:29:08 GMT
There's no way he should have survived last season. That's a matter of opinion. Plenty will say it would have been harsh to sack him after a 13th placed finish regardless of how the season felt. I would have sacked him after the third 9th.
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 14, 2018 0:30:23 GMT
Now you are being deliberately disingenuous here, which doesn't help sensible discussion. I accept that taken in complete isolation, the 2nd second sentence of my 4th paragraph is arguably ambiguous, but it is crystal clear from the context that I was saying just the opposite, that none of us know the facts either about the degree of authority he had been given or what the issues were, which is without doubt the case. He is the CEO and a director who would have been sent over to finalise the negotiations. He will have known what he can and can't offer. He's paid a million quid year to do this. That's correct. So if Scholes offered QSF everything within his remit, would it be Scholes' fault if QSF still refused to sign?
|
|
|
Post by sheriffofrockridge on Jan 14, 2018 0:31:25 GMT
That's a matter of opinion. Plenty will say it would have been harsh to sack him after a 13th placed finish regardless of how the season felt. I would have sacked him after the third 9th. Fuck me it's Alan Sugar.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:33:23 GMT
He is the CEO and a director who would have been sent over to finalise the negotiations. He will have known what he can and can't offer. He's paid a million quid year to do this. That's correct. So if Scholes offered QSF everything within his remit, would it be Scholes' fault if QSF still refused to sign? He accepted it so clearly not.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:34:40 GMT
I would have sacked him after the third 9th. Fuck me it's Alan Sugar. Nope just someone who saw a football manager who tried everything and didn't have anything left to give. I liked Hughes too, it was sad to see.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jan 14, 2018 0:35:20 GMT
Now you are being deliberately disingenuous here, which doesn't help sensible discussion. I accept that taken in complete isolation, the 2nd second sentence of my 4th paragraph is arguably ambiguous, but it is crystal clear from the context that I was saying just the opposite, that none of us know the facts either about the degree of authority he had been given or what the issues were, which is without doubt the case. He is the CEO and a director who would have been sent over to finalise the negotiations. He will have known what he can and can't offer. He's paid a million quid year to do this. Of course he will have known what he can and can't offer, i.e the degree of authority he had been given by the Chairman and the owners, which is exactly what I said in my post. But you and I don't know that. Neither do we know why Flores eventually decided not to sign. Without any of that vital information, it is impossible for any of us to make judgements on his performance in this task. I am not incidentally defending the level of executive salaries on planet football, which is certainly not unique to Stoke City.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:37:54 GMT
He is the CEO and a director who would have been sent over to finalise the negotiations. He will have known what he can and can't offer. He's paid a million quid year to do this. Of course he will have known what he can and can't offer, i.e the degree of authority he had been given by the Chairman and the owners, which is exactly what I said in my post. But you and I don't know that. Neither do we know why Flores eventually decided not to sign. Without any of that vital information, it is impossible for any of us to make judgements on his performance in this task. I am not incidentally defending the level of executive salaries on planet football, which is certainly not unique to Stoke City. He was sent to close the deal and failed like he so usually does.
|
|
|
Post by Malcolm Clarke on Jan 14, 2018 0:50:24 GMT
Of course he will have known what he can and can't offer, i.e the degree of authority he had been given by the Chairman and the owners, which is exactly what I said in my post. But you and I don't know that. Neither do we know why Flores eventually decided not to sign. Without any of that vital information, it is impossible for any of us to make judgements on his performance in this task. I am not incidentally defending the level of executive salaries on planet football, which is certainly not unique to Stoke City. He was sent to close the deal and failed like he so usually does. Unless you know, which you don't, why the deal fell through, you can't say that it was due to a failure of the CEO. That's the point, which I'm sure you understand. We are just going round in linguistic circles here, so I'll call it a day on this point.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 14, 2018 0:52:10 GMT
He was sent to close the deal and failed like he so usually does. Unless you know, which you don't, why the deal fell through, you can't say that it was due to a failure of the CEO. That's the point, which I'm sure you understand. We are just going round in linguistic circles here, so I'll call it a day on this point. I would! 😂 The same old things happen under his stewardship and he never learns. He's not the only one though, this club wreaks of arrogance at its upper echelons.
|
|
|
Post by thehoof on Jan 14, 2018 0:53:40 GMT
Malcolm totally your prerogative my view is the polar opposite - The club failed to make a decision to Back or invest last summer or act in the autumn - The club had failed consistently failed to land first choice targets despite some being at Clayton wood - The club had constantly under invested and embarked on a badly executed self sufficiency plan with loans and free transfers - Where we have invested it’s been done badly imbula , Wimmer , berahino - we’ve sold our best assets arguably cheaply , but haven’t replaced them for sure - Gate receipts are down - Our PR is a nightmare Jesse true ambition the ultimate own goal - we’ve denied within the last month there is any issue - we’ve put £100m revenue at mortal risk under the banner of self sufficiency - my personal experience contrary to yours is he he is arrogant enough to completely ignore any customer big or small . All has happened on his watch as the clubs senior executive paid circa £1m a year as the most senior custodian of the club he is accountable for our current mess and is the root cause of our current position , the job is completely beyond him , we out grew him years ago and the only thing now is to remove him before he does any greater damage . All I would say is the Chairman and his family business, who own the club, have a huge emotional and financial commitment in the club doing well and remaining in the PL. They are in far better position that you or I to make an assessment of the performance of the CEO and I'm sure that if they agreed with your assessment, they would have taken the appropriate action. I will be very interested to see how his position is viewed should we be relegated. I sincerely hope that a sound contingency plan has been put in place by Mr. Scholes, because if we are honest, the deals that we do get to hear about certainly seem to contain more failures than successes. Relegation is a failure and CEO's of a failing business usually pay the price.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Jan 14, 2018 7:56:59 GMT
I asked because you described them as hugely successful. I see Denise coates as being a hugely successful business woman who is indulging her far less successful father and silver spoon brother. It's their love she is funding rather than her own. That may go someway to explaining why incompetence and an aversion to change is the order of the day at stoke city. How else do you explain that but for premier league money our commercial revenues are pretty much unchanged in 10 years? Lazy, complacent, incompetent and ridiculously arrogant are befitting descriptions of those that occupy the positions of power at stoke city and Tony scholes is right there at the heart of it all. A superb accountant he may be but a charismatic and infectious leader he most certainly is not. Three points: 1. In my opinion you're being pretty disingenuous towards Peter and John. 2. I dare say that there are many clubs of our size and stature in the PL now or who have been within the past 10 years whose commercial revenues have followed a similar percentage change to ours. Obviously I don't have data, just a hunch. Happy to be proved wrong. 3. "Lazy, complacent, incompetent and ridiculously arrogant" - I imagine you have no idea what really goes on within the club to be sure about such a statement. Well I've found myself in the company of scholes a few times and that has always been my impression of him. I'vesaid it before so I'm not saying anything new because things don't seem to have gone our way. Clearly he is a very good accountant. I'm not sure that makes him a leader of people which he needs to be.
|
|
|
Post by miggoscfc on Jan 14, 2018 8:26:06 GMT
Unless you know, which you don't, why the deal fell through, you can't say that it was due to a failure of the CEO. That's the point, which I'm sure you understand. We are just going round in linguistic circles here, so I'll call it a day on this point. I would! 😂 The same old things happen under his stewardship and he never learns. He's not the only one though, this club wreaks of arrogance at its upper echelons. Bayern all you do is criticise the club, it must cause much stress that you constantly have to attack those that work there and argue with 75% of posters on here that have a different opinion I'd suggest that you really are not enjoying being a supporter of this football club at the moment. You also suggested that you'd have sacked Hughes straight after the third 9th place finish which is the biggest success our club has ever achieved. (Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it) your either completely on the wind up and are posting just for the reaction or your expectations are way too high. If you really want a fulfilling life I'd suggest either lowering those expectations to those of the rest of us or try supporting a different club which can match those expectations I'd suggest Man City are the only club that could fulfill that for you at the moment. On your death bed do you really want to look back on your life only to see you spending 12 hours a day on the oatcake arguing about the imperfections of a club that is never going to be the club you want it to be ? I'd suggest taking a prolonged period of rest from the oatcake for your own health as the amount of moaning you do can't be good for you, think of the amount of good you could do if you put the hours of posting you do into something constructive in the real world, genuinely this is something I did last year and really noticed a change for the good because of it. Either that or apply to the club to work in these positions that you heavily criticise and for all of us that post on here go and show us that you can take us to that level that you seem to think is achievable. Either way fella good luck my personal opinion is that your on the wind up and post ridiculous things because you enjoy the strong reaction your not too dissimilar from Katie Hopkins in that regard, as a fellow stokie I hope you really take in some of the advice and take a long look in the mirror but I fear all I'm going to get is a sarcastic response.
|
|
|
Post by doitforfrank on Jan 14, 2018 10:41:56 GMT
We have recent proof of how out of touch the club are. We sign a right back, who, may turn out to be very good right back.
However we sign him while we have no manager and Scholes comes out and says it is a player that Mark Hughes wanted to sign, as though that’s a good thing and a good recommendation. This is the guy that the club have just removed from his position just days earlier basically for flawed judgement, after all if he’d got decisions right, like simply reverting to 442 to utilise the players he had, we wouldn’t be in the mess were in and he wouldn’t have lost his job.
Scholes and Cartwright are playing FIFA manager mode with our club, signing players on whims. Whoever scouted Imbula needs sacking! For a player to have so little ability in his wrong foot, to the point he could barely stand on it, and our people couldn’t see it is diabolical. Pulis used to drive the length and breadth of the country seeing players for himself, and I don’t believe for one moment that Hughes saw Imbula, he was presented with the player.
Our club is not for their meddling, it will be around far longer than those two, as will the fans, who are, in my opinion being let down by their actions, as are the owners.
|
|