|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 23, 2022 14:54:20 GMT
Bunny - certainly since MON arrived, there HAS been a plan. Namely, MON was tasked (whilst avoiding relegation) with drastically cutting the wage bill, getting as many of the the high cost, high earning and underperforming players off the books as possible, and replacing them with cheap (or free) low paid players - and significantly reducing the average age of the permanent members of the squad. Now, you may feel that the plan didn't include some things you would have liked, but essentially MON has implemented the plan to an extent that I certainly didn't think was possible in such a short time frame. The end result is that (assuming that we are still not in breach of FFP) the next phase of the plan can take us forward in a way that would not have been possible had the first plan not been successful. Isn't that the point though Forny? It's again 100% been tasked to the manager to do that stuff. What is the next phase of the plan because it's hard to argue we're moving in the right direction on the pitch and arguably off it in some ways, for all the good work done in finally shifting the deadwood. Obviously the bulk of the work to change the wage/age spectrum etc. has been MON's work although other members of staff will have contributed. But it was the owners who made the decision to go down that road. At other clubs, owners have made differing decisions and in some cases this has resulted in points deductions, administration and sometimes relegations. None of this absolves our owners from having made significant mistakes in our last 2 years in the Prem and first 2 years in the Championship. But, personally, I think they and MON have done a decent job in coming up with and implementing a decent financial/FFP rescue plan since MON arrived. You may not be impressed with the affect of the plan on our performances but I suspect that, despite your reservations, had the plan not been conceived and implemented, the situation by now could have been very dire indeed. I am minded about how steep and long Leeds' fall from grace was after they got relegated from the Prem. I would hate Stoke to have been in a Leeds situation - obviously they are back in the Prem now but they fell below the Championship and took years to climb back up to where they are now. I don't know what the next phase of the plan looks like - my main problem is (like most of us) I have no idea exactly when FFP problems will be finally behind us - hopefully it will be this summer or, if not then next summer. Whenever that happy day comes I expect our fortunes to improve rapidly once it does.
|
|
|
Post by tosh on Mar 23, 2022 14:59:10 GMT
Merely reflects the reality of the situation, namely that money invested in most football clubs is effectively a donation and not a loan as there is no chance of ever getting your money back. I'd be surprised if the loan hadn't already been shown as impaired in the books of Bet365. The debt write off will result in a large exceptional credit in the accounts of SCFC. Unlikely to count towards FFP in my view. Wont count towards ffp if they had impaired it in bet 365 accounts they would have to do the opposite side in stoke holdings accounts at same time as net impact to the group is zero they have effectively just given cash to the club like you say. Not sure what you’re debating here. Interest free club loans and whether they are paid off or waived has no relevance to FFP. FFP simply checks that what you have spent in relation to actual trading income, is within the limits imposed by the FFP regulations.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 15:02:21 GMT
Isn't that the point though Forny? It's again 100% been tasked to the manager to do that stuff. What is the next phase of the plan because it's hard to argue we're moving in the right direction on the pitch and arguably off it in some ways, for all the good work done in finally shifting the deadwood. Obviously the bulk of the work to change the wage/age spectrum etc. has been MON's work although other members of staff will have contributed. But it was the owners who made the decision to go down that road. At other clubs, owners have made differing decisions and in some cases this has resulted in points deductions, administration and sometimes relegations. None of this absolves our owners from having made significant mistakes in our last 2 years in the Prem and first 2 years in the Championship. But, personally, I think they and MON have done a decent job in coming up with and implementing a decent financial/FFP rescue plan since MON arrived. You may not be impressed with the affect of the plan on our performances but I suspect that, despite your reservations, had the plan not been conceived and implemented, the situation by now could have been very dire indeed. I am minded about how steep and long Leeds' fall from grace was after they got relegated from the Prem. I would hate Stoke to have been in a Leeds situation - obviously they are back in the Prem now but they fell below the Championship and took years to climb back up to where they are now. I don't know what the next phase of the plan looks like - my main problem is (like most of us) I have no idea exactly when FFP problems will be finally behind us - hopefully it will be this summer or, if not then next summer. Whenever that happy day comes I expect our fortunes to improve rapidly once it does. Did they make the decision to go down that road? Or did they just happen to appoint a manager who saw the locomotive coming after years of appointing ones who didn't? These measures seem very much to be ones driven by him and things the owners hadn't (publicly at least) indicated they saw as a priority. Is it not a bit generous to credit 'the affect of the plan' on our performances? We were flying reasonably high earlier in the season and I don't recall 'the plan' being an issue then. Is part of it to wildly change systems and personnel from game to game in the hope that something, anything sticks? Is it to get game management wrong on a consistent basis so that leads become deficits?
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 15:09:27 GMT
Wont count towards ffp if they had impaired it in bet 365 accounts they would have to do the opposite side in stoke holdings accounts at same time as net impact to the group is zero they have effectively just given cash to the club like you say. Not sure what you’re debating here. Interest free club loans and whether they are paid off or waived has no relevance to FFP. FFP simply checks that what you have spent in relation to actual trading income, is within the limits imposed by the FFP regulations. I agree I said the same previouslyy, the poster was talking about the accounts of bet 365 and whether the auditors would have already made bet365 impair (write off) these loans already I was just replying if they had then stoke holdings would have needed to make an entry in their accounts too to bring the group impact to zero regardless it doesnt impact ffp.
|
|
|
Post by scfc75 on Mar 23, 2022 15:13:46 GMT
Where’s our West Country Miss Marple to tell us we’re flouting FFP and that he’s telling on us to the EFL? Lol- small post...Debt write-offs are excluded from FFP as such, the equity conversion merely takes a club up to the Upper Loss Threshold. The equity vs loss threshold means that a club can lose £5m in a year in FFP terms ie £5m plus FFP exclusions if no equity at all put in, or £13m if equity in. Or anything in between- obviously 3 year rolling basis=£15m vs £39m- but then I would expect Stoke to be towards the Upper threshold anyway so it merely confirms expectations. The equity does not have to be evenly spread ie put in the same amount per year and £40m neatly covers a 5 year period of £8m a year averaged. Differing levels for PL and Championship, although the £5m remains constant at both... Great for the Balance Sheet but all past cases of debt write offs show that it makes no difference to the Profit and Loss account- which is what FFP is based on, hence the Stadium sale write off. If writing off debt counted towards FFP then there would be literally no point. Equity conversion does but only up to the gap between Upper and Lower Threshold in a 3 year Period. Strikes me as a convenient fig leaf anyway 'selling'/ Fixed Assets to be redeveloped if that is the intent, the redevelopment could be done no prob, no impact on FFP- all Tangible Fixed Asset expenditure is exempt from FFP. The Land Registry is interesting, seen no coverage of it by Stoke media or on here- Sheffield Wednesday fell foul of that, one reason why they fell foul in any event. Saw one or two on Twitter asking how the Land Registry aligns with it all. 😂
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Mar 23, 2022 15:42:12 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them. It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepered to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch. I like a moan as much as the next person but if not being overly critical is the trade off for having multi billionaire owners I think we should be able to manage that ! With this sort of backing compared to the financial quagmire that most clubs are in we are pretty much certain to come out smelling of roses sooner or later whatever your opinion of the owners (and their not too shameful record of a decade in the PL and our one and only cup final appearance) 🙂
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Mar 23, 2022 15:52:32 GMT
I am surprised you can just write off 160 million quid of debt under FFP Very surprised , but the club must have spoken to the EFL before doing it ,I am sure So very pleasantly surprised Great news They haven’t written it off, they’ve converted it to equity. It’s doesn’t affect the P&L just strengthens the BS by converting a liability the loan into equity.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Mar 23, 2022 15:53:51 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them. It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepered to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch. Some people just will never be happy. I reckon over 80 of the other 91 league clubs would give their right arm to have our owners, and of the remaining through, they depend on Middle Eastern/Chinese/American owners continuing to maintain their interest (always a question mark unlike rye Coates family) and generosity. Let’s have a look at the new Chelsea owners (especially if they are American), they will inject a large initial amount of cash, and like with Man Utd, they soon want to start having it repaid. We should feel immensely grateful for what and who we have. "Grateful"!?!?!? Just like, in a totally different arena, a certain lady now back home with her family after years in prison abroad, should be more grateful? This is the exact approach against which I rail - perfectly distilled into an Oatie post. Shut up and be grateful - you're lucky to have a job, food to eat, a house, a car, still to be alive......the likes of you do not have a right to expect or even wish for anything more, etc. The masses should be grateful for whatever crumbs fall from the billionaires' tables, and don't you dare do an Oliver Twist and ask for more......
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Mar 23, 2022 15:58:18 GMT
I am surprised you can just write off 160 million quid of debt under FFP Very surprised , but the club must have spoken to the EFL before doing it ,I am sure So very pleasantly surprised Great news They haven’t written it off, they’ve converted it to equity. It’s doesn’t affect the P&L just strengthens the BS by converting a liability the loan into equity. Agreed - FFP focuses on operating profits/losses, and this does not touch on that.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Mar 23, 2022 16:03:19 GMT
I am surprised you can just write off 160 million quid of debt under FFP Very surprised , but the club must have spoken to the EFL before doing it ,I am sure So very pleasantly surprised Great news They haven’t written it off, they’ve converted it to equity. It’s doesn’t affect the P&L just strengthens the BS by converting a liability the loan into equity. Actually they have waived / written off £120m of loans which does credit the stoke holdings p&l (but goes as an expense in bet 365 accounts), it is excluded for ffp purposes though only £40m of loans was converted to shares.
|
|
|
Post by leesandfordstoupe on Mar 23, 2022 16:05:19 GMT
Great news and exactly what I’ve been saying would strengthen their argument about ffp in it’s current format.
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Mar 23, 2022 16:06:03 GMT
I'm assuming the 20M investment in the stadium/facilities will account for the uplift in valuation from when we sold it to ourselves?
Does it work like that?
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Mar 23, 2022 16:08:20 GMT
Obviously the bulk of the work to change the wage/age spectrum etc. has been MON's work although other members of staff will have contributed. But it was the owners who made the decision to go down that road. At other clubs, owners have made differing decisions and in some cases this has resulted in points deductions, administration and sometimes relegations. None of this absolves our owners from having made significant mistakes in our last 2 years in the Prem and first 2 years in the Championship. But, personally, I think they and MON have done a decent job in coming up with and implementing a decent financial/FFP rescue plan since MON arrived. You may not be impressed with the affect of the plan on our performances but I suspect that, despite your reservations, had the plan not been conceived and implemented, the situation by now could have been very dire indeed. I am minded about how steep and long Leeds' fall from grace was after they got relegated from the Prem. I would hate Stoke to have been in a Leeds situation - obviously they are back in the Prem now but they fell below the Championship and took years to climb back up to where they are now. I don't know what the next phase of the plan looks like - my main problem is (like most of us) I have no idea exactly when FFP problems will be finally behind us - hopefully it will be this summer or, if not then next summer. Whenever that happy day comes I expect our fortunes to improve rapidly once it does. Did they make the decision to go down that road? Or did they just happen to appoint a manager who saw the locomotive coming after years of appointing ones who didn't? These measures seem very much to be ones driven by him and things the owners hadn't (publicly at least) indicated they saw as a priority. Is it not a bit generous to credit 'the affect of the plan' on our performances? We were flying reasonably high earlier in the season and I don't recall 'the plan' being an issue then. Is part of it to wildly change systems and personnel from game to game in the hope that something, anything sticks? Is it to get game management wrong on a consistent basis so that leads become deficits? To be fair I don't know the answer to your first question. What I do know is that MON (more than most managers) has a grasp of finance having trained in the discipline after retiring from playing. I doubt if it is a co-incidence (at a time when the club was sailing VERY close to the financial buffers) that the Coates family should appoint a manger better suited than most to helping the club get out of the financial mess it was in. I'm not sure it matters what the answer to your question is - clearly, in the situation the club must have been in after the spending and lack of success of the previous 2 managers, MON was probably as close to a perfect choice to stop the financial rot - even if the medium term results were not what we might have hoped for. We'll have to agree to disagree about your second paragraph. Personally I can't remember so many crucial injuries as we had in both last season and this season. It wasn't just the number of injuries as the fact that it was that so many important players got injured. I'm not sure if we had much chance of maintaining top 6 form either last season or this. But, I could be wrong, I sometimes am!
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Mar 23, 2022 16:09:17 GMT
I'm assuming the 20M investment in the stadium/facilities will account for the uplift in valuation from when we sold it to ourselves? Does it work like that? Gold plated taps in the new toilets mate, we've thought of everything to get out of a points deduction........
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Mar 23, 2022 16:10:40 GMT
Did they make the decision to go down that road? Or did they just happen to appoint a manager who saw the locomotive coming after years of appointing ones who didn't? These measures seem very much to be ones driven by him and things the owners hadn't (publicly at least) indicated they saw as a priority. Is it not a bit generous to credit 'the affect of the plan' on our performances? We were flying reasonably high earlier in the season and I don't recall 'the plan' being an issue then. Is part of it to wildly change systems and personnel from game to game in the hope that something, anything sticks? Is it to get game management wrong on a consistent basis so that leads become deficits? To be fair I don't know the answer to your first question. What I do know is that MON (more than most managers) has a grasp of finance having trained in the discipline after retiring from playing. I doubt if it is a co-incidence (at a time when the club was sailing VERY close to the financial buffers) that the Coates family should appoint a manger better suited than most to helping the club get out of the financial mess it was in. I'm not sure it matters what the answer to your question is - clearly, in the situation the club must have been in after the spending and lack of success of the previous 2 managers, MON was probably as close to a perfect choice to stop the financial rot - even if the medium term results were not what we might have hoped for. We'll have to agree to disagree about your second paragraph. Personally I can't remember so many crucial injuries as we had in both last season and this season. It wasn't so just the number of injuries as the fact that it was that so many important players got injured. I'm not sure if we had much chance of maintaining top 6 form either last season or this. But, I could be wrong, I sometimes am! "But, I could be wrong, I sometimes am!" Frame that! Now if we could just get bayern to admit that, too.........
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 16:18:28 GMT
Did they make the decision to go down that road? Or did they just happen to appoint a manager who saw the locomotive coming after years of appointing ones who didn't? These measures seem very much to be ones driven by him and things the owners hadn't (publicly at least) indicated they saw as a priority. Is it not a bit generous to credit 'the affect of the plan' on our performances? We were flying reasonably high earlier in the season and I don't recall 'the plan' being an issue then. Is part of it to wildly change systems and personnel from game to game in the hope that something, anything sticks? Is it to get game management wrong on a consistent basis so that leads become deficits? To be fair I don't know the answer to your first question. What I do know is that MON (more than most managers) has a grasp of finance having trained in the discipline after retiring from playing. I doubt if it is a co-incidence (at a time when the club was sailing VERY close to the financial buffers) that the Coates family should appoint a manger better suited than most to helping the club get out of the financial mess it was in. I'm not sure it matters what the answer to your question is - clearly, in the situation the club must have been in after the spending and lack of success of the previous 2 managers, MON was probably as close to a perfect choice to stop the financial rot - even if the medium term results were not what we might have hoped for. We'll have to agree to disagree about your second paragraph. Personally I can't remember so many crucial injuries as we had in both last season and this season. It wasn't just the number of injuries as the fact that it was that so many important players got injured. I'm not sure if we had much chance of maintaining top 6 form either last season or this. But, I could be wrong, I sometimes am! I think it does matter if you're asserting that they've consciously chosen a prudent manager with financial nous. They may have done but I think there's every chance it is coincidence given our policy post-Lambert seemed to be to appoint whoever the burgeoning young manager du jour was regardless of how they play or what kind of fit they'd be. I think to excuse some of the very odd decisions made by the manager as having any part in our decline since January is being overly generous.
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Mar 23, 2022 16:32:37 GMT
I know the statement says the group continues its long term support etc... But has this move just made it a whole lot more attractive for a potential buyer? ??? Does it not convince you of their commitment to the club. Why does there always have to be an ulterior motive? We are so fortunate to have them as owners. I can't think of another club whose owners are as bound to the club as the Coates family are to Stoke. Thank you to the Coates family. Some people on here will just not accept we have the best owners possible,how many other clubs stood by all employees during the pandemic ? How many other clubs have frozen ticket prices year on year? how many other clubs pump millions into local charities? and to top it all they are locals Stokies born and bred.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Mar 23, 2022 16:44:43 GMT
So we finally get a statement, and Gods is nowhere to be seen! Oh let me have a look!
|
|
|
Post by theonlooker on Mar 23, 2022 16:45:49 GMT
So we finally get a statement, and Gods is nowhere to be seen! Oh let me have a look! Finally, the Great Gatsby is here...
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on Mar 23, 2022 16:51:35 GMT
I agree Wuzza, although the lack of anything resembling a plan since 2017 worries me. Whose to say that there haven’t been very detailed plans .......that have gone wrong. It happens , especially in the weird old world of football. C'Mon Wuzza, don't you know football is played on paper (or a computer screen these days). You make your plans, they come to pass and success is guaranteed. Simples!
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 23, 2022 16:58:40 GMT
I tweeted this last week: Having the billionaire Coates family as owners is as much a curse as a blessing. We have to feel so grateful all the time that we cannot be allowed to criticise them. It seems appropriate to mention it again today. They have helped to create the mess they are now paying off. Without serious work to revise the operational side of the business, they had better be prepered to dig deep again year after year to cover more huge losses. The way to properly get out of this hole is to run a successful business, on and off the pitch. Some people just will never be happy. I reckon over 80 of the other 91 league clubs would give their right arm to have our owners, and of the remaining through, they depend on Middle Eastern/Chinese/American owners continuing to maintain their interest (always a question mark unlike rye Coates family) and generosity. Let’s have a look at the new Chelsea owners (especially if they are American), they will inject a large initial amount of cash, and like with Man Utd, they soon want to start having it repaid. We should feel immensely grateful for what and who we have. Why? This whole is a gross failure on them. And it’s happened time and time again. It’s great they can write it off but it’s not a good thing.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Mar 23, 2022 17:04:57 GMT
Gods will be pleased at least, sure he'll be here any minute... Well there it is! First 3 thoughts... 1.It's very good news and anyone who thinks there are better owners just waiting to step in and bank roll this fading concern is probably mistaken 2.Who remembers 'Project Break Even' from our mid term prem days? It's turned in to Project Blank Cheque! 3.No mention of why the last 5 years have been so disappointing or what can, has or indeed might be done about it. It's kind of half a statement, perhaps Part 2 will follow as stock is taken at seasons end?
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 23, 2022 17:10:53 GMT
Obviously the bulk of the work to change the wage/age spectrum etc. has been MON's work although other members of staff will have contributed. But it was the owners who made the decision to go down that road. At other clubs, owners have made differing decisions and in some cases this has resulted in points deductions, administration and sometimes relegations. None of this absolves our owners from having made significant mistakes in our last 2 years in the Prem and first 2 years in the Championship. But, personally, I think they and MON have done a decent job in coming up with and implementing a decent financial/FFP rescue plan since MON arrived. You may not be impressed with the affect of the plan on our performances but I suspect that, despite your reservations, had the plan not been conceived and implemented, the situation by now could have been very dire indeed. I am minded about how steep and long Leeds' fall from grace was after they got relegated from the Prem. I would hate Stoke to have been in a Leeds situation - obviously they are back in the Prem now but they fell below the Championship and took years to climb back up to where they are now. I don't know what the next phase of the plan looks like - my main problem is (like most of us) I have no idea exactly when FFP problems will be finally behind us - hopefully it will be this summer or, if not then next summer. Whenever that happy day comes I expect our fortunes to improve rapidly once it does. Did they make the decision to go down that road? Or did they just happen to appoint a manager who saw the locomotive coming after years of appointing ones who didn't? These measures seem very much to be ones driven by him and things the owners hadn't (publicly at least) indicated they saw as a priority. Is it not a bit generous to credit 'the affect of the plan' on our performances? We were flying reasonably high earlier in the season and I don't recall 'the plan' being an issue then. Is part of it to wildly change systems and personnel from game to game in the hope that something, anything sticks? Is it to get game management wrong on a consistent basis so that leads become deficits? I think it's been abundantly clear for quite some time that the plan Forney has detailed has been going on since pretty much O'Neill first transfer window i.e. he was tasked with getting rid of the high earning players who didn't want to be here/we didn't want (only Afobe & Etebo left now) whilst bringing wage bill down massively & massive drop in transfer spending > all that has occurred sadly O'Neill performance in the last few months has been awful, if we we're knocking around the top ten somewhere I have no doubt the club would be delighted (for now) with a view to progressing next season As it is the club have a decision to make re the manager
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 17:11:46 GMT
Gods will be pleased at least, sure he'll be here any minute... Well there it is! First 3 thoughts... 1.It's very good news and anyone who thinks there are better owners just waiting to step in and bank roll this fading concern is probably mistaken 2.Who remembers 'Project Break Even' from our mid term prem days? It's turned in to Project Blank Cheque! 3.No mention of why the last 5 years have been so disappointing or what can, has or indeed might be done about it. It's kind of half a statement, perhaps Part 2 will follow as stock is taken at seasons end? I'm still intrigued as to what you're expecting from Part 2...
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 17:13:00 GMT
Did they make the decision to go down that road? Or did they just happen to appoint a manager who saw the locomotive coming after years of appointing ones who didn't? These measures seem very much to be ones driven by him and things the owners hadn't (publicly at least) indicated they saw as a priority. Is it not a bit generous to credit 'the affect of the plan' on our performances? We were flying reasonably high earlier in the season and I don't recall 'the plan' being an issue then. Is part of it to wildly change systems and personnel from game to game in the hope that something, anything sticks? Is it to get game management wrong on a consistent basis so that leads become deficits? I think it's been abundantly clear for quite some time that the plan Forney has detailed has been going on since pretty much O'Neill first transfer window i.e. he was tasked with getting rid of the high earning players who didn't want to be here/we didn't want (only Afobe & Etebo left now) whilst bringing wage bill down massively & massive drop in transfer spending > all that has occurred sadly O'Neill performance in the last few months has been awful, if we we're knocking around the top ten somewhere I have no doubt the club would be delighted (for now) with a view to progressing next season As it is the club have a decision to make re the manager Who's plan was it though, that's my question. I'm not convinced it was the owners' grand organised plan to bring in a manager well placed to do that, they just lucked into one who was able to.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 23, 2022 17:19:11 GMT
I think it's been abundantly clear for quite some time that the plan Forney has detailed has been going on since pretty much O'Neill first transfer window i.e. he was tasked with getting rid of the high earning players who didn't want to be here/we didn't want (only Afobe & Etebo left now) whilst bringing wage bill down massively & massive drop in transfer spending > all that has occurred sadly O'Neill performance in the last few months has been awful, if we we're knocking around the top ten somewhere I have no doubt the club would be delighted (for now) with a view to progressing next season As it is the club have a decision to make re the manager Who's plan was it though, that's my question. I'm not convinced it was the owners' grand organised plan to bring in a manager well placed to do that, they just lucked into one who was able to. I might be getting the wrong end of the stick here...are you suggesting O'Neill decided to do all this by himself? Would suggest the club i..e John Coates would be the prime mover behind this
|
|
|
Post by northernstokie on Mar 23, 2022 17:19:50 GMT
Is any of this able to be transferred into avaliable funds for the summer window?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Mar 23, 2022 17:24:26 GMT
Who's plan was it though, that's my question. I'm not convinced it was the owners' grand organised plan to bring in a manager well placed to do that, they just lucked into one who was able to. I might be getting the wrong end of the stick here...are you suggesting O'Neill decided to do all this by himself? Would suggest the club i..e John Coates would be the prime mover behind this I'm suggesting the owners didn't target him specifically because of his financial nous and capabilities in that regard. They targeted him because he was an up and coming manager with a reputation, just like Rowett and Jones. That he's been able to do it is testament to him being able to recognise what needed doing. I think they turn over pretty much all football stuff almost wholesale to be driven by the manager.
|
|
|
Post by sportsman on Mar 23, 2022 17:25:16 GMT
Is any of this able to be transferred into avaliable funds for the summer window? The most important question to be asked 😁
|
|
|
Post by heworksardtho on Mar 23, 2022 17:31:54 GMT
All we need now is a new manager , new players then onwards and upwards
|
|