Blades in America Podcast

[54yrblade]

Probably not the thread for anti-Wilder talk….but, this is a huge problem I’ve talking about for a while.

7. Rosen did not realise the scale of CW's involvement in all aspects of the Club when he dismissed him. One reason for bringing him back.

The great SUFC reset is needed.

Light touch research before buying the club?

And no great change until Wilder is out

Rinse & repeat it is then

 

[Dkc]

What I don’t understand is why after saying that the owners need to speak, they are criticising the platform on which he spoke. He’s done what people wanted.

He hasn't done what people wanted. Yes, he spoke but simply speaking isn't enough. He didn't answer any of the main questions that our fans want answering.

The platform wasn't the problem. It's the fact that he was spoon-fed easy questions by a friend. He'll have known the questions in advance and he won't have permitted any uncomfortable ones.

We are still none the wiser on whether he agrees that PA is still owed 35 million and if so, whether they intend to honour their debt. Why, if this 35 million has gone into strengthening the team, are we weaker than in May? What's going on with the Delaware court case? No need to go into details but how would an unfavorable verdict for the owners affect the club? What is our recruitment plan? Surely relying on loans is not sustainable. And how can he be so sure that we are not in line for a points deduction when other, more qualified people think that it is a possibility?

 

[Berkshire Blade]

The platform wasn't the problem. It's the fact that he was spoon-fed easy questions by a friend. He'll have known the questions in advance and he won't have permitted any uncomfortable ones.

So the platform wasn't a problem but everything about the platform was a problem

They absolutely should have done this interview with the local media multiple times since they came in.

 

[Grey Blade]

Honestly it’s a load of waffle up until the last 10 mins. And even then he’s obviously in a position where he can’t disclose too much.

Likewise. My mind was wandering and I think I need to watch the last 15 mins again

 

[Pedro Verde]

As far as Im aware the FAB have put some questions to the owners
Have the owners answered these questions ?
If they have I must have missed it

 

[Grey Blade]

It's the fact that he was spoon-fed easy questions by a friend. He'll have known the questions in advance and he won't have permitted any uncomfortable ones.

It appeared to be carefully scripted. I found the interviewer quite annoying with his Trump like tan and cheesy grinning. By the time there was anything worth hearing I'd lost interest

 

[BiggerBladeThanThou]

Light touch research before buying the club?

And no great change until Wilder is out

Rinse & repeat it is then

If your Wenger, Fergie or Pep fine, make the club yours. But for Wilder to have such a handle on the club (probably beyond his remit as a manager of the squad) is negligence in my eyes and probably why the foreign managers have failed here in such a short space of time comparatively.

Once the ownership debacle has settled, the sooner Wilder is moved on, the better. The club’s hierarchy need a root and branch reset, deliver a new 10 year strategy with key strategic milestones along the way.

The club needs to evolve.

 

[Bladesman]

Its how its done these days .

Very few people in public life , politics , business or sport really open themselves up to any kind of scrutiny.

Chat shows and interviews are carefully constructed with PR consultants and legal advice .

Mostly everything we see and hear is what people want us to see and hear .

We have to take it for what it is .

Some good revisionism on here as if the likes of McCabe always got a good grilling by Radio Sheffield or The Star in the past. McCabe always put out his narrative, usually interviewed by someone he was pally with at RS or The Star and rarely got any tough questions thrown at him. Especially during the period when we were sinking like a stone towards League 1 while he kept running off to Belgium when the going was getting tough.

PA ditched them because the local press favoured their mate Kevin. So he stuck to national press and Blades youtubers.

It's quite telling that our new owners despite not being here that long have also kicked the local press to the curb and the only person who throws them a bone or two is Wilder.

As you say owners want to put their own message out without clickbait spin local press and some national press would put on it. The interview was very Americanised and only informative to us towards the end but people have been banging on for weeks for something and this is it. I was actually surprised the legal issues were raised at all considering how brief their comments have been regarding this and how little they can discuss due to legal reasons. I thought the podcast would skip past it completely.

Regarding the legal stuff, I think they did discover a few skeletons that were not disclosed at takeover, that chimes with PA's eagerness to sell the club to any person who got in touch with him. If the American's genuinely feel like they got ripped off then why should they cough up the rest of the money? Don't forget PA walked off with Dozy's cash knowing full well he wasn't going to get the club.

It could be they are talking total bollocks and we get the book and the shelving thrown at us but we can only go on what's been said.

 

[AdamSufc1997]

Probably not the thread for anti-Wilder talk….but, this is a huge problem I’ve talking about for a while.

7. Rosen did not realise the scale of CW's involvement in all aspects of the Club when he dismissed him. One reason for bringing him back.

The great SUFC reset is needed.

This 100%. Worrying thing is they think wilder is the solution. They just had to have a proper structure and plan in place not wilder or nothing. Heard they invested in data analysis? Looks like we haven't used that the past year...

 

[Champagneblade]

Nail on the head for me that.

All the talk from the local press for the pigs was about points deductions being unfair and harming the fans.

All the talk from the local press about our situation (no matter what the actual rights and wrongs are) is about "ooh there could be points deductions for United!".

Why are they not basing the reporting on an outlook of being on the clubs/fans side that no deductions should take place because it's a non footballing matter, like they did for the pigs more obvious rule breaches. They are just stirring the pot the other way.

When you think, they got no points deduction for only paying 1/4 of what was owed to the minority of who were owed after a lengthy delay. We paid everyone what they were owed but late, and lost 2 points for it.

Now who out of those two should have lost points? And before they would jump in with the 18 points comment, admin has always been non-negotiable and fully understood. They had plenty of chances with the late wages.

So none of these represented a punishment for late AND non-payment of 75% for the minority and 0% for the majority.

 

[Shawy24]

It always was (to them and their mates) a low risk quick flip for profit. Shows all the business acumen of a Baboon to jump into something they know nothing about, advised by a poker player playing the percentages hoping to be CEO, with no foresight of what to do if it went TU.

I’m also staggered by the admitted incredible naivety shown in purchasing and then “running” the club. I’ve been told enough times on here that they’re incredibly successful business people, but on that showing God knows how. Doesn’t give me much confidence in them going forward.

I note he really doesn’t or can’t explain the “restructuring” properly. If they get away with it without action by the regulators or courts then GLTTL.

The only “good” thing I took away from that, was that I believe he now knows the financial realities of the business and that he’s holding a loss making money pit. We’ll tread water for a couple of years, stave off the litigation and relegation and hope for a miracle from Wilder or a Fairy Godfather from Ohio. But at least we’ll still be in business.

Back to the McCabe austerity years. Ah well it was good whilst it lasted.

 

[Bladesman]

 

[Eric_Brooks]

Owner on Gus: Wanted a longer contract and bigger wage than we could afford, we offered on our budget, he rejected.

That kinda contradicts what Chris said in the presser, or should we say true but not the whole truth. Chris said he wanted to go, but the owner said he wanted more money and contract length. So in a way yes he wanted to leave only because we couldn't match his demands.

Course, is the owner telling the truth...

Csnt both be true?

 

[FriethBlade]

Some good revisionism on here as if the likes of McCabe always got a good grilling by Radio Sheffield or The Star in the past. McCabe always put out his narrative, usually interviewed by someone he was pally with at RS or The Star and rarely got any tough questions thrown at him. Especially during the period when we were sinking like a stone towards League 1 while he kept running off to Belgium when the going was getting tough.

PA ditched them because the local press favoured their mate Kevin. So he stuck to national press and Blades youtubers.

It's quite telling that our new owners despite not being here that long have also kicked the local press to the curb and the only person who throws them a bone or two is Wilder.

As you say owners want to put their own message out without clickbait spin local press and some national press would put on it. The interview was very Americanised and only informative to us towards the end but people have been banging on for weeks for something and this is it. I was actually surprised the legal issues were raised at all considering how brief their comments have been regarding this and how little they can discuss due to legal reasons. I thought the podcast would skip past it completely.

Regarding the legal stuff, I think they did discover a few skeletons that were not disclosed at takeover, that chimes with PA's eagerness to sell the club to any person who got in touch with him. If the American's genuinely feel like they got ripped off then why should they cough up the rest of the money? Don't forget PA walked off with Dozy's cash knowing full well he wasn't going to get the club.

It could be they are talking total bollocks and we get the book and the shelving thrown at us but we can only go on what's been said.

Bladesman I agree re the legals. If we were to rule out them just pulling a fast one then I suspect they have found 'stuff' since they came in that they think wasnt disclosed (or was 'misrepresented' ) in the share purchase agreement. Withholding the final payment may be a way of trying to renegotiate the final price to reflect this and im guessing could take months to go through courts.

 

[Bladesman]

Bladesman I agree re the legals. If we were to rule out them just pulling a fast one then I suspect they have found 'stuff' since they came in that they think wasnt disclosed (or was 'misrepresented' ) in the share purchase agreement. Withholding the final payment may be a way of trying to renegotiate the final price to reflect this and im guessing could take months to go through courts.

I think they know they owe him something still but nothing like the final balance that's owed. Also, if they were trying to pull a fast one then why bother to offer PA equity and obviously make other attempts to negotiate.

That said that it is what Rosen is telling us but PA obviously says otherwise.

 

[FriethBlade]

I think they know they owe him something still but nothing like the final balance that's owed. Also, if they were trying to pull a fast one then why bother to offer PA equity and obviously make other attempts to negotiate.

That said that it is what Rosen is telling us but PA obviously says otherwise.

His lawyers will have said dont back down. So it will end uo in court no doubt with the winners being....the lawyers!

 

[Bladesman]

His lawyers will have said dont back down. So it will end uo in court no doubt with the winners being....the lawyers!

Yeah regardless of who you believe, I do think the legal route is messy and expensive and should have been avoided by both parties. Despite American's loving to litigate most of the things they do in business.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

Virtually every post on here slating the video is saying the things the same posters have said before.
Seems a complete lack of listening or understanding about the financial position of all non-parachute clubs in the league.

Also, I wonder how many of these know-it-alls would sink £100m into their club if they win Euro millions??

 

[PrestwichBlade]

Fair, but it doesn't answer the point being made does it? I'm quite sure they've extended the offer for an interview, but like the previous incumbent, it's not been taken up - Danny fails to respond to the "why not"

 

[Razor_Blade]

What if the person who sold you teh car deliberately mis represented the car ?

That would be grounds for a refund no .........

The manta in business is "buyer beware"

That's why they had a period of exclusivity to do "due diligence". They should be reviewing their own princesses and legal team.

If you are implying they were deceived somehow or that things were deliberately hidden or covered up then they would have taken legal recourse against the prince by now.

 

[Bladesman]

 

[FATTYFOULKE]

I’m just pleased they explained promotion and relegation to me.

 

[Bartleby]

He hasn't done what people wanted. Yes, he spoke but simply speaking isn't enough. He didn't answer any of the main questions that our fans want answering.

The platform wasn't the problem. It's the fact that he was spoon-fed easy questions by a friend. He'll have known the questions in advance and he won't have permitted any uncomfortable ones.

We are still none the wiser on whether he agrees that PA is still owed 35 million and if so, whether they intend to honour their debt. Why, if this 35 million has gone into strengthening the team, are we weaker than in May? What's going on with the Delaware court case? No need to go into details but how would an unfavorable verdict for the owners affect the club? What is our recruitment plan? Surely relying on loans is not sustainable. And how can he be so sure that we are not in line for a points deduction when other, more qualified people think that it is a possibility?

Says it's episode 1 so presumably more to come. Hard to think what they will fill it with on the next one without giving us at least something of a bit more value, but you never know with these chairmen types.

 

[Bladesman]

Says it's episode 1 so presumably more to come. Hard to think what they will fill it with on the next one without giving us at least something of a bit more value, but you never know with these chairmen types.

Helmy?

 

[Bartleby]

Helmy?

ah yeah, never thought of that. Might just be more of the same then.

 

[VictoryBlade]

I think the weird bit is more to with the fact that Giddings and Hall have posted the same tweet as if being their own

Because its scripted nonsense, as usual!

 

[FH Team]

Because its scripted nonsense, as usual!

A quick reminder, Andy did not tweet this. That is his former account that was hacked. For some reason, the person or people now in control of that account are copying and pasting tweets from other journalists.

 

[FulwoodBlades]

My takeaway from the interview is that our budget is £34m (85% of £40m income) . In addition, under the new EFL rules, a further £33m is available in any three-year period (with a maximum of £15m payable to the club by the owners in any one year). The budget therefore is a minimum of £34m this year or if they think this is the best year to push for promotion, it could be up to £49m.

They also recognise that the “budget” is the cornerstone of success. The owner during the interview pointed out ”the very strong correlation” between final league position and the size of the budget (presumably this means that there is at least a 95% confidence interval given the language he used and his formal leanings towards data analysis as an individual) .

However, it’s important under the EFL spending rules to not confuse budget available to Chris wilder and the amount he has available for spending on players. Chris gets a budget but he has significant overhead and recurrent costs as well as major support staff costs. For example, we’ve seen the value of boosting medical staff costs in recent years to stem the number of first team player injuries and recovery times. We also all know the value of spending major amounts on our academy to upgrade it. Even things like club travel costs for players and support staff to away matches will cost circa 1% of the total budget .

So the owner discusses budgets in the round. Player budgets (and the small subset of that in transfer fees) is one component of the budget Chris manages and there are many competing calls on his budget where the opportunity costs of not spending are far greater.

Chris has to make these decisions (eg. Whether to spend on developing the academy and medical team, or to pay the wages and/or sign on fee for another striker.

I found the interview a great insight into the difficult decisions confronting a manager and how us fans are mostly only interested in him spending on marquee items like high fee player transfers, and often forget that this can mean the continuing lack of development of the academy (and therefore future income stream), scouting team (to improve the quality and success of our new signings), medical team (to
Reduce injuries and time spent recovering), marketing team (to increase revenue), etc

 

[Kenilworth]

My takeaway from the interview is that our budget is £34m (85% of £40m income) . In addition, under the new EFL rules, a further £33m is available in any three-year period (with a maximum of £15m payable to the club by the owners in any one year). The budget therefore is a minimum of £34m this year or if they think this is the best year to push for promotion, it could be up to £49m.

They also recognise that the “budget” is the cornerstone of success. The owner during the interview pointed out ”the very strong correlation” between final league position and the size of the budget (presumably this means that there is at least a 95% confidence interval given the language he used and his formal leanings towards data analysis as an individual) .

However, it’s important under the EFL spending rules to not confuse budget available to Chris wilder and the amount he has available for spending on players. Chris gets a budget but he has significant overhead and recurrent costs as well as major support staff costs. For example, we’ve seen the value of boosting medical staff costs in recent years to stem the number of first team player injuries and recovery times. We also all know the value of spending major amounts on our academy to upgrade it. Even things like club travel costs for players and support staff to away matches will cost circa 1% of the total budget .

So the owner discusses budgets in the round. Player budgets (and the small subset of that in transfer fees) is one component of the budget Chris manages and there are many competing calls on his budget where the opportunity costs of not spending are far greater.

Chris has to make these decisions (eg. Whether to spend on developing the academy and medical team, or to pay the wages and/or sign on fee for another striker.

I found the interview a great insight into the difficult decisions confronting a manager and how us fans are mostly only interested in him spending on marquee items like high fee player transfers, and often forget that this can mean the continuing lack of development of the academy (and therefore future income stream), scouting team (to improve the quality and success of our new signings), medical team (to
Reduce injuries and time spent recovering), marketing team (to increase revenue), etc

My understanding, and I may be wrong, is that investment in the academy and medical staff is not counted in the new rules.

Whether a club can reinvest all of what it makes in the transfer market by selling players is also a grey area for me. Thee may be different rules for Champ and L1 but Wendy have had an issue on this one.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

My understanding, and I may be wrong, is that investment in the academy and medical staff is not counted in the new rules.

Whether a club can reinvest all of what it makes in the transfer market by selling players is also a grey area for me. Thee may be different rules for Champ and L1 but Wendy have had an issue on this one.

The academy is definitely allowed investment not covered by SCR limits. The ground and fan faculty also excluded.
I don't know if medical staff are are aren't.

I think player sales profits is just Revenue that goes in the pot with ticket sales and TV money.