Blade58
Once a Blade, always a daft ****
I think the investment remains. HRH still co owner, just not at the helm for the time being
Interview with HRH
- Thread starter cooperblade
- Start date
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
I think the investment remains. HRH still co owner, just not at the helm for the time being
Blade58
Once a Blade, always a daft ****
zablade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 4,228
- Reaction score
- 8,001
However much it is spun I think in the long run it's bad news.
Blade58
Once a Blade, always a daft ****
why za?
This was factored in when he agreed to come. The structure is in place and remains. The investment is in place and remains
Jim Phipps becomes co chairman and I expect HRH will be briefed as and when the need arises. I don't see too much changing in the short to medium and term and long term like I say I think he will be back as he says he will only be away for a time
To me that reads like he's here for the long term
GRUMPY BLADE
Well-Known Member
Does he get a 50p refund?
- Admin
- #67
Its hardly spin, the Prince's son and Selahattin Baki are still on the board and Jim Phipps will be "stepping up" to co-chairman.
Its not like the Prince has (or should have needed to) sit in an office on Cherry Street and will now be packing up his desk and saying goodbyes.
The money and commitment remains as long as his representatives do.
I can't imagine they've been spending the time and money on travelling on club related business to suddenly bin it all off without at least seeing their initial aims through.
zablade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2013
- Messages
- 4,228
- Reaction score
- 8,001
I don't think he's going to bin it but I suspect he will have less time to indulge in his hobbies, also as much as i like Jim I worry about him being on the board alongside the McCabes, the rumours I picked up on at the end of last season Is that some people at the club tolerated rather than respected Jim, can see there being a clash of egos there
- Admin
- #69
I'm sure that would be a potential pitfall in *any* partnership as such.
I know what you mean regarding less time, but to know the effect, we'd have to quantify the hours he spent on the club and what he left to his representives to do. Its not like his sole interest has been or is able to be United.
Much of the time people have spent criticising McCabe was during a period he was perhaps less hands on than other parts of his "reign". The figureheads aren't always the active, hands on, daily presence people sometimes assume.
JohnDenver
¡No Pasarán!
Sadly for Kevin, later in his reign, there seemed an increasing correlation between when his hands were actually on and the level of ineptitude we displayed.
bigbirdblade
Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2014
- Messages
- 657
- Reaction score
- 834
yes. That is how i understand it.
LoughboroBlade
Well-Known Member
Interview between Rob Staton and Phipps seems to echo that. Business as usual from his perspective: http://audioboo.fm/boos/2292171-int...phipps-on-his-appointment-as-co-chair-at-sufc
sheffielder
Welcome Positive Nigel
I am still struggling to see how The Prince being the new Sports Minister for Saudi Arabia could be anything but a great opportunity to us. The contacts he will have could be of even greater benefit.
yorkshirecoast
Well-Known Member
I hope you are right. I've been shitting myself worrying we will have to repay his £1 investment.
UnitedBlade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 30, 2012
- Messages
- 3,807
- Reaction score
- 3,972
He's effectively had a personal invite to be the Sports Minister by the King who is worth £12bn. OK it's his uncle so he already knows him pretty well but they take sport seriously in Saudi Arabia. I agree I can't see how this wouldn't be beneficial.
Even if he were to sell (I'm sure he won't), do you think he'd know anyone with the cash to take us on and do you think he'd put a good word in for us?
They've just opened a fabulous stadium in Saudi about a couple of months ago, named after the King.
http://whatculture.com/sport/5-incredible-looking-upcoming-world-football-stadiums.php/3
I'm told after his discussions with Kev, this is the blueprint for the Lane in coming years.
Kev Gee
Well-Known Member
Agreed on this. I cant fail to see how this wont open more doors for us.
I think its a great honour for him & im loking forward to seeing how he gets on in his new role.
Sothall_Blade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2009
- Messages
- 6,750
- Reaction score
- 8,617
It's a good job the Saudi Minister of Sport has already made his investment and the money is in the bank.
That's what enabled the club to move swiftly and decisively when the manager told them we needed 2 more players for a promotion squad.
S5Blade
Nom, Nom, Nom
You mean after Nigel decided to spend it on bringing in 10 new players? oh yeah........
Sothall_Blade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2009
- Messages
- 6,750
- Reaction score
- 8,617
10 new players in to replace the 11 players who left:-
Brayford, Maguire, Hill, Freeman, Westlake, McGinty, Whitehouse, Coady, Brandy, Taylor, Miller
Wage bill probably similar to the end of last season if not reduced by the departure of certain "Premier League" players.
At least £2.5M received in transfer fees. Maybe £0.5M spent on transfer fees = £2M transfer fee surplus.
The Prince's "game changing" investment secure in the bank. No need to sell Maguire unless it improves the team.
And yet Clough was unable to make the signings he knows are needed until we got the Maguire money.
Even them, 33 days weren't enough.
P
pommpey
Guest
Does anyone have an all-up costing on how much Cluff has spent one transfers in since he came?
Or are they all 'undiscloseds' (i.e. don't tell the fans we got this one for next to nowt) or 'frees' (i.e. we did get this one for nowt, but we can't tag them as 'undisclosed')
Smoke/mirrors.
pommpey
blader
Well-Known Member
Sorry can people please stop saying 'he brought in 10' as proof he spent money. What a load of rubbish. We had a bigger squad with a MUCH bigger budget in our first 2 seasons in league 1.that was pre-prince, so what's changed?
Firstly, we let 11 go. So all we've done is replace them. No increase in spending there.
Secondly, let's compare with other clubs. I shall use Bristol City as an example again (sorry). Agard was bought for circa £750,000. That equates to paying a 'free' player £15,000 per week. I can only assume we are not paying any of our new players anything remotely close to that. On top of this fee, clearly Agard will command high wages for this league. Again, it is more than likely he is beig paid more than any of our new recruits. So clearly we hae spent nothing close to our competitors when you just use 1 example. Other frees include: McAnuff, Henderson, Wilbraham will all be on much higher wages than any of our new players.
My final example, which is probably the best trump card is Crawley Town. They brought in FIFTEEN players in the summer. So on this logic, does that mean Crawley are the Man City of league 1? They must have spent an immense amount if their chairman allowed then to bring in 15, they must be swimming in cash!
Just accept we have no GCI and it will do everyone a favour in terms of expectation. Just take is for what we are - an average league 1 squad with an average league 1 budget. Honestly, many of you will be left much less disappointed if you come to this realisation like some of us have. The last thing I want is people turning on Clough as he hasn't had access to finds of other managers. He's doing what he can on a strict budget.
Firstly, we let 11 go. So all we've done is replace them. No increase in spending there.
Secondly, let's compare with other clubs. I shall use Bristol City as an example again (sorry). Agard was bought for circa £750,000. That equates to paying a 'free' player £15,000 per week. I can only assume we are not paying any of our new players anything remotely close to that. On top of this fee, clearly Agard will command high wages for this league. Again, it is more than likely he is beig paid more than any of our new recruits. So clearly we hae spent nothing close to our competitors when you just use 1 example. Other frees include: McAnuff, Henderson, Wilbraham will all be on much higher wages than any of our new players.
My final example, which is probably the best trump card is Crawley Town. They brought in FIFTEEN players in the summer. So on this logic, does that mean Crawley are the Man City of league 1? They must have spent an immense amount if their chairman allowed then to bring in 15, they must be swimming in cash!
Just accept we have no GCI and it will do everyone a favour in terms of expectation. Just take is for what we are - an average league 1 squad with an average league 1 budget. Honestly, many of you will be left much less disappointed if you come to this realisation like some of us have. The last thing I want is people turning on Clough as he hasn't had access to finds of other managers. He's doing what he can on a strict budget.
Bladesman
The Great Grumbleduke
So to sum up.
It was all bollocks about money being in the bank.
All we did was replace what we had with slightly cheaper players.
Bladesman
The Great Grumbleduke
I think the words "Money in the bank" are coming back to haunt us.
S5Blade
Nom, Nom, Nom
This is the problem right here..... Just because you do not know exactly how much united have spent and they have disclosed it to the fans (and rightly so) then we have spent the grand sum of fuck all. Just another stick to try and beat the club with.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
P
pommpey
Guest
Not sure what your point is here.
Do you know how much the club has spent on transfers since Clough arrived?
If not, then don't let me disturb your sleep, like ...
pommpey
S5Blade
Nom, Nom, Nom
No and neither do you?
P
pommpey
Guest
I was asking if anyone did.
No one seems to know. You'd think some sort of ballpark figure would be available to judge the value of players we have brought in.
Or ... were they all freebies?
pommpey
S5Blade
Nom, Nom, Nom
Ahh yes, sorry I must have mis-interrupted "Or are they all 'undiscloseds' (i.e. don't tell the fans we got this one for next to nowt) or 'frees' (i.e. we did get this one for nowt, but we can't tag them as 'undisclosed')" as asking a question rather than again, using it as a stick to try and beat the club with.
P
pommpey
Guest
Well, why not beat the club with the stick?
Unless you have some credible explanation for the lack of investment in the playing staff?
pommpey
Similar threads
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?