Incoming? Didier Lakmel-Ze

[Harrisblade]

No evidence that this is the case is there ?

When has that ever made a difference?

 

[Aston max]

Sheffield United here, does he have a criminal record? Preferably something really bad like beating women? If so, we're in.

Let's not sign him eh?!

What about kidney punching oap disabled people in wheelchairs

 

[HeySethUTB]

Coulibaly is one player. That isn’t anywhere near the acid test to see if the princes MCO will be successful, and think that the model will be good for us in the long run is wide and short of the mark. (A bit like India’s bowling display today).

The MCO model is currently on evidence aligned closely with a feeder club model Snowflake. My reactionary statement PurpleRain isn’t necessarily linked to the rumour, my thoughts on the way the clubs are being run are more informed.

Evidence - The MCO certainly doesn’t match the city group model that aims to invest heavily in different footballing markets to dominate which in-turn takes huge proportions of market share (media, league and cup winnings) whilst doing this they share scouting knowledge. It is not the same as the Red Bull model which aims to centralise networks I.e. philosophy, coaching practices, scouting networks, frequently trading in house, staff and equal development of club infrastructure to improve efficiency and then develop players and clubs, earning money from the success (RB Leipzig) and player sales (Erling Haaland).

The feeder club model doesn’t do much of the above, their is still a high frequency of trading between clubs, but there’re no centralised styles of play, scouting isn’t shared widely (because each team plays differently, targets differ), player development relies heavily on loans to clubs within the MCO that have facilities/opportunities to improve players, and investment is low. Because of this the feeder club model is regarded as fluid, in the sense that, if one team suddenly drops multiple divisions the pieces are jiggled around to benefit the aim of player development so profits can continue to be made. Decisions will also be made on which club has the best chance to improve brand identity and reach via competition status. An argument could be made (not by me) that Beerschot play in smaller less competitive league in which the chances of European qualification is higher, and would take less investment than getting SUFC into the top 6/7 of the premier league currently (Caveats to this though) as Grizzly blade suggested. In this scenario, any available resources large or small may be diverted via various revenue streams to benefit that club *see this player rumour, if true. And also the jostling of No1 spot between Watford and Udinese owned by the Pozzo family.

So, all in all, The United World Group have invested in player development by building a new academy building in France, the United World Group are yet to share scouting knowledge extensively many on here agree the bang for our book was severely restricted due to poor recruitment networks, each team within the UWG plays a different style of football, we have already seen evidence of developing players using a loan strategy that offers opportunities to play at beerschot and investment in all clubs has been relatively low. Where in the above do we benefit?

In summary I believe the MCO that the prince is currently using is a feeder club model, he’s been on record saying no one club will be more important than the other. What worries me is when the Pozzo family utilised and became successful using the feeder club model, they did using an extensive scouting network to find cheap talent and they invested in infrastructure to help develop players to be sold at a profit at all clubs. The downturn was realised when the scouting network became saturated with other clubs that caught wind, to the point that he had to pull funds and sell clubs to stay profitable. Sheffield United are now a club within the group, that haven’t got the most up to date facilities to develop players (There’re in France) we don’t have the opportunities to offer foreign players because of Brexit and divisional status (Thats in Belgium) but we do have a current crop of decent youngsters to send out on loan and hold the bargaining chip that allows other clubs in the network to circumnavigate the rules.

 

[HeySethUTB]

 

[Snowflake]

When has that ever made a difference?

Mr Macabe may disagree with you !

 

[nickwr37]

Coulibaly is one player. That isn’t anywhere near the acid test to see if the princes MCO will be successful, and think that the model will be good for us in the long run is wide and short of the mark. (A bit like India’s bowling display today).

The MCO model is currently on evidence aligned closely with a feeder club model Snowflake. My reactionary statement PurpleRain isn’t necessarily linked to the rumour, my thoughts on the way the clubs are being run are more informed.

Evidence - The MCO certainly doesn’t match the city group model that aims to invest heavily in different footballing markets to dominate which in-turn takes huge proportions of market share (media, league and cup winnings) whilst doing this they share scouting knowledge. It is not the same as the Red Bull model which aims to centralise networks I.e. philosophy, coaching practices, scouting networks, frequently trading in house, staff and equal development of club infrastructure to improve efficiency and then develop players and clubs, earning money from the success (RB Leipzig) and player sales (Erling Haaland).

The feeder club model doesn’t do much of the above, their is still a high frequency of trading between clubs, but there’re no centralised styles of play, scouting isn’t shared widely (because each team plays differently, targets differ), player development relies heavily on loans to clubs within the MCO that have facilities/opportunities to improve players, and investment is low. Because of this the feeder club model is regarded as fluid, in the sense that, if one team suddenly drops multiple divisions the pieces are jiggled around to benefit the aim of player development so profits can continue to be made. Decisions will also be made on which club has the best chance to improve brand identity and reach via competition status. An argument could be made (not by me) that Beerschot play in smaller less competitive league in which the chances of European qualification is higher, and would take less investment than getting SUFC into the top 6/7 of the premier league currently (Caveats to this though) as Grizzly blade suggested. In this scenario, any available resources large or small may be diverted via various revenue streams to benefit that club *see this player rumour, if true. And also the jostling of No1 spot between Watford and Udinese owned by the Pozzo family.

So, all in all, The United World Group have invested in player development by building a new academy building in France, the United World Group are yet to share scouting knowledge extensively many on here agree the bang for our book was severely restricted due to poor recruitment networks, each team within the UWG plays a different style of football, we have already seen evidence of developing players using a loan strategy that offers opportunities to play at beerschot and investment in all clubs has been relatively low. Where in the above do we benefit?

In summary I believe the MCO that the prince is currently using is a feeder club model, he’s been on record saying no one club will be more important than the other. What worries me is when the Pozzo family utilised and became successful using the feeder club model, they did using an extensive scouting network to find cheap talent and they invested in infrastructure to help develop players to be sold at a profit at all clubs. The downturn was realised when the scouting network became saturated with other clubs that caught wind, to the point that he had to pull funds and sell clubs to stay profitable. Sheffield United are now a club within the group, that haven’t got the most up to date facilities to develop players (There’re in France) we don’t have the opportunities to offer foreign players because of Brexit and divisional status (Thats in Belgium) but we do have a current crop of decent youngsters to send out on loan and hold the bargaining chip that allows other clubs in the network to circumnavigate the rules.

MO I get. Modus Operandi. What is MCO? Modus Current Operandi?

 

[HeySethUTB]

Multi Club Ownership Sorry. Could’nt be arsed to keep spelling it.

 

[bertieblade]

Not normally rude. But the prince can fuck right off he’s using us as a feeder club when we’re desperate for signings. Fuck right off.

You are rude, Ill informed ; but in your defence quite funny

 

[HeySethUTB]

Cheers bertieblade did I mention “he can fuck right off”

 

[Tony_Kaufman]

Sounds to me like Beerschot want the player and not Sheffield United but his current club won't sell to rivals. So this is a backhand way of giving Beerschot what he wants.

I imagine Sheffield United will pay the transfer fee then loan him to Beerschot for a fee, which coincidentally will be the same cost as the transfer fee.

Dodgy backhand transfer but nothing that is against the rules.

 

[Kev Gee]

What makes people think that the club will want to do business with us since we are associated with Beerschot?