McCabe

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Would you accept McCabe as sole owner if it meant similar/reduced budget and player sales

  • Total voters
    155
Esablade

Esablade

Never knowingly wrong.
Joined
Jan 5, 2014
Messages
17,842
Reaction score
10,854
Probably a question for Chris more than owt but not sure he looks on here... :)

Anyhow, we're in the dark re: what's going on behind the scenes but obviously there is much speculation...a lot of which is centred on McCabe not wanting Princey to take sole ownership...so with this in mind:

'Would fans accept McCabe as sole owner even if it meant we had to sell players to get new ones in and our budget remained the same, maybe even dropped a bit for next season?

McCabe's a Blade and we ain't never had 'a barrel of money' so with the apparent uncertainty over selling to Princey, is toughing it out with McCabe in the hope he has/will get new investment the way to go?
 



With Prince off the scene and McCabe back in driving seat he is in a better position to bring on board some Asian investment as another co ownership scenario. But ensure any new partner buys in with enough dosh to make a difference in summer player dealing, not a discount £1 with jam tomorrow which doesn't materialise.
 
Bucksblade said:
With Prince off the scene and McCabe back in driving seat he is in a better position to bring on board some Asian investment as another co ownership scenario. But ensure any new partner buys in with enough dosh to make a difference in summer player dealing, not a discount £1 with jam tomorrow which doesn't materialise.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure that he has significant investment lined up.

I just hope that agrees terms with the Prince sooner rather than later.
 
Blade58 said:
Are you basing that investment on anything M, or just guessing?
Click to expand...
I have heard a couple of whispers going back to last year and it's the only scenario that makes sense to me with McCabe having effectively instigated the buy out option.

So I'm not claiming to be ITK and I may be miles wide of the mark but in business most things happen for a reason and to me this is the most logical scenario.
 
McCabe won't go it alone in the long term - that is precisely the reason why HRH was brought on board in the first place and most probably the reason for the recent ownership related moves/rumours. Apparently investment from China is still expected to be the most likely outcome (coming from a close associate of McCabe's).

It is interesting how a lot of people's view of McCabe has drastically changed over recent months - from demanding he sells up and leaves the club to begging him to take sole ownership again. Perhaps it just shows how little people know or understand around business ownership and particularly ownership of a football club.
 
Last edited:
Mouth of the South said:
It is interesting how a lot of people's view of McCabe has drastically changed over recent months
Click to expand...

Do you think attitudes to McCabe have changed that much or do people simply view this as yet another 'fuck up' so let's get on with it?
 
Its a loaded question as I doubt either of the two owners are intending to go it alone as it wouldn't make sense. So both will probably believe they have investment lined up. For those voting yes to the OP you do understand you are voting for Chris Wilder to leave SUFC.
 
Esablade said:
Do you think attitudes to McCabe have changed that much or do people simply view this as yet another 'fuck up' so let's get on with it?
Click to expand...

I certainly think that the performance of the team since CW took over has helped. Let's see what transpires over the coming months in terms of ownership and investment but to answer your question, yes, I do think a lot of people have changed their tune regarding McCabe and that frustration regarding budget now seems to be directed more (rightly or wrongly) towards HRH.
 
McCabe doesnt' have the dosh to fund even average investment by championship standards. He needs help, Prince bought in and hasnt delivered either through lack of funds or interest. McCabe has invoked some kind of buy out clause to force his hand.

I suspect the Prince is stalling as he doesn't really want to buy (especially as the training ground and other assets will be near worthless to him ) but if we were to fluke promotion he's walking away from a club that will be worth a lot more in 3 months time.

In the meantime McCabe has some other investors lined up. What I'm not sure about is who wants to take on the potentially very expensive role.of funding a promotion push without having full control. If there is someone that is our perfect scenario...enough money to compete for top level players but with a Blades hand on the rudder.
 
Mouth of the South said:
I certainly think that the performance of the team since CW took over has helped. Let's see what transpires over the coming months in terms of ownership and investment but to answer your question, yes, I do think a lot of people have changed their tune regarding McCabe and that frustration regarding budget now seems to be directed more (rightly or wrongly) towards HRH.
Click to expand...


IMO:

I'd say whatever people think of McCabe's tenure here the vast majority would back him if he came out and said 'I don't want the club to go to Princey' (or whoever)
Even if that meant a return to selling players to fund etc...I'd class it as yet another 'fuck up/bad luck'..but hey! ;)

Not sure how others feel.
Hence the OP :)
 
Maidenhead said:
I have heard a couple of whispers going back to last year and it's the only scenario that makes sense to me with McCabe having effectively instigated the buy out option.

So I'm not claiming to be ITK and I may be miles wide of the mark but in business most things happen for a reason and to me this is the most logical scenario.
Click to expand...

Didn't the Prince instigate the buyout clause?
 
Esablade said:
Probably a question for Chris more than owt but not sure he looks on here... :)

Anyhow, we're in the dark re: what's going on behind the scenes but obviously there is much speculation...a lot of which is centred on McCabe not wanting Princey to take sole ownership...so with this in mind:

'Would fans accept McCabe as sole owner even if it meant we had to sell players to get new ones in and our budget remained the same, maybe even dropped a bit for next season?

McCabe's a Blade and we ain't never had 'a barrel of money' so with the apparent uncertainty over selling to Princey, is toughing it out with McCabe in the hope he has/will get new investment the way to go?
Click to expand...
Good question and yes, i think for now we're being well run and the owners don't interfere too much in the playing side, budgets are set and are seemingly being realised (ie we're not being promised things which aren't delivered).

To be honest until the issue came up with the ownership challenge, i was very happy with how things appear to be run at the club
 



Addison said:
Its a loaded question as I doubt either of the two owners are intending to go it alone as it wouldn't make sense. So both will probably believe they have investment lined up. For those voting yes to the OP you do understand you are voting for Chris Wilder to leave SUFC.
Click to expand...

It is loaded..and I gave your reply a like but I don't necessarily agree with the final sentence...though it is a possibility of course. :)
 
Wilder as much as he loves United and the fans love him and the owner loves him ('he's a lucky boy') is an employee so doesn't really have a say, he does his job and gets paid and he has a contract. He has never given any indication of wanting anything other than just wanting to get on with his job and that's where the 'wanting to know which direction the club is going' comes in (I'd suggest), getting on with the job is dependent on finances for transfer fees and wages; if it's £2 or £20 million per window he needs to know because investigating players to make sure they are right takes time and we can't go from looking at Port Vales reserves to signing Balotelli (I've given an extreme and obvious example to show how it could go wrong) just because we have the money.
 
Esablade said:
It is loaded..and I gave your reply a like but I don't necessarily agree with the final sentence...though it is a possibility of course. :)
Click to expand...

I'm assuming you meant McCabe sole owner with no new investment/partner as you said player sales and reduced budget. If the Princes investment is lost then player sales will have to make up the shortfall. CW wouldn't get a similar budget it would have to be much lower. Would CW stay if we sold Brooks, Fleck and Coutts to fund this with little in the way of improved budget to bring players of similar quality in. I doubt it very much as he's an ambitious man.
 
Addison said:
I'm assuming you meant McCabe sole owner with no new investment/partner as you said player sales and reduced budget. If the Princes investment is lost then player sales will have to make up the shortfall. CW wouldn't get a similar budget it would have to be much lower. Would CW stay if we sold Brooks, Fleck and Coutts to fund this with little in the way of improved budget to bring players of similar quality in. I doubt it very much as he's an ambitious man.
Click to expand...

Yep, thats what I meant.
 
SwissBlade said:
Nobody knows. Perhaps McCabe called his bluff and suggested that he bought him out
Click to expand...

But the official statement said as such, that the HRH had instigated the clause to purchase the club and also the freehold, so I'd say it confirms that the prince instigated it, indicating he has the funds to purchase?
 
JayGreen17 said:
But the official statement said as such, that the HRH had instigated the clause to purchase the club and also the freehold, so I'd say it confirms that the prince instigated it, indicating he has the funds to purchase?
Click to expand...

You're right. In order to buy McCabe out, the prince would know he would have to activate the clause. So yes, the prince activated the clause.

However, we do not know how that came about in the first place. Was it the prince instigating it or McCabe telling him to buy him out
 
KM is fed up with PA's lack of investment
KM suggests to PA that he buy him out and PA agrees if the price for the remaining 50% is acceptable
KM & PA agree a price for the shares
KM & PA both know that as part of the original agreement, if PA owns more than 70% of the shares then he has a specified time period to buy all of the assets KM currently owns
KM knows that PA can't afford this and therefore will pull out of the deal, allowing KM to buy PA's 50% and the problem (PA) goes away
PA decides to be clever and proposes that he will by KM's 50% through a member of PA's family, thus ensuring that the 70% clause can't be invoked
KM unsurprisingly objects to this as PA would have control of the club and have access to all the assets of KM for a relative pittance (low annual rent)
KA & PA now involved in legal arguments
 



I thought the opinion on here used to be that McCabe wasn't willing to match the increased investment that the Prince wanted to put in?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
  • Poll Poll
Are we there yet dad? What are you thinking at the moment? MANAGER POLL 1
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Millhousesblade1889
Millhousesblade1889
Shadota
  • Poll Poll
What would be your preferred tactical setup for next season?
Replies
14
Views
609
jt64
jt64
LBA_Blade
  • Poll Poll
Relegation to the Championship
2
Replies
47
Views
3K
71Blade
71Blade
Revolution
  • Poll Poll
Do you want Wednesday to go into liquidation and (presumably) start again as a Phoenix club?
4 5 6
Replies
159
Views
10K
KMC-1889
KMC-1889
Rodley
  • Poll Poll
VAR Is there Asbestos in Patrick Bamford’s Artex bathroom wall?
Replies
27
Views
2K
Edgar Allan Poo
Edgar Allan Poo

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom