Ownership Wrangle

[Fraggle Blade]

Thanks. Was Chris Wilder at that meeting? I thought I read somewhere that he was.

No, he wasn't at the meeting, it was on a Saturday just before the Forest match, so he'd be sorting the team out.

From memory it was basically Kevin McCabe, his sons, the McCabes solicitor, John Garrett and a few other club officials helping out.

 

[metalblade]

We fans and Kev could do this. Stops potential future asset strippers as they can't really build flats when loads of fans collectively own the freehold of the pitch.
http://www.chelseafc.com/fans/chelsea-pitch-owners.html

A good few years too late, we have already been asset stripped by someone wanting to build flats behind the Pukka Pie corner

 

[Sean Thornton]

A good few years too late, we have already been asset stripped by someone wanting to build flats behind the Pukka Pie corner

You can't be aset stripped by a bloke who owns the assets anyway. This has been explained to you before.

 

[Sean Thornton]

What did McCabe actually say about the budget for next season at the Shareholders meeting?
Most people, including Chris Wilder, seem to be saying that he doesn't know what his budget for next season will be.
If it's already been agreed between the two owners, why is he still publically questioning what's going on?

The budget could have been provisionally set before the proposed buyout. It could quite easily have gone out of the window now, so both statements could be true.

 

[blade too long]

What will Reg Brearly do now

 

[Ainsley Harriott]

What ownership wrangle? Is Woolhouse still world hide and seek champion?

I could swear blind someone on site knows him. They told me a few months back. A sparky I think it was. He was a Blade n all.

Can’t offer much more than that though.

Waste of a post really.

 

[The Crab]

What will Reg Brearly do now

Go back to his old job as landlord of The Woolpack*

*that may have been Amos

 

[Cerberus Blade]

A way forward for next season without the Ownership Wrangle being resolved:-

1) Both owners agree to put the same amount into the club as they did last season
2) Confirm to Chris Wilder that his wages budget for next season is £x M based on the amount they put in (probably similar to this season).
3) Allow Wilder to spend any money he brings in through sales (e.g. Brooks) on new players (wages and/or transfer fees)


Wilder would know exactly where he stands and that he has scope to "wheel and deal" and improve the squad.
The joint owners have another year in which to sort out who owns the club going forward.
Any funding they put in for this season could simply be included in the final deal, so that neither owner loses out.

Would that keep everybody happy? Any flaws in the plan?

Yes just one major flaw. The money they both put in last year wasn’t sufficient. To rely on top up funds from player sales forces Wilder down the route of selling his best players, at a time when he should be looking to keep his better players and add more of similar or better ability.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Yes just one major flaw. The money they both put in last year wasn’t sufficient. To rely on top up funds from player sales forces Wilder down the route of selling his best players, at a time when he should be looking to keep his better players and add more of similar or better ability.

If the aim was not to get relegated and finish comfortably mid table with a shout of the play-offs then I'd say the budget was spot on. Only some of the fans expected us to get back to back promotions.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Yes just one major flaw. The money they both put in last year wasn’t sufficient. To rely on top up funds from player sales forces Wilder down the route of selling his best players, at a time when he should be looking to keep his better players and add more of similar or better ability.

Is he leaving before or after selling our best players?

 

[blade too long]

Yes just one major flaw. The money they both put in last year wasn’t sufficient. To rely on top up funds from player sales forces Wilder down the route of selling his best players, at a time when he should be looking to keep his better players and add more of similar or better ability.

Was always going to be a smaller budget than Boro villa Fulham wolves and a few others as we don't have over flush investors .We all know what we have as investors would never come close to what some can throw at it . Just saying we should have put another 10 m in is a throw away line . If you ain't got another 10m to put in .i want a new jag 4x4 but am in a similar position

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Yes just one major flaw. The money they both put in last year wasn’t sufficient. To rely on top up funds from player sales forces Wilder down the route of selling his best players, at a time when he should be looking to keep his better players and add more of similar or better ability.

Wilder says it’s not about the level of funding, it’s about the uncertainty.

If his choice was between selling Brooks for £20M and spending it on new players or him leaving (and they probably sell Brooks anyway), I think Wilder would be happy to take up the “wheel and deal” option.

 

[ourbob]

Enjoy your summer and be ready to support Wilder's red & white army.

Enough said.

 

[Isar]

Second rule of the forum is. Even if you see a similar thread, start another just in case...

3rd rule if the forum, if you are really bored start many more threads on the same topic.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Was always going to be a smaller budget than Boro villa Fulham wolves and a few others as we don't have over flush investors .We all know what we have as investors would never come close to what some can throw at it . Just saying we should have put another 10 m in is a throw away line . If you ain't got another 10m to put in .i want a new jag 4x4 but am in a similar position

Room in the back for a shag

 

[Sean Thornton]

Room in the back for a shag

There is in the Range Rover Eclipse his neighbours got......

 

[blade too long]

There is in the Range Rover Eclipse his neighbours got......

Its just a dealer group name given to some black ones at the time of the Eclipse
that had climate control and other bits hrown in

Ive explained this before

 

[Sean Thornton]

Its just a dealer group name given to some black ones at the time of the Eclipse
that had climate control and other bits hrown in

Ive explained this before

Yes but you made it all up. I checked

 

[Pinchy]

i want a new jag 4x4 but am in a similar position

The Jaguar is a sleek, elegant cat of a motor car. It purrs but it can growl on demand. It was never intended to be a 4x4.



Inferior cars are available...

 

[blade too long]

Yes but you made it all up. I checked

hes changed it now for an overfinch convertible

 

[blade too long]

The Jaguar is a sleek, elegant cat of a motor car. It purrs but it can growl on demand. It was never intended to be a 4x4.

View attachment 39341

Inferior cars are available...

the f pace looks sleek

 

[GrayBlade]

The Jaguar is a sleek, elegant cat of a motor car. It purrs but it can growl on demand. It was never intended to be a 4x4.

View attachment 39341

Inferior cars are available...

Actually I’ve just bought a Jaguar XF saloon with AWD so you can have your purr and eat it.

 

[Pinchy]

Actually I’ve just bought a Jaguar XF saloon with AWD so you can have your purr and eat it.

Very good. I don’t doubt you are very happy with your choice.

 

[GrayBlade]

Very good. I don’t doubt you are very happy with your choice.

It’s a lovely car and drives like a dream. All I would say is that it’s become very much like a lot of other cars these days, look at it from the side and you’d be hard pushed to tell it from half a dozen other models. I’m a bit of a Jag traditionalist TBH, this is my 4th and the one it replaced was a 15 year old XJ and I thought it looked beautiful, far better than the newer models. Then some twat pranged it in the Northern General car park last month and drove off and the upshot was it’d have cost me more to repair it than it was worth.

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Wilder says it’s not about the level of funding, it’s about the uncertainty.

If his choice was between selling Brooks for £20M and spending it on new players or him leaving (and they probably sell Brooks anyway), I think Wilder would be happy to take up the “wheel and deal” option.

I agree. That’s part of the problem. There’s no guarantee he would see all or even most of that money.

The business model for the club since 2005 has been to fund the club through profits made on player sales.

 

[Sean Thornton]

I agree. That’s part of the problem. There’s no guarantee he would see all or even most of that money.

The business model for the club since 2005 has been to fund the club through profits made on player sales.

And that's not worked otherwise millions extra wouldn't have needed to be thrown at it, so l doubt it's ever been the business model.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Is he leaving before or after selling our best players?

Leave, then buy them.