Jump to content

Abu Derby County


tinman

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Floppy Sausage said:

 There is nothing wrong with having money to spend so long as you have a manager who can spend it correctly. Maxwell, Pickering, Gadsby and Morris all had success. Morris less so, but far more than the dross under Nigel and the Americans. The problems start when the money runs out, or it is spent badly.

Back when Pickering started spending, Blackburn were doing the same. They spent wisely, we didn’t. They ended up winning the Premier League. Man City were in league 1 before the money came in, Leeds look good in the prem now, they were in league 1 due to bad money management, they are now in the prem due to good money management, same with Wolves, same with Villa, same with Brighton. The odd time you get a Burnley or a Blackpool, but without money it is very unlikely you get far in this game.

I would rather take the chance that we get money and a manager spends it well, rather than go back to the days of Phil Brown and Nigel Clough not having a pot to piss in and sitting in the bottom half of the championship for the next 10 years.

Right now Morris has to sell. He cannot put money into the club anymore, and he recently got a loan to pay running costs. He has to sell the club, and I prefer he sells to someone who can fund a promotion push than someone who cannot.

As for FFP. There is nothing stopping a club who usually get 30k crowds, from investing good money in the squad, if it is done properly. We can also still have the academy produce players, but instead of complimenting them with Colin Kazim Richards after a one and a half year search for a target man, maybe we could at least sign someone worthy of scoring more than 4 goals a season.

A lot of reasonable points in there but the key takeaway is clever use of that potential money.

If reports are to be believed, we will have a new owner who has never been involved in professional football before, allied to a new manager who will want his own players bringing in. That doesnt reassure me that the a) a high % of incoming signings will be successful or b) that the squad will start to swell in size again.

The point about Pickering is interesting as it was Cox, an established manager with a great track record here (both results & signings) who brough in Kitson, Johnson, Pembridge, Short et al. It still didnt work though & arguably was a millstone around our necks until Jim Smith came in 1995 & went down the bargain & youth route...not unlike our approach currently.

I do accept your point about Morris having to sell & that it would need to be someone with substanial funds. For me, its also as important that they have a long term strategic mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 10.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, loweman2 said:

I see no comparison being made simply a quote as old as the hills, so I share with you the context of that saying, if you dance with the devil, remember it’s he who calls the tune. So perhaps you won’t be able to stop the dance until he says so.

Or if the tune gets changed to another one that you are not so keen to keep dancing to, especially, perhaps with a different dance partner, you mightn’t be able to get away.

could be apt, then again could be a load of old tosh, bit like all that glistens isn’t always gold ? We shall see. ?‍♂️?

I am not totally up to speed with the small print of UAE Law, but I am pretty sure shirt buyers have nothing to fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ramslaar said:

The interesting thing is it's not just the moneys ran out it's just there is no way of getting it in to the club.this is what ffp does...it dont matter how rich the owner is the rules stop you from pumping money in.thats why there is so much  frustration of parachute payments because it's an income that the other teams cant match.when and if this takeover happens it will be very interesting as to how if at all we get around combating the rules if the Dubai guy want to inject cash.stadium rename? Plaza?roof? Averting these are a few ways I can think of but cant think of many more......

Someone mentioned that a new owner gets a clean slate with regards FFP.

Not sure if that is the case, but if it is then that is a game changer.

Our wage bill is relatively low compared to what it was, so a new owner would have a bit of room to make a few adjustments that could make the difference.

But, it needs to be in a similar way that Newcastle did it when they had Rafa Benitez, literally highlight the best championship players and sign them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

What we need and have needed for a few years is someone who can afford to sign 2 or 3 key players without having to sell a key player to do it.

Our squad at the minute is probably 70% there. If someone came in and said to the manger choose 3 realistic players and they are yours, it could be the difference between struggling and automatic challengers.

Tomori, Harry Wilson and Adam Armstrong please.

So....all we need is an international defender, and international midfielder and the leading goal scorer in the league and we will be ok..... ...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jimbo Ram said:

Is the potential investment and spending money on players different than if Mel just splashed the cash in Jan in terms of FFP? One minute we are walking a tightrope with FFP, the next there is talk of big spending? Can someone simply explain to me how this works?

Hi Jimbo

 

I’ve seen you ask a couple of times. I don’t have any accounting qualifications or experience but have set up, sold and closed down companies so have some idea.

ffp is about income. The more you have the more you can spend. But you can’t spend more than you’re income (rather your debt is limited). So if you have a rich owner who is inclined to spend, you have to increase your income. Few quick ideas would include refreshing all commercial partners. Eg signing new suppliers and structuring the payments so that e.g. small example - new geographical slant to the ownership means new companies wanting to advertise on boards around the pitch. They pay £100k for 2 year deal, subject to tv appearances, league position, promotion/relegation, trophies, signing exciting players, attendance figures etc. They pay 50% up front. 30 static hoardings can therefore theoretically bring in £1.5m up front. Add this in to shirt sponsors, stadium sponsors, academy sponsors, caterers, Moor Farm sponsors etc. Big example - stadium sponsorship. Ipro deal was £7m and it was a few years ago. Now the price is £10m for 7 years (again subject to increases if we get promoted etc). £5m up front. So far we’ve got £6.5m more income for 20/21. We might see a lot of Middle Eastern/western/Asian companies who want to do business in UAE purchase boxes and improved prices and/or rent Pride Park in the summer for promotional events. 
 

These are just quick and dirty ideas which can be picked apart and I’m sure their commercial team will blow these out of the water. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, enachops said:

Who says we will go on a spending splurge? Sheffield United are owned by Arab Billionaires and haven’t bought success. 

Morris has wanted to sell for years. This sale could be vital for the future of the club and means we stop taking loans out to keep functioning. Let’s see what happens. As long as the sheikh has legitimate funds I don’t see a problem. Even better if Morris and Pearce were to stay on in some capacity.

Fair point re Sheff Utd but as a general rule, new owners do tend to open the chequebook. Maxwell, Pickering, Gadsby & Morris did so here and the temptation must be strong to show a statement of intent to expectant fans.

100% agree that an ideal situation would be Morris & Pearce to stay on. Would be a real shame for mistakes to have been made over the last 5 years & then that experience leave the building. Morris with a small equity % and a role as Chief Executive allied with funds elsewhere would be the best case scenario.

 

3 hours ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

What we need and have needed for a few years is someone who can afford to sign 2 or 3 key players without having to sell a key player to do it.

Our squad at the minute is probably 70% there. If someone came in and said to the manger choose 3 realistic players and they are yours, it could be the difference between struggling and automatic challengers.

Tomori, Harry Wilson and Adam Armstrong please.

I'd probably say we're closer to 80%/85% there, with only a first choice CF the glaring deficiency. Again, if a new owner comes in & funds 2 quality players in positions in which we need an upgrade, thats fine but my concern is the careful squad build is dispensed in favour of headline grabbing signings in positions that don't need bolstering. A lot of this comes down to continuity elsewhere in the club i.e. Cocu, Morris & Pearce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, tinman said:

Died in February, fawaz bought the club in July 

Not entirely ITK and only a rumour, Doughty's family weren't entirely happy with Fawaz's conduct when he bought Forest from the estate.

They had invested upwards of 100milliion and ended up with a relative pittance from the deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, i-Ram said:

Might you like to inform us all why you are of the opinion that our potential new owner might be compared to the devil?  I share a dictionary definition of the word devil, so you can decide if he is best described as 1 2 3 or 4.

1 the supreme spirit of evil; Satan. A subordinate evil spirit at enmity with God, and having power to afflict humans both with bodily disease and with spiritual corruption.

2 an atrociously wicked, cruel, or ill-tempered person.

3 a person who is very clever, energetic, reckless, or mischievous.

4 a person, usually one in unfortunate or pitiable circumstances: The poor devil kept losing jobs through no fault of his own.

https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/dance-with-the-devil/

WHAT DOES DANCE WITH THE DEVIL MEAN?

To dance with the devil is to engage in risky, reckless, or potentially immoral behavior.

Risky or reckless? I'd say there's risk. Morality is open to personal interpretation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, MuespachRam said:

So....all we need is an international defender, and international midfielder and the leading goal scorer in the league and we will be ok..... ...?

Yes and thanks to all this Arab money we can do what we want.

Lovely jubbly.

And before anyone gets on their high horse about human rights, if anyone types that whilst using a mobile phone, wearing Nike or Adidas clothes, leave it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, MackworthRamIsGod said:

Yes and thanks to all this Arab money we can do what we want.

Lovely jubbly.

And before anyone gets on their high horse about human rights, if anyone types that whilst using a mobile phone, wearing Nike or Adidas clothes, leave it out.

You don't need to eschew all the features of modern life to have the right to be concerned about human rights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, kash_a_ram_a_ding_dong said:

Hold on,an unknown Geordy who knows nothing about Derby,or Mel or especially this deal comes onto the forum to vent his disappointment over his own clubs dealings and all of a sudden,Mel has got it all wrong,the deals all wrong for us and Derby are going to hell?

All this despite,non of us, especially the bloke from Newcastle having any knowledge whatsoever about the deal itself.

C'mon guys.

Hopefully it was just mad ramblings of a pissed off Geordie......... personally I thought he came across quite legit and seemed quite a bit more knowledgeable about the Sheikh than anyone else has on this thread, if he was just a angry Geordie wouldn't he be more inclined to rant about Mike Ashley .....what concerns me is no-one seems to know how much this Sheikh is actually worth, in fact some people don't even know where he is from.......maybe being a Derby fan for only 48yrs my pessimism is on high alert, I hope I'm wrong to not be over excited, I hope the unknown Geordie is just amiserable old Jimmy Nail lookalike that has just come onto our forum to vent his disappointment, if the deal is as close as has been reported we will find out soon enough ???

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

You don't need to eschew all the features of modern life to have the right to be concerned about human rights.

But if you are concerned about a man buying our club, but then are willing to wear products from companies with very little ethics and are willing to fund that company, you are just picking and choosing when to be unhappy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BriggRam said:

what concerns me is no-one seems to know how much this Sheikh is actually worth

 

How much am I worth?

@RoyMac5? @Srg? @Boycie? @i-Ram? @B4ev6is? @MuespachRam?

People’s worth is opaque. I have no idea what this Sheikh is worth. But, the question is, should it concern us that we don’t know?

Not really.
 

Generally, people don’t buy football clubs for altruistic reasons, unless they are supporters of the club (Mel, Gibson- see what I did there?) they are buying. 

So, the real question is; why buy a club? Some will do so for prestige (PSG, Milan - not so much in our case); but mainly to make money -as an investment. Fact.

If you want to make money from a football club; you’ll not do it on the Championship. Therefore, you need to get to the Premier League. So, investment will be necessary. 

Once in the Premier League, to make money, you need to stay there. So, ongoing investment and the success of the academy are key. But, if you ask Arsenal fans about Stan Kroenke - they’d not be happy, about just doing enough to be at the top end.

So, where am I going with this? I think we have to assume that if Mel thinks this is right for the club he owns and literally supports, we should all be happy and embrace it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Van Rammeister said:

So, where am I going with this? I think we have to assume that if Mel thinks this is right for the club he owns and literally supports, we should all be happy and embrace it.

Because Mel has never been wrong about anything to do with the running of the club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...