When do we give up on clough??

[tomsdubs]

if only we were in the prem already he could have done a holloway but alas holloway has talent

Holloway has talent yet has failed at other clubs, YR you are extremely selective in your reasoning. Holloway was a complete disaster at Leicester, failed to keep Blackpool up. He's basically the equivalent of Phil Brown, failed at Derby and had a good start in the prem with Hull before eventually crashing and burning.

Your arguments consist of you selectively picking points to make NC look poor while ignoring the elephant sat in the room. Your speculative arguments are tedious at best. Holloway has talent? Can't organise a defence at all, good eye for a bargain and average track record.

[davenportram]

December 28th Blackpool were 8th

End of Season they were 19th, picking up just 14 points in the second half of the season. Bit if a fall away.

Good attack ( we are still the last team to keep a clean sheet at Blackpool, think it was in 2009) but ****e defensively.

[tomsdubs]

If you remember Hull did the same thing, top 10 first half then barely won a game second half.

[smiffy]

December 28th Blackpool were 8th

End of Season they were 19th, picking up just 14 points in the second half of the season. Bit if a fall away.

Good attack ( we are still the last team to keep a clean sheet at Blackpool, think it was in 2009) but ****e defensively.

Still 3 more than we got all season:o

[RebelScum]

Correct:D

I concur!

Can people stop with this its getting irritating!

[Leeds Ram]

blackpool did better than anyone expected in the championship and the premiership, they did well just to take it too the last day, i wish we could have done that in our prem season when we spent a lot more money.

[tomsdubs]

blackpool did better than anyone expected in the championship and the premiership, they did well just to take it too the last day, i wish we could have done that in our prem season when we spent a lot more money.

Yeah cause we spent loads, splitting hairs mate. The teams that are still up there e.g Sunderland, they went up and spent a lot of money and are still there. Us, Blackpool and Hull didn't spend much in comparison and where are we now? Newcastle managed to keep hold of good players so did not need to rebuild.

Be interesting to see how Norwich and QPR get on this season, haven't spent big either of them.

[Leeds Ram]

Yeah cause we spent loads, splitting hairs mate. The teams that are still up there e.g Sunderland, they went up and spent a lot of money and are still there. Us, Blackpool and Hull didn't spend much in comparison and where are we now? Newcastle managed to keep hold of good players so did not need to rebuild.

Be interesting to see how Norwich and QPR get on this season, haven't spent big either of them.

Blackpool weren't expected to go up in the championship, neither were hull but sunderland and newcastle were certainly favorites. Our points total of 11 pales to insignificance when compared to Blackpool's in the 30's. They spent a lot less and did remarkably well, they massively overachieved which we haven't done in any form since the little dwarf.

[duncanjwitham]

Yeah cause we spent loads, splitting hairs mate. The teams that are still up there e.g Sunderland, they went up and spent a lot of money and are still there. Us, Blackpool and Hull didn't spend much in comparison and where are we now? Newcastle managed to keep hold of good players so did not need to rebuild.

Be interesting to see how Norwich and QPR get on this season, haven't spent big either of them.

Sunderland wasted an obscene amount of money though - McShane for £5m, Chopra £5m, Andy Reid £4m, Gordon £9m, Halford £2.5m and so on. We spent a similar amount to what the likes of Stoke and Wolves spent first season up. And again, we spent similarly to Birmingham and Hull, who at least survived their first season.

[tomsdubs]

Blackpool weren't expected to go up in the championship, neither were hull but sunderland and newcastle were certainly favorites. Our points total of 11 pales to insignificance when compared to Blackpool's in the 30's. They spent a lot less and did remarkably well, they massively overachieved which we haven't done in any form since the little dwarf.

We didn't overachieve with Billy at all, we spent good money and he had full backing. If anything his Jan signings made us worse, I mention Sunderland and Newcastle because they are bigger clubs like us, no we aren't as big but we can pull for players etc. I'll give you benefit of the doubt as you are still a kid and you are naive to think there was anything good about Billy's time here, i didn't even like the guy when we were winning.

Billy's summer signings for the prem were shocking, we were dire and he got sacked and replaced by an amateur star. Kind of a different scenario really isn't it? What's stable about a manager that questions his future at a club after winning the playoff final?

Last time we overachieved was when Burley got a load of freebies that were the real deal. Shame he fell out with the board.

[Leeds Ram]

We didn't overachieve with Billy at all, we spent good money and he had full backing. If anything his Jan signings made us worse, I mention Sunderland and Newcastle because they are bigger clubs like us, no we aren't as big but we can pull for players etc. I'll give you benefit of the doubt as you are still a kid and you are naive to think there was anything good about Billy's time here, i didn't even like the guy when we were winning.

Billy's summer signings for the prem were shocking, we were dire and he got sacked and replaced by an amateur star. Kind of a different scenario really isn't it? What's stable about a manager that questions his future at a club after winning the playoff final?

Last time we overachieved was when Burley got a load of freebies that were the real deal. Shame he fell out with the board.

So you think we were expected to win promotion then? i wonder what the odds were on that happening, we only just avoided relegation the year before and we went up, i think we overachieved. I will not argue with the janurary signings however i didn't mention it, only that we overachieved with him, which with west brom, sunderland and birmingham in the division i don't see how you can argue against it, especially since west brom were damn good back then.

Maybe promotion was good? didn't you celebrate at wembley or invade the pitch or celebrate when we won at home to southampton? or were you sat there bored to death? I admit the style wasn't great but one can overlook that when you win and the wembley trip was something which i will never forget. Again i didn't mention stability, Burley had personal issues which made him leave the club simple as, he did brilliantly and did over achieve big time as well.

[smiffy]

We didn't overachieve with Billy at all, we spent good money and he had full backing. If anything his Jan signings made us worse, I mention Sunderland and Newcastle because they are bigger clubs like us, no we aren't as big but we can pull for players etc. I'll give you benefit of the doubt as you are still a kid and you are naive to think there was anything good about Billy's time here, i didn't even like the guy when we were winning.

Billy's summer signings for the prem were shocking, we were dire and he got sacked and replaced by an amateur star. Kind of a different scenario really isn't it? What's stable about a manager that questions his future at a club after winning the playoff final?

Last time we overachieved was when Burley got a load of freebies that were the real deal. Shame he fell out with the board.

So we have no chance next season then, we have not spent enough ?

[tomsdubs]

So we have no chance next season then, we have not spent enough ?

I'm pretty certain we won't go up this season unless the next two signings are quality, I think we might come close to the playoffs but the quality of the opposition this season is higher than last. I'm not saying we have to spend big to go up teams like Norwich proved that, but you need stability and a solid core squad of players. Hopefully we'll see that develop this season.

[ramblur]

I'm not really sure what the board has done wrong - it's first priority was to reduce debt so we remained a going concern and could build later on (which is what we're doing).

I'll start off with 2 links:-

http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/Pearson-time-right-leave/story-11568673-detail/story.html

http://www.thisisderbyshire.co.uk/MORTGAGE-MORTGAGE-OWE-YEAR/story-11578130-detail/story.html

..and follow up by pointing out that the 07/08 accounts clearly show that our owners didn't introduce any new capital into the club in the year to 30/6/08.

From the first link (backed up by the second) it appears the first priority was to waste a lot of money (and not money they'd put in).For those who believe that the LOG's signings plunged us into debt in real terms,then they must also believe that the January activity plunged us into even more debt (pure logic,given that they introduced no new money in that year).

To try to understand the LOG situation,let's try this hypothetical exchange in July 07:-

LOG- Sorry fans,but we can't afford to sign any players.Whilst we'll be getting at least £32m of tv revenues this year ,we'll only be getting £8m of this in August and we've had to pay Prem wages from 1st July (along with other wages and running expenses) and we won't get the next £8m tranche until Jan,so we've got to find 6 months' total wages and running expenses in the meantime.If we had all the tv income,then we'd be able to sustain a moderate wage bill and about £10m of signings.

FANS-Are you lot stupid,or what?Just borrow the dosh and repay it out of the income.It's not as though you'd be putting us in hock.

LOG-You're sure you won't accuse us of putting the club in debt?

FANS-FFS,just get on with it.

LOG-Righty ho,but don't throw the debt mud at us later.

Well,the LOG weren't 'stupid,or what',and obviously thought the fans weren't either.I believe the loan was secured against (and repaid from) the following year's income for strategic reasons,allowing the flexibility to respond to whatever situation held sway in January.But the point is that they could have secured and repaid out of the back end 07/08 income,and thus show it wasn't real debt.If they had done this,then GSE wouldn't have been able to embark on their January spree without themselves borrowing (or actually putting in their own money).

The last entry of the 07/08 cashflow statement shows that cash increased during the year by £8.952m,and note no. 27 to the accounts shows that the components of this were an increase in cash from £4.160m to £7.899m (£3.739m) and a decrease in the overdraft from £6.107m to £894k (£5.213m).Just taking the final cash figure,if you were to add back in the Jan 08 madness (let alone any additional admin expenses that GSE may have introduced) ,you'd find that there was more than enough to repay the £10.4m loan in that same year.

You think that GSE were the great debt reducers,staving off administration and keeping us a going concern? Let's look at the following year.£15.456m of debt was repaid,and £9.135m of new debt taken on.We know that £10.4m of debt repayment was that organised by the LOG (thus leaving £5.056m of GSE inspired reduction),but they also took on the additional debt and hence their efforts actually increased the debt by £4m.

We were later told by AA that our good guy investors had dug deep to reduce the debt down to the mortgage of £15m (repeated by Glick months later),the only problem being that restated accounts later showed up the existence of more debt.

The 09/10 accounts showed the o/s debt as follows:-

Other loans £4.763m,Long term debt £15.524m and HP £20k,thus giving a total of £20.307m (i.e. not much different to the situation immediately following repayment (out of their resources) of the £10.4m LOG loan.)

Glick,of course,is finally forced to come clean on the other debt and tries to shrug it off as a revolving loan (which,of course has to be repaid and carries interest charges-the hallmarks of debt).He then tries to tell us £4m+ of debt was repaid shortly after the year end,out of season ticket income,the only problem being that the bulk of S/T income had been taken in April and the accounts showed that there was only £1.178m cash at the year end (in other words,a lot of this advance revenue had already been used on 09/10 running expenses).The feeding of the 5000 must have been a stroll in the park compared to Glick's suggestion.

The owners put in £6.6m in the last year and the debt that Glick referred to actually amounted to £4.763m,so even if it had been repaid out of this there would only be less than £2m left to add to the end of year £1m,thus we start the year with less than £3m (and less than the amount you'd expect from early renewals).I venture to suggest that those financial circumstances would make the income from the sales of Hulse,Commons and Moxey rather more palatable than a £2m Hooper bid.

Have a good read of the second link,in reply to Gadsby's questioning of GSE's inward investment to cover transfers and debt reduction.Everything is dated back to January 1st.£6m debt reduction was a jolly good effort in 6 months,said Pearson.Six months from Jan 1st takes you to June 30th,a period in which they put in zilch.Similarly,transfers backdated to Jan 1st and the clever use of "so there's an investment".Yes,Adam,an investment alright,but from what source (given that your lot put in nothing to June 30th).

[Boycie]

did anybody read that wall of text? lol!

[CumbrianRam]

did anybody read that wall of text? lol!

Not really.

[Boycie]

I'm trying to remember if Rambler's pro or anti GSE?

[Anag Ram]

This may have come across as a defuser, or a stupid post, but i was merely bringing my views to the masses with a picture to demonstrate my views on next season.

Top half finish:whistle:

Clough stays.

Let's hope she's not accurate - looks like we're on our way out of both cups and more than capable of going down!

[GboroRam]

did anybody read that wall of text? lol!

I am. Not because I particularly want to hang anyone on what they've said or not said - but I just want to know who are the good guys and who are the villains.

I'm no expert but it sort of sounds like nobody has really put any money in. LOG, GSE, nobody comes out of the above sounding like philanthropists.

And all in all, I don't really care. As long as we're not hurtling towards bankruptcy, as long as we're not laundering some mafia kingpin's ill-gotten gains, and as long as Clough can build a team that competes, I'll be happy.

Would be nice to know if GSE have bailed us out, if the LOG have bailed us out, if nobody has bailed us out or what. But my puny little brain just can't take it all in.

As I said in the guitar playing thread, a guitar has 6 strings so must be easy to master. Numbers only go from 0 to 9 so accounts must be fairly easy to work out as well. I probably need a nap, come back to it fresh. It's obviously very simple.

[ramblur]

did anybody read that wall of text? lol!

Daveo won't accept anything that isn't stuffed with facts:D