Alph Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 £50m!!! Fifty!!? Think what that could do at Derby!! Big screen in every corner, have the guy on the tannoy shot, have the kids who call out names on a flight to Malaysia enroute to proper jobs, have the people who wanted goal music lined up for a firing squad, have the West Stand turned to face the car park where a fancy Mercedes might excite them, kit the SE corner out in Stone Island gear, hire those Palace cheerleaders for us, buy Frankie boots that tie themselves, buy Brayford a better wig, renew Naylors passport for when we play Cardiff...... ..phew, the possibilities are endless. We could afford a whole squad of Claude Davis-type transfers!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 £50m!!! Fifty!!? Think what that could do at Derby!! Big screen in every corner, have the guy on the tannoy shot, have the kids who call out names on a flight to Malaysia enroute to proper jobs, have the people who wanted goal music lined up for a firing squad, have the West Stand turned to face the car park where a fancy Mercedes might excite them, kit the SE corner out in Stone Island gear, hire those Palace cheerleaders for us, buy Frankie boots that tie themselves, buy Brayford a better wig, renew Naylors passport for when we play Cardiff...... ..phew, the possibilities are endless. We could afford a whole squad of Claude Davis-type transfers!! We could also buy black nets. Only rich clubs like Manchester City are allowed black nets, because black nets are cool, as they look invisible on the tele. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 it is not a joke nrothing what they orginal promised when they took over, they said they would give nigal 50m to spend, well that money has not been seen. £50m. That's £50,000,000??? Most premiership managers don't get that to spend in all their time at a club... Sorry B4, you're making that up. If you provide evidence i'll gladly reverse my opinion and join you outside Pride Park with my burning pitchfork... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StockholmRam Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 With 50 million we could have brought Florist and turned the Shi*ty ground into allotments. 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G STAR RAM Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 it is not a joke nrothing what they orginal promised when they took over, they said they would give nigal 50m to spend, well that money has not been seen. I'm sorry but if you are going to use posts like this to try and back up your point to get the Americans out you are just going to end up making yourself look silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuitYourJibbaJivin Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 No it won't count. Ahhhhh i didnt think it would, i guess wel have to wait till we spend over a million for it to be classed as a marquee signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 £50m. That's £50,000,000??? Most premiership managers don't get that to spend in all their time at a club... Sorry B4, you're making that up. If you provide evidence i'll gladly reverse my opinion and join you outside Pride Park with my burning pitchfork... It seems to be a common misconception. The GSE takeover was valued at around £50m (as I understand it, made up of roughly £19m to Gadsby to buy the club and £31m of debt that the club owed at the time). Unfortunately some poeple seem to have decided that meant we had £50m to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GboroRam Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 50m buys a helluva lot of mushy peas too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martyn Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Ahhhhh i didnt think it would, i guess wel have to wait till we spend over a million for it to be classed as a marquee signing. No, he'll have to be paid over £10k a week too, else we'll have just "overpaid for a overrated player". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Éire Ram Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 They said they were going to follow the "Aston Villa model" when they first arrived at the club and that would have required £30M plus in transfer fees, wages and agent fees and I think the owners got cold feet at the large amount of sums required to maintain even a competitive Championship side, especially after Paul Jewell squandered most of the cash in the January and Summer transfer windows on players like Robbie Savage, Tito Villa, Luke Varney, Dickinson, Pereplotkins, Sterjovski and the like but that doesn't excuse the overzealous nature of the austerity measures places upon the club that has seen it stagnate instead of progress. With that said, they have failed to deliver on their promises and the plan that is in place now isn't going to get us to the Premier League, we will be forever hovering between 8th and 15th in the Championship without ever seriously threatening to finish in the play-offs, which makes me wonder with all the financial muscle that the owners possess, why bother taking the club over in the first place if they aren't going to utilize some of that wealth to progress it? Honestly, they might as well just sell us if we're nothing but a financial football experiment to see if we can be both self sustaining and successful, as self sustainability and success very rarely go hand in hand in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 It seems to be a common misconception. The GSE takeover was valued at around £50m (as I understand it, made up of roughly £19m to Gadsby to buy the club and £31m of debt that the club owed at the time). Unfortunately some poeple seem to have decided that meant we had £50m to spend. And Ill think you will find that the 50m figure stated was not correct, be warned you will open up another 20 pages of debate, I would suggest searching Ramblurs posts on this, it has been done so many times before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duncanjwitham Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 And Ill think you will find that the 50m figure stated was not correct, be warned you will open up another 20 pages of debate, I would suggest searching Ramblurs posts on this, it has been done so many times before. Whether that £50m was right or not, it was the figure that was given at the time, and it was the amount that GSE effectively paid to aquire the club. It was nothing to do with investment after the takeover (which is what a lot of people seemed to think it was). And I know it's been done to death before, but people are still not understanding it and are still repeating the same drivel about being given £50m to spend on players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 My thoughts are with B4 this afternoon who will obviously be devastated by the news Ball has gone out on loan for the season, keep yer chin up lad and stay strong, he will be back next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StaffsRam Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Black armbands at the ready. Man down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-JW- Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Ball will score at least 40 goals next year, he is that good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StockholmRam Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Ball will score at least 40 goals next year, he is that good. UK government has frozen Syrian assets to the tune of 100 million pounds. 50 million of that is to be given to Nigel Clough for new players!! 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top 6 finish Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 it is not a joke nrothing what they orginal promised when they took over, they said they would give nigal 50m to spend, well that money has not been seen. B4 mate you are the most genuine and honest rams fan around.Also not only that but you see all through the bullshit. I wish there were more like you.The trouble is you have upset the board groupies on here and when they want to hear the truth they will ask for it,sadly they are not there yet.Keep up the good work mate you are right and don 't let the ******** grind you down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
top 6 finish Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 It seems to be a common misconception. The GSE takeover was valued at around £50m (as I understand it, made up of roughly £19m to Gadsby to buy the club and £31m of debt that the club owed at the time). Unfortunately some poeple seem to have decided that meant we had £50m to spend. Really! ok produce the figures to prove that.By the way LeedsRam you know it won't take 20 pages,20 words should suffice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramblur Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Whilst I don't want to go over old ground,I'd just point out that it eventually cost c£16m to buy 100% of the club-not bought off Gadsby,but the LOG+AP. As this takes the overall investment to over £44m,then our problems don't relate so much to the amount of money that was put in,but more to what was done with it. I suppose it's a little ironic that for those who reckoned that the £50m was nothing to do with "enterprise value" (takeover sum + inherited debt),then the "missing" £5.4m would probably see us promoted (or I suppose I should say give us a great chance)-even half would probably do the job. In the enterprise value,you're actually supposed to deduct cash and cash equivalents.I'd argue that the parachute payments represented cash equivalents,especially as the first one automatically reduced the £31m debt by £10m,with no input required from the investors.Anyway,it's a tired old argument Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Really! ok produce the figures to prove that.By the way LeedsRam you know it won't take 20 pages,20 words should suffice. I don't know the figures, and therefore would not ridicule a poster for getting something wrong when I didn't understand the investment figures myself.....but that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.