Board/Fan Relationship

1444547495053

Comments

  • And there in lies the problem. £20m here, £20m there.
  • Viable or not there's no way they're going to be able to sell a stadium that swallowed £762m of taxpayers' money without facing a lot of political opposition

    On top of that there's UK Athletics 50 year deal, even if the LLDC sold the stadium any buyer would have to honour that or persuade them to quit
  • The stadium will need major work
    When facts get out!



    Ok
    How many times have you herd
    “ it’s not built for football stadium “


    I thought it would be better then it was.
  • Macca - they won't be losing £2bn, they'll be losing £80m every four years then facing re-election when it possibly becomes someone else's problem
  • Oh. ;hmm

    So it's not a joint venture any more, but wholly-owned by whatever the LLDC is called now?
  • I thought Newham effectively wrote off their 45m?

    E20 owns it, no? LS185 runs it
  • Saw in the paper how the spuds have increased capacity by 900 or so in there stadium by taking out the trophy cabinet and garage for open top bus to make room
  • A good transfer policy makes all the difference....

    DYufA6dX4AEmeTP
  • Not to mention spending about £120 million...
  • vorselaar - but that same transfer policy bought the first three players originally...
  • Liverpool May have bought a few duds (including AC), however they have bought and seen Suarez, Torres and Coutinho go for massive money. And they still sit with Salah, firminho and more
  • Jordez - Salah is probably worth than on his own now...

    MrsGrey - I don't think bought by the same club is the same thing as transfer policy. I can't imagine Lambert being bought by Klopp different style.
  • Yes. ;ok

    But in that case isn't 'transfer policy' just another way of saying 'they buy players the manager rates'?

    To be classed as an actual 'policy', I think it needs to be more than that.... maybe covering ages of players, type of contracts they get, how the deals are structured, what sort of clauses are put in the contracts and stuff like that.
  • edited March 2018
    I'm not sure 'buy good players' counts as a transfer policy...
  • I was responding to the post.

    "but that same transfer policy bought the first three players originally..."

    My point was that just because players are bought by the same club it doesn't mean the thing as the same transfer policy.
  • MrsGrey said:

    Yes. ;ok

    But in that case isn't 'transfer policy' just another way of saying 'they buy players the manager rates'?

    To be classed as an actual 'policy', I think it needs to be more than that.... maybe covering ages of players, type of contracts they get, how the deals are structured, what sort of clauses are put in the contracts and stuff like that.

    Which West Ham, have being miserable at, one of the highest wage payers in the league and possibly getting relegated.

    From saying we have enough money to purchase players but wouldn't buy Defoe because he had no resale value but then signing players like Fonte / Evra / Zabaleta....

    West Ham's policy is the worst in the league when you measure up finances to finishing places to wages paid. Tragic.


  • From saying we have enough money to purchase players but wouldn't buy Defoe because he had no resale value but then signing players like Fonte / Evra / Zabaleta....

    You assume that all other things were equal.
  • edited March 2018



    My point was that just because players are bought by the same club it doesn't mean the thing as the same transfer policy.

    What about during the same season?

    The same transfer policy (same season, same manager) bought Firmino and Benteke.




    Or the same manager? Rogers brought in Borini and Firmino. (But in different seasons.)
  • Simple to conceive of.

    Not so simple to execute.

    Otherwise everybody would be doing it ;wink
  • That certainly looks more constructive and fair play to DS for inviting them in.

    I also read all 32 pages of the Karren B, letters to LLDC/Mayor or London, I think she handled herself quite well in those but seems to be banging her head against a brick wall. For some reason E20 do not want to play ball and it would be in their interests to do so and help reduce the cost to the taxpayer, legal action is now on the horizon and that won’t do anyone any good
  • I'd be happy if the club were to pay a bit more if the club were to have a bit more say on changing a few things.
  • In her letters they do offer to pay for the track cover and seem willing to help
  • edited March 2018
    No often I’d say this but well done the tax man ;ok
  • Presumably he has now sacked his tax advisor. ;lol
  • Can Scribble off "British TaxPayer" as a sound bite they like to use then.
  • I suspect he still stumps up a fair bit more than we manage.
Sign In or Register to comment.