| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:25 - Feb 9 with 1982 views | QJumpingJack |
Did Pearlman actually write this or was it Levien's PR man? |  | |  |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:52 - Feb 9 with 1929 views | majorraglan |
The article has come from the club, so based on what’s happened previously there is bound to be scepticism from the fans. I have no issue with questions being asked and the facts being investigated.
I believe the club must be run on a sustainable basis and it may well be that Pearlmans words are 100% accurate and the truth, but the fact that there has previously been a lack of engagement and transparency doesn’t help his position. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:57 - Feb 9 with 1910 views | Darran |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:52 - Feb 9 by majorraglan |
The article has come from the club, so based on what’s happened previously there is bound to be scepticism from the fans. I have no issue with questions being asked and the facts being investigated.
I believe the club must be run on a sustainable basis and it may well be that Pearlmans words are 100% accurate and the truth, but the fact that there has previously been a lack of engagement and transparency doesn’t help his position. |
It’s not all the truth though is it? The bit about moving on players who would have the least impact on our team for the second half of the season when they tried to move on James and Fer isn’t the truth is it? |  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 20:25 - Feb 9 with 1878 views | jasper_T |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:57 - Feb 9 by Darran |
It’s not all the truth though is it? The bit about moving on players who would have the least impact on our team for the second half of the season when they tried to move on James and Fer isn’t the truth is it? |
"While we think highly of Wilfried Bony, Tom Carroll and Jefferson Montero, it was our belief that these particular moves would have the least impact on our team for the second half of the season"
No reference to Fer and DJ at all in that comment. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 20:26 - Feb 9 with 1862 views | _ |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:42 - Feb 9 by Jango |
everyone’s fear in the summer was that we’d be relegated again, some saying it was guaranteed. We are 6 points off playoffs playing some lovely stuff with a team littered with academy players. Surely that’s something to celebrate. The club was and maybe still is in a mess financially. Our record signing before we got promoted was Craig Beattie I believe for £800k. That’s the size of club we are at this level. We paid £4m for Celina, £2m for Asoro plus others this summer , so this idea that the yanks are trying to steal what they can is nonsense. I’m happy for them to make big decisions on selling players if it means I’m enjoying next season and the seasons after as much as I’m enjoying this one. |
Superb post but unfortunately we're genuinely dealing with fools and blaggards.
They're being exposed with every passing day. |  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 20:28 - Feb 9 with 1855 views | _ |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:25 - Feb 9 by QJumpingJack |
Did Pearlman actually write this or was it Levien's PR man? |
I'm not sure if I like this guy or feel totally sorry for him.
Is this a comedy account FFS? | |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 21:50 - Feb 9 with 1756 views | majorraglan |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 19:57 - Feb 9 by Darran |
It’s not all the truth though is it? The bit about moving on players who would have the least impact on our team for the second half of the season when they tried to move on James and Fer isn’t the truth is it? |
No it isnt and I hope I was giving the impression it was. I was trying to make the point that contrary to what some posters on here believe, it’s healthy and ok for fans to question the information being issued by the club. Pearlman and the press office are employees of the club and will do their masters work.
Many years ago lots of fans used the expression “In Huw we trust” and I believe that’s been a factor in where we are today.
In terms of the moving on Fer and James, I do think that’s down to money. Fer’s a good player and he’s been influential this season and James is a good little player, he’s not the finished article but he’s got a lot of potential and hopefully will be worth a lot more this summer. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 21:54 - Feb 9 with 1742 views | Darran |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 21:50 - Feb 9 by majorraglan |
No it isnt and I hope I was giving the impression it was. I was trying to make the point that contrary to what some posters on here believe, it’s healthy and ok for fans to question the information being issued by the club. Pearlman and the press office are employees of the club and will do their masters work.
Many years ago lots of fans used the expression “In Huw we trust” and I believe that’s been a factor in where we are today.
In terms of the moving on Fer and James, I do think that’s down to money. Fer’s a good player and he’s been influential this season and James is a good little player, he’s not the finished article but he’s got a lot of potential and hopefully will be worth a lot more this summer. |
I knew what you were saying my friend I was just adding a bit.
Personally I’d never trust them. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 22:07 - Feb 9 with 1712 views | monmouth |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 21:54 - Feb 9 by Darran |
I knew what you were saying my friend I was just adding a bit.
Personally I’d never trust them. |
I'd never trust anybody at the club again, and sadly that includes the trust as well as the other owners. I trust some individuals in the Trust, but not the entity, and I trust none of the other board members or shareholders at all.
Fool me once and all that.
We'll just have to see how it plays out. |  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 22:43 - Feb 9 with 1666 views | Swanseaman |
"The club did not want to see Daniel go and would only have reluctantly completed the deal - which was influenced by a number of contributing factors - if it was on terms that made sense for us and allowed us to accelerate the restructuring needed to put the club back on a sound financial footing for the future."
So he's saying that if the money was right they would have sold.
But Dan James will be worth more if he keeps improving. They bought players like Clucas in August 2017 for 16m, then sell him for 6m in Aug 2018.
Clueless. [Post edited 9 Feb 2019 22:47]
|  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 22:50 - Feb 9 with 1635 views | monmouth |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 22:43 - Feb 9 by Swanseaman |
"The club did not want to see Daniel go and would only have reluctantly completed the deal - which was influenced by a number of contributing factors - if it was on terms that made sense for us and allowed us to accelerate the restructuring needed to put the club back on a sound financial footing for the future."
So he's saying that if the money was right they would have sold.
But Dan James will be worth more if he keeps improving. They bought players like Clucas in August 2017 for 16m, then sell him for 6m in Aug 2018.
Clueless. [Post edited 9 Feb 2019 22:47]
|
And he'll be worth less if he doesn't. The deal as originally quoted is entirely defendable. As is refusing it. It is all based on your view of Daniel James and the other options available to pay down the debt. It's fine to say we should keep him, and I'm actually well on that side of the line, as I very much like having him on the pitch, but to say it shouldn't have been considered a viable option and if they'd made that decision it would have been a travesty, or giving him away, is nuts. We'll only know that with hindsight. | |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 00:08 - Feb 10 with 1571 views | Swanseaman |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 22:50 - Feb 9 by monmouth |
And he'll be worth less if he doesn't. The deal as originally quoted is entirely defendable. As is refusing it. It is all based on your view of Daniel James and the other options available to pay down the debt. It's fine to say we should keep him, and I'm actually well on that side of the line, as I very much like having him on the pitch, but to say it shouldn't have been considered a viable option and if they'd made that decision it would have been a travesty, or giving him away, is nuts. We'll only know that with hindsight. |
The problem with the yanks is that they do not learn from their mistakes, and they do not realize that short term gains can have a detrimental effect on the team, that can eventually end up with more relegations. Continuing to offload, weakening the team , for short term gains, will backfire in the longrun.
Like a chess player who's not concentrating on any moves ahead. They did it with Llorente and Sigurdsson, and from my experience of them, they will carry on making the same mistakes over and over. | |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 03:40 - Feb 10 with 1509 views | BanosPerth |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 00:08 - Feb 10 by Swanseaman |
The problem with the yanks is that they do not learn from their mistakes, and they do not realize that short term gains can have a detrimental effect on the team, that can eventually end up with more relegations. Continuing to offload, weakening the team , for short term gains, will backfire in the longrun.
Like a chess player who's not concentrating on any moves ahead. They did it with Llorente and Sigurdsson, and from my experience of them, they will carry on making the same mistakes over and over. |
Absolutely right. But it's not just them, it's the current corporate ethos whereby tomorrow's bottom line is all that counts, thus keeping the shareholders/hedge fund investors happy in the short term, as opposed to any long term vision. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 08:46 - Feb 10 with 1451 views | clloy2 |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 21:54 - Feb 9 by Darran |
I knew what you were saying my friend I was just adding a bit.
Personally I’d never trust them. |
The hedge fund (majority owners) could sort this mistrust out overnight if they really wanted to. And that is divulge the full financial accounts to the trust or their appointed representatives for the past 2 and a half years. I'm not talking high level P&L that just shows outgoings or a loss, I would want every pound in and out accounted for. A financial account could show a loss of £10m but where's that 10m actually gone in real terms ( professional fees/consultancy etc). If the clubs finances are really as bad as the owners would have us believe, then bloody well end this mistrust for once and for all, and let the trust see the full financial working's of the club down to every last working transaction. After all the trust still own 21% or thereabouts. If the trust were indeed to have this offered to them, and after real scrutiny they came out and announced, Yes the club is really in a mess, we are satisfied that their has been nothing underhand going on, then fine I think I and the rest of the fanbase would accept this and we would move on, but until that happens, I still take everything they say with a pinch of salt, and this huge mistrust will continue, and Im sorry Mr. Pearlman, what you print in the matchday programme could well be corporate bullshit. The balls in your court, either put up or shut up End this mistrust for good. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 08:56 - Feb 10 with 1442 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 12:50 - Feb 9 by dobjack2 |
What was the original deal then? Can you provide a link?
If they moved the goalposts and the deal was no longer in the club’s interest according to the owners man then the Jenkins is the saviour stuff must be a load of bollox then.
Hard to believe anyone without any facts. |
Chris has just demonstrated inside knowledge of the deal so you’ll have to take that as read. |  |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 08:58 - Feb 10 with 1436 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:22 - Feb 9 by Headmaster |
Exactly the point I made. There seems to be a fair few delusional people following us. Either that or they're not acting in good faith. |
Their actions in trying to get Fer and James out of the door are iat complete odds with the statement they’ve issued. Actions speak louder than words. | |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 09:04 - Feb 10 with 1424 views | Brynmill_Jack |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 20:25 - Feb 9 by jasper_T |
"While we think highly of Wilfried Bony, Tom Carroll and Jefferson Montero, it was our belief that these particular moves would have the least impact on our team for the second half of the season"
No reference to Fer and DJ at all in that comment. |
But they still tried to get rid of them FFS. They failed to do so but they’re hardly going to mention those two who would have had a huge impact on the squad. Utter lying bast@rds ! | |
| Each time I go to Bedd - au........................ |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 10:05 - Feb 10 with 1393 views | ItchySphincter |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 12:16 - Feb 9 by monmouth |
This is where I am too. |
... and me. What he said in those notes is just obvious business practice. |  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:24 - Feb 10 with 1328 views | omarjack |
I understand what this bloke are trying to say. But here's the thing..
You either want to invest, try to be competitive, take financial risks in order to give yourself the best chance at success..OR..you go down the road they're going on right now, selling, trimming and trying to cash in every asset they can find at their disposal.
It's very rare that a club manages to succeed at both things. We're not giving ourselves the best chance right now at success, all this BS about being afraid of going into administration etc isn't going to cut it, Just a scarecrow. Nobody is asking for a massive investment like what Stoke did, keeping a massive wage bill, buying rubbish players for big money. We wanted a bit more than what we've got..and not to sell, sell, sell just for the sake of it, without consideration for the state of the squad.
I mean how is losing Montero going to help us going forwards ffs? Just cost cutting to save an extra million.
Also, things are only going to get worse, 8m loss of income next year, 19m the year after, he's already saying that McBurnie is a goner at first offer, Baker-Richardson just got a new deal, and being groomed to be our new CF for the next season. It's ridiculous, how are we going to achieve any success on the pitch like this? We simply won't. |  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:37 - Feb 10 with 1318 views | Swanseaman |
"how is losing Montero going to help us going forwards ffs?"
Exactly. By losing Montero we have become a weaker team. If we continue to get rid of good players for short term gain, there will be a loss of supporters wanting to watch the games, and in the long run we will just slide down the leagues. | |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:45 - Feb 10 with 1306 views | union_jack |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:24 - Feb 10 by omarjack |
I understand what this bloke are trying to say. But here's the thing..
You either want to invest, try to be competitive, take financial risks in order to give yourself the best chance at success..OR..you go down the road they're going on right now, selling, trimming and trying to cash in every asset they can find at their disposal.
It's very rare that a club manages to succeed at both things. We're not giving ourselves the best chance right now at success, all this BS about being afraid of going into administration etc isn't going to cut it, Just a scarecrow. Nobody is asking for a massive investment like what Stoke did, keeping a massive wage bill, buying rubbish players for big money. We wanted a bit more than what we've got..and not to sell, sell, sell just for the sake of it, without consideration for the state of the squad.
I mean how is losing Montero going to help us going forwards ffs? Just cost cutting to save an extra million.
Also, things are only going to get worse, 8m loss of income next year, 19m the year after, he's already saying that McBurnie is a goner at first offer, Baker-Richardson just got a new deal, and being groomed to be our new CF for the next season. It's ridiculous, how are we going to achieve any success on the pitch like this? We simply won't. |
You are absolutely right. It’s a balancing act.
You can only make money really (other than by asset stripping) by being successful and that means being in the PL. To do that you have to invest in players which I’d guess would need to be lucky with the right players 80% of the time.
What we need is an investor with the money, a Chairman to sensibly control the flow of money and a DoF who knows the game inside out and more to pick the right player (with the aid of an exemplary scouting team). At our level we’ll make purchasing mistakes for a load of reasons but we would need to limit those.
Easy really😠|  |
| |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:49 - Feb 10 with 1296 views | jasper_T |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:37 - Feb 10 by Swanseaman |
"how is losing Montero going to help us going forwards ffs?"
Exactly. By losing Montero we have become a weaker team. If we continue to get rid of good players for short term gain, there will be a loss of supporters wanting to watch the games, and in the long run we will just slide down the leagues. |
Montero has played less minutes for us than Asoro and is on more money than 3 or 4 first team regulars put together. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:55 - Feb 10 with 1286 views | jasper_T |
Worth some fans realising that the top three teams in this league have all sold their brightest stars over the last couple of seasons but continued to build and strengthen.
Villa and Stoke have spent bucketloads and are no better than we are.
Derby's best players are loanees, if they go up they start from scratch.
Birmingham have moneybags backers but EFL rules prevent them from spending due to the club losing so much money.
Bolton are a stones throw away from liquidation. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 13:58 - Feb 10 with 1275 views | jasper_T |
Bristol City as well, sold their brightest stars to PL teams in the summer and have now won 8 on the trot, into the playoffs and looking strong. | | | |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 15:01 - Feb 10 with 1245 views | _ |
| From the boardroom b0ll0cks on 08:46 - Feb 10 by clloy2 |
The hedge fund (majority owners) could sort this mistrust out overnight if they really wanted to. And that is divulge the full financial accounts to the trust or their appointed representatives for the past 2 and a half years. I'm not talking high level P&L that just shows outgoings or a loss, I would want every pound in and out accounted for. A financial account could show a loss of £10m but where's that 10m actually gone in real terms ( professional fees/consultancy etc). If the clubs finances are really as bad as the owners would have us believe, then bloody well end this mistrust for once and for all, and let the trust see the full financial working's of the club down to every last working transaction. After all the trust still own 21% or thereabouts. If the trust were indeed to have this offered to them, and after real scrutiny they came out and announced, Yes the club is really in a mess, we are satisfied that their has been nothing underhand going on, then fine I think I and the rest of the fanbase would accept this and we would move on, but until that happens, I still take everything they say with a pinch of salt, and this huge mistrust will continue, and Im sorry Mr. Pearlman, what you print in the matchday programme could well be corporate bullshit. The balls in your court, either put up or shut up End this mistrust for good. |
I think instead of getting carried away.with lots of stuff you've heard on here I'd speak with the Trust directly so they can put most of what you've said right.
Or even better, Lisa or Ux will reply to your message here and save you the trouble. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
