eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,126
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 28, 2018 10:53:11 GMT
Oldie - Pretty much agreed on all points. My personal GUESS is that the UWE was doable and needn't have saddled us with an unacceptable level of external debt. Why would Dwane Sports have bought us otherwise? I would conclude that a low ROI that was the barrier - not the deal itself. The Al-Qadi's are bankers. (No cockney rhyming pun intended). That is why I maintain UWE was a good deal for Bristol Rovers, but a bad one for Dwane Sports and outside investors. I think Kevin Spencer was of this opinion as well. A chance in a generation lost? If it can be resurrected as per your comment above - bring it on. UTG!
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 11:05:49 GMT
Oldie - Pretty much agreed on all points. My personal GUESS is that the UWE was doable and needn't have saddled us with an unacceptable level of external debt. Why would Dwane Sports have bought us otherwise? I would conclude that a low ROI that was the barrier - not the deal itself. The Al-Qadi's are bankers. (No cockney rhyming pun intended). That is why I maintain UWE was a good deal for Bristol Rovers, but a bad one for Dwane Sports and outside investors. I think Kevin Spencer was of this opinion as well. A chance in a generation lost? If it can be resurrected as per your comment above - bring it on. UTG! I guess my friend, only time now will tell. In the meantime it's a lovely day down here and it's cheese and cider day in my local village pub. Real cider that is. Any comments made by me after 3pm I deny responsibility for, now.😎😎
|
|
vaughan
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by vaughan on Sept 28, 2018 11:09:52 GMT
UWE was recognised by the majority of fans as a once in a lifetime opportunity.
To see it fall through was disappointing enough. Not being told why, even in outline, is frustrating in equal measure.
There is confidentiality, but we did not get a plausible explanation.
Again supporters are treated like numpties.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 11:19:22 GMT
UWE was recognised by the majority of fans as a once in a lifetime opportunity. To see it fall through was disappointing enough. Not being told why, even in outline, is frustrating in equal measure. There is confidentiality, but we did not get a plausible explanation. Again supporters are treated like numpties. But did the "majority of fans" have clear understanding of the detail? If not it's just wishful thinking embraced in a herd mentality. But yes, BRFC do not do communications nor expectation management.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 11:19:47 GMT
Oldie - Pretty much agreed on all points. My personal GUESS is that the UWE was doable and needn't have saddled us with an unacceptable level of external debt. Why would Dwane Sports have bought us otherwise? I would conclude that a low ROI that was the barrier - not the deal itself. The Al-Qadi's are bankers. (No cockney rhyming pun intended). That is why I maintain UWE was a good deal for Bristol Rovers, but a bad one for Dwane Sports and outside investors. I think Kevin Spencer was of this opinion as well. A chance in a generation lost? If it can be resurrected as per your comment above - bring it on. UTG! Isn't the missing bit here what Higgs may have handed to UWE in exchange for the difference between Sainsbury's £28m and the £45+m build cost of UWE? Why would UWE hand that back just because Higgs has been replaced on the opposite side of the table? As for due diligence, Swiss may well be right when he suggested that it extended to having The Mem valued at 2 x X with the purchase price being 1 x X, based on that they decided to buy and then investigate what could be done with UWE later. Either way, without Sainsbury's, there was a big gap between the value of The Mem and the build price of UWE, an absolute minimum of £25m, even if the owners put their own money in it wouldn't matter, they would still want a return on it, not just the extra £20m, the whole £45m, so it didn't matter that much who funded it, that was just about spreading risk, my opinion is that Higgs may well have given away so much of the cake that there wasn't enough left to provide a return on the build cost.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 11:25:31 GMT
Oldie - Pretty much agreed on all points. My personal GUESS is that the UWE was doable and needn't have saddled us with an unacceptable level of external debt. Why would Dwane Sports have bought us otherwise? I would conclude that a low ROI that was the barrier - not the deal itself. The Al-Qadi's are bankers. (No cockney rhyming pun intended). That is why I maintain UWE was a good deal for Bristol Rovers, but a bad one for Dwane Sports and outside investors. I think Kevin Spencer was of this opinion as well. A chance in a generation lost? If it can be resurrected as per your comment above - bring it on. UTG! Isn't the missing bit here what Higgs may have handed to UWE in exchange for the difference between Sainsbury's £28m and the £45+m build cost of UWE? Why would UWE hand that back just because Higgs has been replaced on the opposite side of the table? As for due diligence, Swiss may well be right when he suggested that it extended to having The Mem valued at 2 x X with the purchase price being 1 x X, based on that they decided to buy and then investigate what could be done with UWE later. Either way, without Sainsbury's, there was a big gap between the value of The Mem and the build price of UWE, an absolute minimum of £25m, even if the owners put their own money in it wouldn't matter, they would still want a return on it, not just the extra £20m, the whole £45m, so it didn't matter that much who funded it, that was just about spreading risk, my opinion is that Higgs may well have given away so much of the cake that there wasn't enough left to provide a return on the build cost. We can debate the numbers, but yes that's pretty much what I think.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,126
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 28, 2018 11:28:42 GMT
Oldie - Pretty much agreed on all points. My personal GUESS is that the UWE was doable and needn't have saddled us with an unacceptable level of external debt. Why would Dwane Sports have bought us otherwise? I would conclude that a low ROI that was the barrier - not the deal itself. The Al-Qadi's are bankers. (No cockney rhyming pun intended). That is why I maintain UWE was a good deal for Bristol Rovers, but a bad one for Dwane Sports and outside investors. I think Kevin Spencer was of this opinion as well. A chance in a generation lost? If it can be resurrected as per your comment above - bring it on. UTG! I guess my friend, only time now will tell. In the meantime it's a lovely day down here and it's cheese and cider day in my local village pub. Real cider that is. Any comments made by me after 3pm I deny responsibility for, now.😎😎 Enjoy! I look forward to reading your comments post 3pm.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 12:03:48 GMT
Isn't the missing bit here what Higgs may have handed to UWE in exchange for the difference between Sainsbury's £28m and the £45+m build cost of UWE? Why would UWE hand that back just because Higgs has been replaced on the opposite side of the table? As for due diligence, Swiss may well be right when he suggested that it extended to having The Mem valued at 2 x X with the purchase price being 1 x X, based on that they decided to buy and then investigate what could be done with UWE later. Either way, without Sainsbury's, there was a big gap between the value of The Mem and the build price of UWE, an absolute minimum of £25m, even if the owners put their own money in it wouldn't matter, they would still want a return on it, not just the extra £20m, the whole £45m, so it didn't matter that much who funded it, that was just about spreading risk, my opinion is that Higgs may well have given away so much of the cake that there wasn't enough left to provide a return on the build cost. We can debate the numbers, but yes that's pretty much what I think. I think that the only number we have is, what was it, £28.3m from Sainsbury's? The rest was always going to be fluid anyway. I still think it would have been interesting to see what Higgs did had he have won the court case. Pure guesswork, but maybe another action against Sainsbury's relating to increase in build cost and a load of other 'noise'.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 12:12:57 GMT
Yup - I am, quite literally, revolting. Serious question vertigo - do you think we will have new owners within a month? IMHO opinion we need new owners to move the Club forward. The current ones have been "rumbled" (well some bright chaps knew there was something amiss well before the UWE collapse. Take a bow swissgas). I think quite a few of us had serious concerns with the owners post UWE, and the shambolic PR disaster that ensued. Right now, incredibly, there are still a few people that think the Al-Qadi's are (and I paraphrase) "doing an excellent job and are here for the long run". For these people - please please please take a look at the stunning piece of cutting edge architecture that is the new family stand. It is symbolic of their tenure. It is a failure. It illustrates perfectly what they have achieved in terms of improving infrastructure in the 2 1/2 years they have been in charge. It's a tent that someone else has paid for. If I was Bristol Energy - I would be suing. Some people are happy with it. I would suggest that some people are very easily pleased and content with mediocrity. It's not even mediocre. It is an embarrassment. Regards, Rebel. To be honest, not even from the first day of the AlQ's tenure did I think that they would be throwing in their own money to complete the building of the UWE. I am sure they mentioned that they would be looking at outside investment right from the start but that seemed to get glossed over in some sort of euphoria that was surrounding the club at the time. As investment bankers, I had always assumed that they would be well versed in raising capital from outside investors to complete large projects. I had always assumed that they were going to use a vehicle such as a bond so that investors would get a return on investment over a long period of time. When the UWE collapsed I remember reading comments such as, "It wasn't right for Dwane, but that doesn't mean it wasn't right for Rovers'. Nobody knows what was said or why the deal collapsed. I do remember well before the AlQs turned up there were many of us who were questioning the cut of non-matchday revenue between UWE and Rovers. The sort of phrase used above made it sound like the AlQs only wanted to proceed if they were going to get something for themselves. I do not think this was true. In my mind, the business case would always have to stack up and show a clear profit as that is the only way that you would be able to sell any kind of bond or debenture to outside investors. If it "Wasn't right for Dwane", it means it wasn't right for an investment vehicle, therefore there would be no way to raise the capital. It is fair enough that they would want a return, they are not a charity after all. What rankles for me with the potential "It was a good deal for us but not for Dwane" school of thought is the agony that they would not build it...but seemed to be doing nothing about looking for someone who would. And so we as supporters were left to watch possibly our best ever chance of a stadium disappear down the river never to be seen again for reasons we aren't allowed to know. The thought that it might be because they didn't get what *they* were looking for when there could have perhaps been alternatives leaves me wondering rather bitterly "what if?" This has only been compounded by what appears to have been gross negligence since. The money has dried up, sponsors are forking out for "temporary" measures and the owners refuse to clearly state their vision of the future direction of the club. It feels like we couldn't be more rudderless if we tried and the plans for the UWE are yesterday's chip wrappings. Hard to believe that things could have gone so wrong from the day they takeover
|
|
|
Post by laughinggas on Sept 28, 2018 12:25:12 GMT
This all depends on what is meant being good for the fans?
Does that just mean having a shiny new stadium with bells and whistles so great match day experience. Or is it new stadium with income that will grow the club? Huge difference.
|
|
|
Post by billyocean on Sept 28, 2018 12:44:33 GMT
Maybe the rumoured new owners (American; Thai; Higgs; Buffalo Bill; Shorty; the man with the Golden Gun; Isle on Man; Jersey) will leave it until he (they) have built a new ground, and then we can send it back to the Badminton Horse Trials I once did a very hard day’s work putting up the stands at Badminton horse trials and lugging seats round. You’re right, the Waq Shack is pretty similar. It also reminds me of a medieval royal joust stand. We could have Lines presenting a maiden with a rose before kick off
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 12:56:23 GMT
Another rebel searching frantically for a cause. Yup - I am, quite literally, revolting. Serious question vertigo - do you think we will have new owners within a month? IMHO opinion we need new owners to move the Club forward. The current ones have been "rumbled" (well some bright chaps knew there was something amiss well before the UWE collapse. Take a bow swissgas). I think quite a few of us had serious concerns with the owners post UWE, and the shambolic PR disaster that ensued. Right now, incredibly, there are still a few people that think the Al-Qadi's are (and I paraphrase) "doing an excellent job and are here for the long run". For these people - please please please take a look at the stunning piece of cutting edge architecture that is the new family stand. It is symbolic of their tenure. It is a failure. It illustrates perfectly what they have achieved in terms of improving infrastructure in the 2 1/2 years they have been in charge. It's a tent that someone else has paid for. If I was Bristol Energy - I would be suing. Some people are happy with it. I would suggest that some people are very easily pleased and content with mediocrity. It's not even mediocre. It is an embarrassment. Regards, Rebel. New owners within a month? no idea but no evidence put forward by anyone to suggest its true. New owners rumbled? Neither swissgas or anyone else has produced any evidence to suggest the owners have bad intentions toward the club or are managing the club badly. Charge against the mem is a legitimate business practise not unique to BRFC. The owners have clearly improved the club and the ground during their tenure. We need a new ground and they have been unable to deliver that which is frustrating for supporters i agree. If we had a new ground and a promotion winning budget provided by the owners the same group of posters would be telling us that were being led to ruin by irresponsible overspending. Some people are negative no matter what happens thats how they are.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 13:31:24 GMT
Yup - I am, quite literally, revolting. Serious question vertigo - do you think we will have new owners within a month? IMHO opinion we need new owners to move the Club forward. The current ones have been "rumbled" (well some bright chaps knew there was something amiss well before the UWE collapse. Take a bow swissgas). I think quite a few of us had serious concerns with the owners post UWE, and the shambolic PR disaster that ensued. Right now, incredibly, there are still a few people that think the Al-Qadi's are (and I paraphrase) "doing an excellent job and are here for the long run". For these people - please please please take a look at the stunning piece of cutting edge architecture that is the new family stand. It is symbolic of their tenure. It is a failure. It illustrates perfectly what they have achieved in terms of improving infrastructure in the 2 1/2 years they have been in charge. It's a tent that someone else has paid for. If I was Bristol Energy - I would be suing. Some people are happy with it. I would suggest that some people are very easily pleased and content with mediocrity. It's not even mediocre. It is an embarrassment. Regards, Rebel. New owners within a month? no idea but no evidence put forward by anyone to suggest its true. New owners rumbled? Neither swissgas or anyone else has produced any evidence to suggest the owners have bad intentions toward the club or are managing the club badly. Charge against the mem is a legitimate business practise not unique to BRFC. The owners have clearly improved the club and the ground during their tenure. We need a new ground and they have been unable to deliver that which is frustrating for supporters i agree. If we had a new ground and a promotion winning budget provided by the owners the same group of posters would be telling us that were being led to ruin by irresponsible overspending. Some people are negative no matter what happens thats how they are.These owners were, as far as I recall, universally welcomed. Any negativity is a direct result of their words and actions. Some people are dreamers who wouldn't recognise reality if it walked up to them and slapped them in the face with a big reality fish, that's just how they are. Glad you think they are running the club well. So you approve of an office, 120 miles away, costing the club £1000 per-day, and then them awarding themselves interest on the debt created by having that office. It's nice that you are happy, personally, I think it's outrageous.
|
|
|
Post by matealotblue on Sept 28, 2018 13:34:21 GMT
Maybe the rumoured new owners (American; Thai; Higgs; Buffalo Bill; Shorty; the man with the Golden Gun; Isle on Man; Jersey) will leave it until he (they) have built a new ground, and then we can send it back to the Badminton Horse Trials I once did a very hard day’s work putting up the stands at Badminton horse trials and lugging seats round. You’re right, the Waq Shack is pretty similar. It also reminds me of a medieval royal joust stand. We could have Lines presenting a maiden with a rose before kick off Roses you can find (even if they are in a tin 🤪) Maidens......not so sure ....??
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,126
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 28, 2018 13:38:33 GMT
I believe we will have new owners in a month. Firm evidence? A bit thin in the ground. Just drawing my own conclusions from what I have heard and read. I really value certain people on here and their views. "Rumbled". As in no "Plan B once UWE collapsed and they want to sell". Martyn Starnes confirmed we still have no Plan B. I have never suggested any "bad intentions" by the Al-Qadi's, neither to my knowledge, has swissgas. Yes, the owners have improved the Club. The cost of those improvements (pitch, Development squad, senior management team hires etc) currently run at £2mil a year. A potential buyer will have to find in excess of an additional £5mil to cover that expenditure (vs. the price tag in Feb 2016). Yes, we need a new ground. Your penultimate sentence is just plain odd. If you care to trawl back through my posts Feb 2016 to August 2017 - you will see me positive and 100% behind the Al-Qadi's. Then the UWE collapsed. They then lied to us. And we discover there was no Plan B. Some people are unremittingly positive no matter what. I guess ignorance really is bliss.
|
|
eppinggas
Administrator
Ian Alexander
Don't care
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 8,126
|
Post by eppinggas on Sept 28, 2018 13:45:33 GMT
New owners within a month? no idea but no evidence put forward by anyone to suggest its true. New owners rumbled? Neither swissgas or anyone else has produced any evidence to suggest the owners have bad intentions toward the club or are managing the club badly. Charge against the mem is a legitimate business practise not unique to BRFC. The owners have clearly improved the club and the ground during their tenure. We need a new ground and they have been unable to deliver that which is frustrating for supporters i agree. If we had a new ground and a promotion winning budget provided by the owners the same group of posters would be telling us that were being led to ruin by irresponsible overspending. Some people are negative no matter what happens thats how they are.These owners were, as far as I recall, universally welcomed. Any negativity is a direct result of their words and actions. Some people are dreamers who wouldn't recognise reality if it walked up to them and slapped them in the face with a big reality fish, that's just how they are. Glad you think they are running the club well. So you approve of an office, 120 miles away, costing the club £1000 per-day, and then them awarding themselves interest on the debt created by having that office. It's nice that you are happy, personally, I think it's outrageous. The London office costs 'only' £684.93 per day based on a 365 day year. Bargain.
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Sept 28, 2018 14:48:02 GMT
To be honest, not even from the first day of the AlQ's tenure did I think that they would be throwing in their own money to complete the building of the UWE. I am sure they mentioned that they would be looking at outside investment right from the start but that seemed to get glossed over in some sort of euphoria that was surrounding the club at the time. As investment bankers, I had always assumed that they would be well versed in raising capital from outside investors to complete large projects. I had always assumed that they were going to use a vehicle such as a bond so that investors would get a return on investment over a long period of time. When the UWE collapsed I remember reading comments such as, "It wasn't right for Dwane, but that doesn't mean it wasn't right for Rovers'. Nobody knows what was said or why the deal collapsed. I do remember well before the AlQs turned up there were many of us who were questioning the cut of non-matchday revenue between UWE and Rovers. The sort of phrase used above made it sound like the AlQs only wanted to proceed if they were going to get something for themselves. I do not think this was true. In my mind, the business case would always have to stack up and show a clear profit as that is the only way that you would be able to sell any kind of bond or debenture to outside investors. If it "Wasn't right for Dwane", it means it wasn't right for an investment vehicle, therefore there would be no way to raise the capital. It is fair enough that they would want a return, they are not a charity after all. What rankles for me with the potential "It was a good deal for us but not for Dwane" school of thought is the agony that they would not build it...but seemed to be doing nothing about looking for someone who would. And so we as supporters were left to watch possibly our best ever chance of a stadium disappear down the river never to be seen again for reasons we aren't allowed to know. The thought that it might be because they didn't get what *they* were looking for when there could have perhaps been alternatives leaves me wondering rather bitterly "what if?" This has only been compounded by what appears to have been gross negligence since. The money has dried up, sponsors are forking out for "temporary" measures and the owners refuse to clearly state their vision of the future direction of the club. It feels like we couldn't be more rudderless if we tried and the plans for the UWE are yesterday's chip wrappings. Hard to believe that things could have gone so wrong from the day they takeover This is not an I told you so post but I had my misgivings about them from day 1. I warned friends not to be boastful and that we had to wait & see. We were the ALQ”s second choice, or should I say Waels second choice ? Gillingham owner knocked them back. The badge kissing made me nauseas as did the many, many selfies & Waels pretence. His desperation in attempting to be one of the boys & happily taking credit for promotions. I once warned him, in a private twitter chat, of the speed things & opinions can and do change and he replied along the lines of I can take it as I understand football very well. Seems that now he has had some questions asked, he is quickly withdrawing from social media. I wish him no ill will but I always felt there was huge naivety in him. Lets face it, he was blagging it all the while. Most people who professed to know football so well would not have need to hire as many experts but I fear that was nothing but a smokescreen. It takes some doing to come into a club and more than double the losses.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 15:21:13 GMT
It is fair enough that they would want a return, they are not a charity after all. What rankles for me with the potential "It was a good deal for us but not for Dwane" school of thought is the agony that they would not build it...but seemed to be doing nothing about looking for someone who would. And so we as supporters were left to watch possibly our best ever chance of a stadium disappear down the river never to be seen again for reasons we aren't allowed to know. The thought that it might be because they didn't get what *they* were looking for when there could have perhaps been alternatives leaves me wondering rather bitterly "what if?" This has only been compounded by what appears to have been gross negligence since. The money has dried up, sponsors are forking out for "temporary" measures and the owners refuse to clearly state their vision of the future direction of the club. It feels like we couldn't be more rudderless if we tried and the plans for the UWE are yesterday's chip wrappings. Hard to believe that things could have gone so wrong from the day they takeover This is not an I told you so post but I had my misgivings about them from day 1. I warned friends not to be boastful and that we had to wait & see. We were the ALQ”s second choice, or shoukd I say Waels second choice ? Gillingham owner knocked them back. The badge kissing made me nauseas as did the manmy many selfies & Waels pretence. His desperation in attempting to be one of the boys & happily taking credit for promotions. I once warned him, in a private twitter chat, of the speed things & opinions can and do change and he replied along the lines of I can take it as I understand football very well. Seems that now he has had some questions asked, he is quickly withdrawing from social media. I wish him no ill will but I always felt there was huge naivety in him. Lets face it, he was blagging it all the while. Most people who professed to know football so well would not have need to hire as many experts but I fear that was nothing but a smokescreen. It takes some doing to come into a club and more than double the losses. KP Most of that is nonsense.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 15:27:50 GMT
It is fair enough that they would want a return, they are not a charity after all. What rankles for me with the potential "It was a good deal for us but not for Dwane" school of thought is the agony that they would not build it...but seemed to be doing nothing about looking for someone who would. And so we as supporters were left to watch possibly our best ever chance of a stadium disappear down the river never to be seen again for reasons we aren't allowed to know. The thought that it might be because they didn't get what *they* were looking for when there could have perhaps been alternatives leaves me wondering rather bitterly "what if?" This has only been compounded by what appears to have been gross negligence since. The money has dried up, sponsors are forking out for "temporary" measures and the owners refuse to clearly state their vision of the future direction of the club. It feels like we couldn't be more rudderless if we tried and the plans for the UWE are yesterday's chip wrappings. Hard to believe that things could have gone so wrong from the day they takeover This is not an I told you so post but I had my misgivings about them from day 1. I warned friends not to be boastful and that we had to wait & see. We were the ALQ”s second choice, or shoukd I say Waels second choice ? Gillingham owner knocked them back. The badge kissing made me nauseas as did the manmy many selfies & Waels pretence. His desperation in attempting to be one of the boys & happily taking credit for promotions. I once warned him, in a private twitter chat, of the speed things & opinions can and do change and he replied along the lines of I can take it as I understand football very well. Seems that now he has had some questions asked, he is quickly withdrawing from social media. I wish him no ill will but I always felt there was huge naivety in him. Lets face it, he was blagging it all the while. Most people who professed to know football so well would not have need to hire as many experts but I fear that was nothing but a smokescreen. It takes some doing to come into a club and more than double the losses. People seem way too happy to overlook the second choice aspect- like they homed in on Rovers specifically because of the UWE when we know that they touted themselves around far less attractive clubs first. Still, keep believing that we are a special club with a beautiful piece of land and that Wael was a Gashead from birth etc.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 15:31:42 GMT
This is not an I told you so post but I had my misgivings about them from day 1. I warned friends not to be boastful and that we had to wait & see. We were the ALQ”s second choice, or shoukd I say Waels second choice ? Gillingham owner knocked them back. The badge kissing made me nauseas as did the manmy many selfies & Waels pretence. His desperation in attempting to be one of the boys & happily taking credit for promotions. I once warned him, in a private twitter chat, of the speed things & opinions can and do change and he replied along the lines of I can take it as I understand football very well. Seems that now he has had some questions asked, he is quickly withdrawing from social media. I wish him no ill will but I always felt there was huge naivety in him. Lets face it, he was blagging it all the while. Most people who professed to know football so well would not have need to hire as many experts but I fear that was nothing but a smokescreen. It takes some doing to come into a club and more than double the losses. KP Most of that is nonsense. Some of it is OK. The losses are huge. The bit that I disagree with most is the part about employing experts, that's the right way to do things, surround yourself with people who are better than you are at doing the job, the problem is, we don't seem to have any output from Wael's army of experts.
|
|