Did Nick Illingsworth Really Say This

[alpine_saint]

I think I prefer the football forum negativity that results from not winning a football game to the negativity that unfathomably arises from an upbeat financial statement.

 

Sigh.

 

 

This.

 

Some of our fans are perverts.

[up and away]

I'm with you on this - if there was another world war then all this stupidness would be put aside, but it's just football rivalry at the end of the day and as suc it's not really important.

 

But getting back to this snide thread, the more i think about it the more annoyed I am by it because at the end of the day nick just posted a comment that you may or may not agree with and some slithery snakes decided it was OK to have a pop at him for it.

 

Welldone to all the decent people who've supported him because that is the right attitude to have.

 

The OP is a very poor analogy. On one hand you have a company funded by debt with little chance of repayment, on the other hand you have a company funded from ample reserves. It is of no real significance that loans were converted into shares, because it's all from the same source. In the grand scheme of things, whether that source decides to call in those loans is exactly the same if they decide to sell off part / all of the club. Irrespective of the loans being converted or still outstanding.

 

There is absolutely no comparison between Saints and Pompey over financial issues. We can afford to balance any short fall between spend and income from another source as demonstrated in the accounts. Eventually we will have to square the circle of spend and income at some time in the Premier to be sustainable. That's to be expected and something adopted by every Premier club that balances their books, even though the finances can get out of kilter going through the Championship to get to the Premier.

 

The trick is to be self sustainable in the Premier unless you have a constant source of outside income.

[St Marco]

Welldone to all the decent people who've supported him because that is the right attitude to have.

 

Disagree there.

 

I have met the guy and I know a lot of other people who have been conned by him in the past from various events. It's funny that your talking about him like he is some angel because "he get's off his arse". That must mean he is a great guy! The reality is he is an attention seeker and sometimes the way in which he has done that has bordered on the controversial.

I do find it kind of funny that you are defending the guy on here but yet when it comes to Cortese you don't apply the same rule. I can imagine what you would say if Cortese arranged an end of year celebration at St Mary's for "real Saints fans" for £25 a ticket including free drink etc but when you got there it was not as advertised and the drink was actually one can each.... I can imagine you would be among the first to rush to this "spaz forum" as you called it to vent your anger of the club ripping off the fans!

 

While some might find Nick a "nice guy" a lot of others don't. If you read his articles about the club your find quite a lot of them are negative. They put a ****ty spin on things inside the club. Some would say that is an agenda. Some would say thats just how it is over there. But saying it is the right attitude to have is wrong because pretty much everyone knew that whatever numbers were released he would of wrote something ****ty about them. Go read the article from the last time.

 

We can all guess at what is happening inside with the finances but in the 3 years or so they have been in charge have we ever had anything even remotly happen that is the same as what is happening down the road? How many times have we heard the people in charge say the plan is to get Southampton back to the PL and make it be self sustainable? But the thing that tips it over the edge for me and shows it is just a bitter rant is does he not realise what Cortese is a specialist at? It seems he has forgotten when comparing the two that Cortese is a succesful banker from Switzerland. Now I don't know the guy but working in business myself i'm pretty sure he would not want a trainwreck of a company on his CV. As a banker i'm pretty sure he will have covered most of the situations that could happen. For example say we don't go up and we no longer have the backing of the family. We have a very talented squad who we could easily sell. We bought Lambert for £1m, how much would he be worth now? Lallana cost us nothing what would he be worth now?

 

Point being there is nothing in his reply to even suggest ways to bring the wages down if we did go the same way. It is an "assumption". One which as always takes a negative view point.

 

What is happening is nothing like what is happening down the road and to suggest it is really does seem desperate to me.

[The9]

http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/southampton/fb_mb.php?m=v&t=51572&page=2#50

 

Jeez, and I try and give someone the benefit of the doubt. Assuming that's him and not some other Nick.

Edited 30 March, 2012 by The9

[The9]

Anyone else glad muppets like this are prevented from getting Season Tickets? I wouldn't want this kind of custom in a business I owned.

 

Nope, I think that's completely out of order irrespective of his sometimes half-baked criticisms, though as a privately-run business they can basically do what they want.

[dubai_phil]

OK addressing his opinions

Firstly our income this season wont have increased hugely, the difference between league one and the Championship is minimal, literally the tv money plus gate money (4k average increase @ £17 per ticket average = £1.56 million) probably all off set against increased wage bill.

Define Modest Nick? All estimates were that our income dropped by around 30% when we went into L1. Similar figures have been quoted on the PTS thread.

So let us give the benefit of the doubt. Let us say that our income has risen this season by between 18 and 25%.

That is an OUTSTANDING performance by a Business in this recession. How many Retail chains have gone bust in the past 12 months? Does he not ever listen to the Business News on TV? Jeez, the economy has been in RECESSION - ie NEGATIVE growth for most of the past year. We have had pages of moans about how many on here cannot afford to go yet they STILL do.

Sorry IMHO this is his first fault Revenue HAS increased and by ANY standards it is NOT modest

 

The key point is that our wages equate to 93% of our income, think how much we have been slaughtering Pompey for having such a high wage bill and how that is the road to disaster, Personally I dont think there is much to worry about,

 

It is a "Key Point" but "I don't think it is anything to worry about" Well Nick, WHICH is it. If it is nothing to worry about then in your opinion it CANNOT be key.

 

Then let us look deeper. When ML bought the club he INVESTED CAPITAL. What did he GET? A team built around Paul Wotton, Olly Lancashire, an injured Lee Holmes & Lloyd James.

What are THE MOST IMPORTANT ASSETS of a football club? - It's Playing staff. So he INVESTED CAPITAL to IMPROVE THE VALUE OF THE ASSETS OF THE BUSINESS. The ENTIRE point that distinguishes us from the skates is that they INCLUDED the COST OF SALARIES into the value of the Investment.

They did NOT spunk 36 grand a week onto a 52 year old, or a has been PL player, they made sure they 1) retained players who could improve in performance AND value 2) Bought players who HAD A RESALE VALUE.

 

So we were in L1 with 93% - how many pages on ALLL the forums were dedicated to WORRY that IF we did NOT catch Huddersfield "We would lose our best players" All of us KNEW that Lambert, Lallana, Morgan, AOC, Fonte would be off at the drop of a TRANSFER BID - the high earners would be GONE and MOSt would have retunred A PROFIT.

 

(Jeez, the SAME applies THIS season FFS) And anyway, AOC DID leave and did we buy a TBH? no, we built a state of the art facility for the future - IT IS CALLED INVESTMENT OF CAPITAL

 

How the hell does he think his Laptop was created, IPads & Phones, HTC Desires, they ALL came about by INVESTING for the future by PROPER businesses. Does Nick work in a Bank? Where there is never a thought about anything other than make a buck today?

 

but the inference is clear, the Libeherr family are in this for money, whether markus loved the club is now sadly not an issue, but converting loans to shares, although just shifting paper, shows that they are tightening down the small print on the contract.

 

What are you talking about Nick? Do you so seriously fail to understand the definition of SHARE CAPITAL and EQUITY They invested MONEY. They have retained their MONEY. It is now a piece of paper. That paper can be kept. it can be passed to the family members or it CAN BE SOLD. Whatever happens the ONLY concern that it gives to Southampton Football Club is that we (inc NC) can no longer have ANY say in who BUYS those piece of paper.

The Shareholders gave money to the club once before. They gave 32million. They lost every penny of it when we went into Admin. IF Rupert turned up and gave teh Liebherrs 100 mil for their piece of paper we can do sod all about it (apart from make sure he loses the lot)

The CLUB no longer has to pay that back - JEEZ NO INTEREST PAYMENTS (ask Man Ure what THAT means) we only give them back a SHARE of any PROFIT

 

The reality is that we have and are making a loss, the only differnce between us and Pompey is that our owners havent been arrested and had their assets frozen and therefore cant pay the bills.

Poor, very poor. the fundamental difference is that as NC said in previous Interviews the Money was invested in the club BEFORE he went out to spend it - That is called Compliance. Compare the Mali group with Decades of PUBLISHED FINANCIAL REPORTS, a track record of Sports Sponsorship and a a firmly establised Corporate Social Responsibility programme to two guys who turned up out of the blue with nothing but a PROMISE of a Bank Guarantee and no accounts and no Internet history except Rumour Mafia.

A VERY lame linkage

 

All I am saying is we have spent the last six months berating Pompey supporters for allowing owners to come in and spend money that the club doesnt have and how they havent learnt their lessons, yet we are in exactly the same boat.

 

Total failure to understand Business. What the hell does he think the City of London does? he lives in a Capitalist Society yet utterly fails to understand the notion of how Equity and Investment works. He may not be this stupid, but he has chosen his words poorly.

Lampitt sat down with two people who offered him NO cash, who had NOT paid any cash to buy the ownership of PCFC, they were never INVESTORS.

 

NC sat down with ML and allocated an Investment into a Business. NC spent what he had in the bank, he KNEW he never had to pay it back. He also knew that IF he made mistakes and lost his FRIENDS' money he would lose more than a job.

 

We have NEVER been in the same boat. Even IF we are not self sufficient, even IF we do not get promoted, the transfer fees for Morgan and Adam would MORE than cover our financial needs for next season.

 

We have ASSETS. The skates had thin air, there is NO comparison whatsoever.

 

 

 

Hence, IMHO I believe he is a cock

 

And hence I don't care if others on here think my opionion above is a crock of sh1t.

 

That is freedom

[dune]

Disagree there.

 

I have met the guy and I know a lot of other people who have been conned by him in the past from various events. It's funny that your talking about him like he is some angel because "he get's off his arse". That must mean he is a great guy! The reality is he is an attention seeker and sometimes the way in which he has done that has bordered on the controversial.

 

Actually I think he's a decent guy because I think he's a decent as a person. I don't know him, but he's always been fair on the UI, can take a joke etc. It's my judgement that he's alright.

[Frank's cousin]

Interesting to the usual Pavlovian knee-jerk reaction (geddit?) to the use of the words "Nick" and "Illingsworth" consecutivley. I actually read what he wrote:

 

- pargarph 1, statement of what is quite likely true: income up modelstly, wages up too.

 

But this is very vague, and as such is somewhat biassed towards 'we should all be worried' - He makes no attempt to try and assess what teh increase is and what that potentially means for the ratio 2011-2012

 

- paragrpah 2: wages 93% of income is TRULY a worry, and one which wouldn't be allowed under some rules. Its not sustainable as a business, and is someting a lot of clubs have gone thorugh (incldugin SFC).

 

True if this was without any means to service it - we all know the club has stated time and again that the aim is self sustainabilty in teh prem - it all depends on whether you view injection of investment capital as 'income' or not - if loans then you need greater guarrantees that its sustainble in the future until such a time its repaid in full and you would hope contingency is made for any unforeseeable issues. In our case it was indicated that there was proviosn to fund teh club for a RAPID return to the top flight - OK it was not sepecified that this was in effect loan conversion to equity, but I still believe this was ALWAYS the intention - Liebherrs dont do borrowings - they inject their OWN cash to build business - the news yesterday just CONFIRMS what we always believed... some hoped

"shows that they are tightening down the small print on the contract" is arguable - there might be other (tax?) benefits of this, plus the ability to trade. But it is in any event arguable.

 

There is NO evidence for this one way or another - is pure speculation - yes it makes a sale easier, but not more inevitable - not sure what he is getting at here to be honest

 

 

- paras 3 and 4, well, pretty much true: the difference between profligate spenders is their ability to pay the bills at the end of each month. Ours can, poopeys cant.

 

But where is the analysis of the strategy? If we assume that the NC/Liebherr strategy was to inject capital to fund growth then its NOT overspending if the spending is in line with the budgets set out in plan - overspending in that case would be if we had blown the 33 mil in one season ignoring the budget....

- "i dont think the liebherrs are of the same ilk as Pompeys owners, but that doesnt change the points about overspending," Fair comment.

 

No its not when you view it from a perspective of sensible business practice, robust budgetary controls and appropriate planning in line with teh agreed capital injection.

 

Sorry but to suggest NC and Liebherr of 'not of the same ilk' is a thinly veiled insult and I would have expected better from Nick - NC and Markus SAVED the club he says he loves - even if he does not love them, they are due more respect at the very least

OK, slag him off because he eats children, but at kleast address the points he makes.

 

I'll bite and address his points

[This Charming Man]

Actually I think he's a decent guy because I think he's a decent as a person. I don't know him, but he's always been fair on the UI, can take a joke etc. It's my judgement that he's alright.

 

I do believe his little party at Wembley before the JPT final lost him a lot of fans and is what St Marco was alluding to with his Cortese end of season party reference.

 

I can understand why a lot of people are and were p1ssed off with him over that.

[Frank's cousin]

Think NIck is in the classic case of 'when in a hole...stop digging...' Naturally he has the right to disagree with strategy and approach of the club if thats his view (although he has not suggested a viable alternative that would achieve the same in such a period) - but it just give me the feckin hump to see this sniping ****** pant wetting negativity ....when you look at where we are now compared to when Markus and NC took over.... so hes narked over the ST business - well be a man, apologise and put it right... swallow some feckin pride and sort it out in private.

[hypochondriac]

Think NIck is in the classic case of 'when in a hole...stop digging...' Naturally he has the right to disagree with strategy and approach of the club if thats his view (although he has not suggested a viable alternative that would achieve the same in such a period) - but it just give me the feckin hump to see this sniping ****** pant wetting negativity ....when you look at where we are now compared to when Markus and NC took over.... so hes narked over the ST business - well be a man' date=' apologise and put it right... swallow some feckin pride and sort it out in private.[/quote']

 

Whilst I do agree with the majority of your post, I do believe he tried to sort it in private for some time. It was only when he was ignored for a long time and blocked from getting it sorted that he went public.

[The9]

Jeez, and I try and give someone the benefit of the doubt. Assuming that's him and not some other Nick.

 

Actually having re-read it, with the exception of his paranoia about "tightening contracts" (which is just writing off the debt within UEFA's monetary rules) and the failure to accept that our owner has the money and none of Portsmouth's did, most of it is just about fair comment, albeit with a bit of a flapping spin.

 

As far as "rocking the boat" goes, nothing to do with being a successful business (which we're not at the moment, btw - that's what the "LOSS" stuff is about) all to do with the timing of announcing the accounts.

[Maggie May]

Silver Spoon.

[ottery st mary]

:rolleyes:IF NICK is half as intelligent as I have been led to believe...He would not have written this..

 

IT has to be an idiot, someone who has an axe to grind in respect of Saints or against NA...

 

OR.... more likely a Pompey supporter...

 

like Corp or PFC123......

 

Mind you the idiot, axe to grind and Pompey supporter ..may well come under the same heading;)

 

 

Noooooooooo Nick is a Saints supporter..he would not do this:p

 

Whoever...WHY do this at this time?

 

To me it does not matter if part true or opinion..IT is a dig at Saints..

Edited 30 March, 2012 by ottery st mary

[dune]

I do believe his little party at Wembley before the JPT final lost him a lot of fans and is what St Marco was alluding to with his Cortese end of season party reference.

 

I can understand why a lot of people are and were p1ssed off with him over that.

 

Well yeah, but they were mugs for paying in the first place. I went in the boozer Stu Romsey organised and it was free and it was great.

[Danbert]

Petty? Maybe.

 

The fact is though, SFC is now a privately owned company, run by NC.

 

IF Nick Illingsworth was a regular in a pub and then started to slag off the landlord to everyone else that frequented said pub then NC would be well within his rights to bar him.

 

As I see it, it is effectively the same deal. SFC is run by NC, if NC see's it fit to bar people that slag off his work then there's little anyone can do about it.

 

Personally, I don't really understand how anyone can be overly critical of Cortese. I am not saying he has made no mistakes, or that he is beyond reproach or questioning, but I really believe the progess SFC has made under his tenureship is unquestionable, and he has played a MASSIVE role in this. For this Cortese has earned (IMO) maximum levels of respect and deserve massive amounts of credit. And I live up his arse and if he wants to bar me too then that's fine.

 

Corrected that for you

[KelvinsRightGlove]

Corrected that for you

 

Great input there.

 

Your concise insights really are an asset for this board.

 

How exactly am I living in NC's arse? Just putting a different perspective on things. Which others have also referred to.

 

If appreciating the good work someone has done for the club means I 'live in their arse' then call me an anal dweller.

 

I never said I agreed with NC's decision, I just stated that he can pretty much do what he wants, and that on balance it is hard to argue with the progress made under NC. Which again is agreed with by many others on this thread.o

 

Come back when you have something intelligent to say. Until that point drag your knuckles back to your hole.

 

Better luck next time.

[ecuk268]

Am I correct in assuming that the figures exclude the Oxlade-Chamberlain money?

[This Charming Man]

Am I correct in assuming that the figures exclude the Oxlade-Chamberlain money?

 

I'm pretty sure that someone on another thread said the figures won't include the AOC money.

[Frank's cousin]

... the only truely remarkable thing about all this is that are still isolated pockets of fans who despite, eveything that has happened, everything that and then all the progress etc still feel harbour some sort ingrained distrust, hatred, dislike for NC without ever fully explaining their reasons in any sort of adult way - one can only assume its because they know deep down their reasons are ridiculous and would make them look pathetic. Given everything we do know (and yes if you are really paranoid there might be things we dont), how anyone who is a saints cant be absolutely feckin ecstatic about the current situation is beyond me... trivial gripes because he cant please all the people all the time is one thing. The snidey, veiled insults and ridicule truely are childish and frankly pathetic. I thought we had dumped those losers who wouldn'y be happy even with half time blow jobs in a champions league final when Lowe finally left... but on hey it only highlighted that they needed the thrill of having someone to blame for all their petty inadequacies to compensate for something... f*cking bewildering.

[Avenue Saint]

... the only truely remarkable thing about all this is that are still isolated pockets of fans who despite' date=' eveything that has happened, everything that and then all the progress etc still feel harbour some sort ingrained distrust, hatred, dislike for NC without ever fully explaining their reasons in any sort of adult way - one can only assume its because they know deep down their reasons are ridiculous and would make them look pathetic. Given everything we do know (and yes if you are really paranoid there might be things we dont), how anyone who is a saints cant be absolutely feckin ecstatic about the current situation is beyond me... trivial gripes because he cant please all the people all the time is one thing. The snidey, veiled insults and ridicule truely are childish and frankly pathetic. I thought we had dumped those losers who wouldn'y be happy even with half time blow jobs in a champions league final when Lowe finally left... but on hey it only highlighted that they needed the thrill of having someone to blame for all their petty inadequacies to compensate for something... f*cking bewildering.[/quote']

 

Excellent post!

[tpbury]

Excellent post!

 

Are the Euro final BJs available in Aus, if not, why not? NC OUT!!

[dune]

No it's not! maybe if you are a minority, black, disabled, illegal, gay, Scottish/Welsh etc, but for the majority it's a case of 'pay your taxes' and shut the f**k up.

 

Give it a few years and gingers will be liberated.

[trousers]

OK addressing his opinions

 

Define Modest Nick? All estimates were that our income dropped by around 30% when we went into L1. Similar figures have been quoted on the PTS thread.

So let us give the benefit of the doubt. Let us say that our income has risen this season by between 18 and 25%.

That is an OUTSTANDING performance by a Business in this recession. How many Retail chains have gone bust in the past 12 months? Does he not ever listen to the Business News on TV? Jeez, the economy has been in RECESSION - ie NEGATIVE growth for most of the past year. We have had pages of moans about how many on here cannot afford to go yet they STILL do.

Sorry IMHO this is his first fault Revenue HAS increased and by ANY standards it is NOT modest

 

 

 

It is a "Key Point" but "I don't think it is anything to worry about" Well Nick, WHICH is it. If it is nothing to worry about then in your opinion it CANNOT be key.

 

Then let us look deeper. When ML bought the club he INVESTED CAPITAL. What did he GET? A team built around Paul Wotton, Olly Lancashire, an injured Lee Holmes & Lloyd James.

What are THE MOST IMPORTANT ASSETS of a football club? - It's Playing staff. So he INVESTED CAPITAL to IMPROVE THE VALUE OF THE ASSETS OF THE BUSINESS. The ENTIRE point that distinguishes us from the skates is that they INCLUDED the COST OF SALARIES into the value of the Investment.

They did NOT spunk 36 grand a week onto a 52 year old, or a has been PL player, they made sure they 1) retained players who could improve in performance AND value 2) Bought players who HAD A RESALE VALUE.

 

So we were in L1 with 93% - how many pages on ALLL the forums were dedicated to WORRY that IF we did NOT catch Huddersfield "We would lose our best players" All of us KNEW that Lambert, Lallana, Morgan, AOC, Fonte would be off at the drop of a TRANSFER BID - the high earners would be GONE and MOSt would have retunred A PROFIT.

 

(Jeez, the SAME applies THIS season FFS) And anyway, AOC DID leave and did we buy a TBH? no, we built a state of the art facility for the future - IT IS CALLED INVESTMENT OF CAPITAL

 

How the hell does he think his Laptop was created, IPads & Phones, HTC Desires, they ALL came about by INVESTING for the future by PROPER businesses. Does Nick work in a Bank? Where there is never a thought about anything other than make a buck today?

 

 

 

What are you talking about Nick? Do you so seriously fail to understand the definition of SHARE CAPITAL and EQUITY They invested MONEY. They have retained their MONEY. It is now a piece of paper. That paper can be kept. it can be passed to the family members or it CAN BE SOLD. Whatever happens the ONLY concern that it gives to Southampton Football Club is that we (inc NC) can no longer have ANY say in who BUYS those piece of paper.

The Shareholders gave money to the club once before. They gave 32million. They lost every penny of it when we went into Admin. IF Rupert turned up and gave teh Liebherrs 100 mil for their piece of paper we can do sod all about it (apart from make sure he loses the lot)

The CLUB no longer has to pay that back - JEEZ NO INTEREST PAYMENTS (ask Man Ure what THAT means) we only give them back a SHARE of any PROFIT

 

 

Poor, very poor. the fundamental difference is that as NC said in previous Interviews the Money was invested in the club BEFORE he went out to spend it - That is called Compliance. Compare the Mali group with Decades of PUBLISHED FINANCIAL REPORTS, a track record of Sports Sponsorship and a a firmly establised Corporate Social Responsibility programme to two guys who turned up out of the blue with nothing but a PROMISE of a Bank Guarantee and no accounts and no Internet history except Rumour Mafia.

A VERY lame linkage

 

 

 

Total failure to understand Business. What the hell does he think the City of London does? he lives in a Capitalist Society yet utterly fails to understand the notion of how Equity and Investment works. He may not be this stupid, but he has chosen his words poorly.

Lampitt sat down with two people who offered him NO cash, who had NOT paid any cash to buy the ownership of PCFC, they were never INVESTORS.

 

NC sat down with ML and allocated an Investment into a Business. NC spent what he had in the bank, he KNEW he never had to pay it back. He also knew that IF he made mistakes and lost his FRIENDS' money he would lose more than a job.

 

We have NEVER been in the same boat. Even IF we are not self sufficient, even IF we do not get promoted, the transfer fees for Morgan and Adam would MORE than cover our financial needs for next season.

 

We have ASSETS. The skates had thin air, there is NO comparison whatsoever.

 

 

 

Hence, IMHO I believe he is a cock

 

And hence I don't care if others on here think my opionion above is a crock of sh1t.

 

That is freedom

 

^ 100% this

[Tamesaint]

... the only truely remarkable thing about all this is that are still isolated pockets of fans who despite' date=' eveything that has happened, everything that and then all the progress etc still feel harbour some sort ingrained distrust, hatred, dislike for NC without ever fully explaining their reasons in any sort of adult way - one can only assume its because they know deep down their reasons are ridiculous and would make them look pathetic. Given everything we do know (and yes if you are really paranoid there might be things we dont), how anyone who is a saints cant be absolutely feckin ecstatic about the current situation is beyond me... trivial gripes because he cant please all the people all the time is one thing. The snidey, veiled insults and ridicule truely are childish and frankly pathetic. I thought we had dumped those losers who wouldn'y be happy even with half time blow jobs in a champions league final when Lowe finally left... but on hey it only highlighted that they needed the thrill of having someone to blame for all their petty inadequacies to compensate for something... f*cking bewildering.[/quote']

 

Do Saints have to be in the Champions League final or can it be any CL final?

[Frank's cousin]

Do Saints have to be in the Champions League final or can it be any CL final?

 

Champions league and you get to pick between lady of choice.... and 'what the feck has the Roman ever done for us'...

[Dalek2003]

Illingsworth is an idiot and that's all I'll say on this matter.

[CB Fry]

OK addressing his opinions

 

Define Modest Nick? All estimates were that our income dropped by around 30% when we went into L1. Similar figures have been quoted on the PTS thread.

So let us give the benefit of the doubt. Let us say that our income has risen this season by between 18 and 25%.

That is an OUTSTANDING performance by a Business in this recession. How many Retail chains have gone bust in the past 12 months? Does he not ever listen to the Business News on TV? Jeez, the economy has been in RECESSION - ie NEGATIVE growth for most of the past year. We have had pages of moans about how many on here cannot afford to go yet they STILL do.

Sorry IMHO this is his first fault Revenue HAS increased and by ANY standards it is NOT modest

 

 

I agree with most of the rest of this post but this is stretching things a bit. The figures show we spent more than a pretty penny to get promoted, and since promotion we have got attendances back to where they were last time in the Championship.

 

The idea the club has stumbled on some miracle elixir of growth is frankly bonkers. If we had got promoted on, say, 40% wages to turnover, that would count as OUTSTANDING (in your terminology).

 

The idea that this is comparable with a high street clothing store is ludicrous. I bet Brightons revenues have gone up by far more % (probably in absolute terms too) than ours, and Sheffield Wednesday and United will see similar OUTSTANDING BREATHTAKING UNBELIEVABLE increases next season, pending promotion of course.

 

Getting promoted from League one with the wage bill is anything but OUTSTANDING. It was expected and frankly, essential.

 

 

Calm down people and stop bloody over egging everything.

[lordswoodsaints]

The difference between us and Pompey is that they cheated by paying players and buying players instead of paying their taxes and not paying their running costs.

They also didn't honour certain players contracts by not paying out their image rights money.

 

Pompey have never had the income streams we have had,like the academy and the higher gates yet they still went and paid players silly money,at one stage they had 5 current England players in their team,more than any other in the prem at the time yet still nobody raised any concerns of how it was all being paid for......well now we know,they weren't paying their tax.

[The Kraken]

I agree with most of the rest of this post but this is stretching things a bit. The figures show we spent more than a pretty penny to get promoted, and since promotion we have got attendances back to where they were last time in the Championship.

 

Without wishing to be too pedantic, that's not entirely true. Our current average attendance is just over 25,500. Previous years in the Championship showed average attendances of 23.5K, 23.5K, 21K and 17.5K.

 

In mitigation, we've never had a season as successful or trouble-free as this one, which would somewhat explain the extra 2K on the gate.

[dubai_phil]

I agree with most of the rest of this post but this is stretching things a bit. The figures show we spent more than a pretty penny to get promoted, and since promotion we have got attendances back to where they were last time in the Championship.

 

The idea the club has stumbled on some miracle elixir of growth is frankly bonkers. If we had got promoted on, say, 40% wages to turnover, that would count as OUTSTANDING (in your terminology).

 

The idea that this is comparable with a high street clothing store is ludicrous. I bet Brightons revenues have gone up by far more % (probably in absolute terms too) than ours, and Sheffield Wednesday and United will see similar OUTSTANDING BREATHTAKING UNBELIEVABLE increases next season, pending promotion of course.

 

Getting promoted from League one with the wage bill is anything but OUTSTANDING. It was expected and frankly, essential.

 

 

Calm down people and stop bloody over egging everything.

 

Point is though CBF the EQUITY was used to fund the promotion push. ML put aside an amount of money for us to spend on getting promotion - it has now been taken away from being owed by the club.

 

It was NOT however sh1t or bust, IF it had failed, the equity invested would have been returned as many of our best players would have left. The Wages were NOT independent, the INVESTMENT covered the wages. THEY NEVER INTENDED OR EXPECTED TURNOVER TO COVER WAGES IN THAT YEAR.

 

Entrepreneurship is about managing Risk, they took a measured risk with an upside AND a recovery plan IF it had failed.

 

Hence we saw investment to improve the squad in January. We had a plan and COULD have been successful this year AND had the investment to cover it.

 

Increasing the revenue by 18-25% is outstanding, it is not MODEST. It is not over egging it is challenging what Nick said.

 

Obviously it came about BECAUSE of promotion, BUT the ENTIRE point of INVESTMENT is to build incremental opportunities and revenue streams. IT WORKED.

 

Again, one thing that MANY have failed to ask is this

 

Why did they call the debt to equity swap at THIS time?

There are only two reasons

 

Clearly NC believes he does not NEED any more cash from outside

Or this makes it easier for the Liebherr family to step away without harming the legacy of Markus

[CB Fry]

Without wishing to be too pedantic, that's not entirely true. Our current average attendance is just over 25,500. Previous years in the Championship showed average attendances of 23.5K, 23.5K, 21K and 17.5K.

 

In mitigation, we've never had a season as successful or trouble-free as this one, which would somewhat explain the extra 2K on the gate.

 

 

I knew someone would pick me up on that. My main thrust is what we have achieved is not some economic miracle when lots of shops are shutting down which was the hysterical stuff DP was coming out with.

 

We spent a fortune and we got promoted from the third tier of English football. Some of it is down to excellent management on and off the pitch, but some of it is simple good fortune on our behalf. Some of the hyperbole on here is not dissimilar to a lottery millionaire being congratulated for his brilliant ticket buying strategy.

[CB Fry]

Point is though CBF the EQUITY was used to fund the promotion push. ML put aside an amount of money for us to spend on getting promotion - it has now been taken away from being owed by the club.

 

It was NOT however sh1t or bust, IF it had failed, the equity invested would have been returned as many of our best players would have left. The Wages were NOT independent, the INVESTMENT covered the wages. THEY NEVER INTENDED OR EXPECTED TURNOVER TO COVER WAGES IN THAT YEAR.

 

Entrepreneurship is about managing Risk, they took a measured risk with an upside AND a recovery plan IF it had failed.

 

Hence we saw investment to improve the squad in January. We had a plan and COULD have been successful this year AND had the investment to cover it.

 

Increasing the revenue by 18-25% is outstanding, it is not MODEST. It is not over egging it is challenging what Nick said.

 

Obviously it came about BECAUSE of promotion, BUT the ENTIRE point of INVESTMENT is to build incremental opportunities and revenue streams. IT WORKED.

 

Again, one thing that MANY have failed to ask is this

 

Why did they call the debt to equity swap at THIS time?

There are only two reasons

 

Clearly NC believes he does not NEED any more cash from outside

Or this makes it easier for the Liebherr family to step away without harming the legacy of Markus

 

Yes, fine.

 

And yes, investment builds businesses, but not that many businesses would risk that % of turnover on one bet in one year, which is what we have done. It's only sustainable because the family have turned it into equity, which is good fortune on our behalf.

 

Our revenue increase I would wager is just in line with TV revenue and increased gates. Modest may not be the right word, but say it is outstanding is just silly. If a 25% increase is outstanding then a 90% wages to turnover ratio must be petrifying. I'd also suggest that if wages have increased more than 25% (i bet they have) then the revenue increase is definitely not outstanding. "Turnover is vanity.." is a phrase I am sure you are familiar with and I am sure you know the end of. Increasing turnover in the season you've gone up a division really isn't outstanding. It really, really isn't.

 

Quite frankly, I woud not describe anything the Leibherrs have done as investment in any true sense of the word. They've given us money and the club is spending it. I'm more than happy, we are going up. But this is a lottery win far more than a business plan.

[dubai_phil]

Modest may not be the right word, but say it is outstanding is just silly.

 

OK we are on the same page. My issue was to challenge the points as he made them. IF some can defend Nick calling the increase modest then I can call them outstanding.

 

Obviously "they are to be expected" and of course the 60mil + 40 mil we would be guaranteed in TV revenue alone for only 1 year in the PL would in Nick's view be still modest?

 

I do disagree with your last line though. I would OBVIOUSLY agree and say that finding the Liebherrs was the lottery win.

(How DID they hear about us though? That one still bugs me)

 

Then compare Lampitt/Storrie school of Club Management when given a pot of cash with that of NC.

 

In his defence I think we have seen NC has a bit more in him. How can Staplewood NOT be planning?

 

I also see a "PLAN" in the type of players we have signed - our TEAM spirit is the key and the Scouting staff seem to have been working to a plan to find players with the right mental attitude

[Frank's cousin]

Yes, fine.

 

And yes, investment builds businesses, but not that many businesses would risk that % of turnover on one bet in one year, which is what we have done. It's only sustainable because the family have turned it into equity, which is good fortune on our behalf.

 

Our revenue increase I would wager is just in line with TV revenue and increased gates. Modest may not be the right word, but say it is outstanding is just silly. If a 25% increase is outstanding then a 90% wages to turnover ratio must be petrifying. I'd also suggest that if wages have increased more than 25% (i bet they have) then the revenue increase is definitely not outstanding. "Turnover is vanity.." is a phrase I am sure you are familiar with and I am sure you know the end of. Increasing turnover in the season you've gone up a division really isn't outstanding. It really, really isn't.

 

Quite frankly, I woud not describe anything the Leibherrs have done as investment in any true sense of the word. They've given us money and the club is spending it. I'm more than happy, we are going up. But this is a lottery win far more than a business plan.

 

Sorry but that is naive at best and rather disengenuous - what you are saying that someone of Markus' and NCs background and experience would still gamble on 33 mil? Boll ox - It wa sstaed by NC very early on that Provision was made for the cub to build. There is not a cat in hells chnace that they would have comitted to that level of spending if the Loan to equity move was not always part of the plan - not sure why you cant see that they set a budget for a 5 year plan - a plan that would require a spending level that would need to be supported by cash injection if they were to guarrantee a return to the prem in that time - its why promotion from l1 became so important within 2 years , and why 2 years were probably factored in for further promotion. The risk was NOT in whether the loans would converted or not, they always were. the risk which both NC and Markus would have been fully aware of was that given its football they could have spent 50 mil in five years and NOT gotten into the prem - eg their limit was reached and they would have failed in their bid.

 

This is a case where teh wage to turnover figure is not necessarily an accurate way of judging the merits of the business plan as the plan would have factored in an annual suplementary amount which would have been set by the final level of commercial and gate receipts - had they OVER SPENT massively on this budgeted amount it would have been a poor result, but we have been told this did not happen... so I really cant see why you believe its such a flawed strategy?

[CB Fry]

OK we are on the same page. My issue was to challenge the points as he made them. IF some can defend Nick calling the increase modest then I can call them outstanding.

 

Obviously "they are to be expected" and of course the 60mil + 40 mil we would be guaranteed in TV revenue alone for only 1 year in the PL would in Nick's view be still modest?

 

I do disagree with your last line though. I would OBVIOUSLY agree and say that finding the Liebherrs was the lottery win.

(How DID they hear about us though? That one still bugs me)

 

Then compare Lampitt/Storrie school of Club Management when given a pot of cash with that of NC.

 

In his defence I think we have seen NC has a bit more in him. How can Staplewood NOT be planning?

 

I also see a "PLAN" in the type of players we have signed - our TEAM spirit is the key and the Scouting staff seem to have been working to a plan to find players with the right mental attitude

 

Yep, agree. With that kind of cash sloshing about the management could easily have spent it in far worse ways. Hello Leicester, Hello QPR, Hello Sven, Hello Joey Barton.

 

We've done a hell of a lot right. But we have also spent far more than the club can really justify - remember the amount the family has written off is the same as the cost of the stadium which we couldn't afford the repayments on.

 

And this just to get out of League One and, soon, the Championship. Let's not kid ourselves that success in the Premier League is anything other than a massive drain [on admittedly bigger] resources.

 

So yes, pots of cash, spent very well, no mistake. But lets not start calling it sustainable yet.

 

Let's be clear - I'd rather us a well run rich club than a well run self sustaining (aka skint) club. I can live with that.....

[CB Fry]

Sorry but that is naive at best and rather disengenuous - what you are saying that someone of Markus' and NCs background and experience would still gamble on 33 mil? Boll ox - It wa sstaed by NC very early on that Provision was made for the cub to build. There is not a cat in hells chnace that they would have comitted to that level of spending if the Loan to equity move was not always part of the plan - not sure why you cant see that they set a budget for a 5 year plan - a plan that would require a spending level that would need to be supported by cash injection if they were to guarrantee a return to the prem in that time - its why promotion from l1 became so important within 2 years , and why 2 years were probably factored in for further promotion. The risk was NOT in whether the loans would converted or not, they always were. the risk which both NC and Markus would have been fully aware of was that given its football they could have spent 50 mil in five years and NOT gotten into the prem - eg their limit was reached and they would have failed in their bid.

 

This is a case where teh wage to turnover figure is not necessarily an accurate way of judging the merits of the business plan as the plan would have factored in an annual suplementary amount which would have been set by the final level of commercial and gate receipts - had they OVER SPENT massively on this budgeted amount it would have been a poor result, but we have been told this did not happen... so I really cant see why you believe its such a flawed strategy?

 

 

Sorry there is a hell of a lot of people having it both ways. Either Markus loved the club and wanted to see us right and to achieve his dream of seeing the club in the Premier league etc etc or this is some water tight s hi t hot business plan which can't fail? Go on one thread and say "this is simply business" and the Markus-he-loved-us brigade get upset. Go on a different thread and say "this is just a lottery win" and the response is "this is a business strategy". Eh?

 

There's a lot of people who seem to be labouring under the assumption that once we are in the Premier League it's all profit profit profit all the way, and as long as we spend big to get there the pay offs then balance out the millions we spent getting out of, err, League One.

 

There aint many people getting rich in the Premier League you know. Outside of players, agents and the dogs of certain cockney managers.

 

Simply put we are being gifted money to get to the Premier League. Go us. But at some point this will have to stop if the club is to be anything like a sustainable entity. Or the Leibherrs will sell us, which is something else people on this forum get upset about. Because Markus loves us. Because this is a calculated business strategy. Or both. Or neither. Or something.

Edited 30 March, 2012 by CB Fry

[Frank's cousin]

Yep, agree. With that kind of cash sloshing about the management could easily have spent it in far worse ways. Hello Leicester, Hello QPR, Hello Sven, Hello Joey Barton.

 

We've done a hell of a lot right. But we have also spent far more than the club can really justify - remember the amount the family has written off is the same as the cost of the stadium which we couldn't afford the repayments on.

 

And this just to get out of League One and, soon, the Championship. Let's not kid ourselves that success in the Premier League is anything other than a massive drain [on admittedly bigger] resources.

 

So yes, pots of cash, spent very well, no mistake. But lets not start calling it sustainable yet.

 

Let's be clear - I'd rather us a well run rich club than a well run self sustaining (aka skint) club. I can live with that.....

 

The justification is moot point - I have never been a big advocate of buying success or spending your way out of trouble in football - but everyone knows that it's easy to lose money and diffficult make it in this game as every penny earned is swallowed up as fans expect zero profit and every last available penny spent on improving the 1st team - we also know that teh lower leagues are notoriously difficult to escape from, especially you are the name club as those around you up their game to show billy big boll ox they are no longer the club they once were - so you need to at the very least be able to fend of interset in your better players and invest in quality that can deal with that an fight your way out as rapidly as possible - wise move? Well so far a spend of 33 mil for an assett worth around 25-20 right now, and probably 45-60 in the prem - seems a reasonable return to me - assuming there is someone who would pay that for it naturally, but I do think the spend was factored in from the beginning and therefore given taht its worked, you cant really fault the strategy

[dubai_phil]

Sorry there is a hell of a lot of people having it both ways. Either Markus loved the club and wanted to see us right and to achieve his dream of seeing the club in the Premier league etc etc or this is some water tight s hi t hot business plan which can't fail? Go on one thread and say "this is simply business" and the Markus-he-loved-us brigade get upset. Go on a different thread and say "this is just a lottery win" and the response is "this is a business strategy". Eh?

 

There's a lot of people who seem to be labouring under the assumption that once we are in the Premier League it's all profit profit profit all the way, and as long as we spend big to get there the pay offs then balance out the millions we spent getting out of, err, League One.

 

There aint many people getting rich in the Premier League you know. Outside of players agents and the dogs of certain cockney managers.

 

Disagree with this one CBF.

 

A mega Successful Businessman can invest in a zillion things. BUT at his age he will invest in something that "looks interesting" or leaves a legacy.

 

BUT and this is the thing. His WHOLE life has been about Business Empire Building, success in Business does not come from ONLY having a Business Plan, but FAILURE always comes from NOT having one.

 

The Businessman will get a buzz from the EMOTION he gets from success, but he wil ALSO get a bizz from seeing the results of his planning

 

NC himself would never have started the project without plans - budgets, targets, (hell we HEARD the term many times) Key Performance Indicators.

 

NC own words - 5 year plan.

 

So you call him a liar? (Don't think you are BTW)

[Lets B Avenue]

Our revenue increase I would wager is just in line with TV revenue and increased gates. Modest may not be the right word, but say it is outstanding is just silly. If a 25% increase is outstanding then a 90% wages to turnover ratio must be petrifying. I'd also suggest that if wages have increased more than 25% (i bet they have) then the revenue increase is definitely not outstanding. "Turnover is vanity.." is a phrase I am sure you are familiar with and I am sure you know the end of. Increasing turnover in the season you've gone up a division really isn't outstanding. It really, really isn't.

 

 

How much of that 90% was the "one-off payment" of £1.4m which, presumably, was the Pardew and Downes severance package?

[Viking Warrior]

If Galloway has made a comeback then cue chorley and McMillan to enter the fray ! As for Illingsworth then what a **** . Does he still represent the saints trust?

[CB Fry]

How much of that 90% was the "one-off payment" of £1.4m which, presumably, was the Pardew and Downes severance package?

 

Yes, managerial severence packages are a rare old thing in British football, aren't they?

[Frank's cousin]

Sorry there is a hell of a lot of people having it both ways. Either Markus loved the club and wanted to see us right and to achieve his dream of seeing the club in the Premier league etc etc or this is some water tight s hi t hot business plan which can't fail? Go on one thread and say "this is simply business" and the Markus-he-loved-us brigade get upset. Go on a different thread and say "this is just a lottery win" and the response is "this is a business strategy". Eh?

 

There's a lot of people who seem to be labouring under the assumption that once we are in the Premier League it's all profit profit profit all the way, and as long as we spend big to get there the pay offs then balance out the millions we spent getting out of, err, League One.

 

There aint many people getting rich in the Premier League you know. Outside of players, agents and the dogs of certain cockney managers.

 

Simply put we are being gifted money to get to the Premier League. Go us. But at some point this will have to stop if the club is to be anything like a sustainable entity. Or the Leibherrs will sell us, which is something else people on this forum get upset about. Because Markus loves us. Because this is a calculated business strategy. Or both. Or neither. Or something.

 

Excuse me, but who wants it both ways? Markus and NC saw a commercial opportunity. that is not mutually exclusive from also seeing something that in his retirment might be fun as well as something they could build together? Why is it beyond the realms of possibilty that having taken that step, developed a plan, acknowledged the need for funding to achieve its aims, acknowledged that with that investment came risk, and also the reaity that unlike other businesses the level of investment required would be high relative to the risk and potential return? ... that they actually found it possible a bond to the club - its the fan disease afterall - you go a few times, you love it and you get hooked?

Its even not beyond the reasonable psychobable that such a bond is increased given the desire to see if they could build something together with it?

 

Can you not see a situation, given the investment in infrastructure that NC and Markus knew would be necessar to be self sustaining would probably mean investing more than a typical buisness would need (afterall evryone with half a brain, let alone financiers and extremely successful businessmen) know football is an easy way to get poor very quickly?

 

Self sustaining is the stated AIM - NC has said it, Markus said it and I believe they are working towards it - but with an acknowledgement that to get there they would need to be prepared to in effect buy the club for 50 mil... They could have done that and bought a lower tier debt free Prem club, but I suspect that the fact they built it is part of the orginal appeal - that was what Markus did for his working life afterall.

[Lets B Avenue]

Yes, managerial severence packages are a rare old thing in British football, aren't they?

 

Not disputing that. Just asking the person with all the answers, how different the figure would have been if Pardew had still been in charge.

[CB Fry]

Not disputing that. Just asking the person with all the answers, how different the figure would have been if Pardew had still been in charge.

 

Who's got all the answers? not me. Plenty of other people with all the answers sneered and belittled Alan Pardew. He's currently besting Liverpool, a team that actually spent more than us recently. But hey ho. We're going up mush.

[brmbrm]

I'll bite and address his points

 

Wasn't meant to be an attempt at trolling. Actually, i think wages = 93% of income IS a potential problem: its OK if someone is prepared to pur money into the club, but if they change their mnds?

 

Also arenb't there some fifa rules proposed reagrding limiting wages to income?

[aintforever]

Simply put we are being gifted money to get to the Premier League. Go us. But at some point this will have to stop if the club is to be anything like a sustainable entity. Or the Leibherrs will sell us, which is something else people on this forum get upset about. Because Markus loves us. Because this is a calculated business strategy. Or both. Or neither. Or something.

 

They are investing money to make the club a Premier league one, it's not rocket science and there is no reason to think it's not a sustainable plan.

 

It makes no business sense at all for a club with billions behind it to try and balance the books in League 1 or the Championship when the awards for being in the top league are so much greater.

[CB Fry]

They are investing money to make the club a Premier league one, it's not rocket science and there is no reason to think it's not a sustainable plan.

 

It makes no business sense at all for a club with billions behind it to try and balance the books in League 1 or the Championship when the awards for being in the top league are so much greater.

 

It's a semantic point but I'm going to make it again. I say they are giving us money to get to the Premier League. The only rewards available is the very fact of being in the premier league. There aint much money to be made back. What's Randy Lerner making out of thr Premier League? Or our friend Roman?

 

We're jolly lucky for you to be able to say that there is no point balancing the books. We have that luxury because our owner is giving us money. Just because it has been spent well doesn't make it investment. It's just free money.

[Thedelldays]

maybe, NC is right (again) in that this is not a business transaction at all and they (or whoever in the family) want the kudos of owning a decent premier league football club...

 

feck knows...however, I had never witnessed a promotion until last may..now I am about to witness a 2nd on the bounce....love it

Edited 31 March, 2012 by Thedelldays

[dubai_phil]

It's a semantic point but I'm going to make it again. I say they are giving us money to get to the Premier League. The only rewards available is the very fact of being in the premier league. There aint much money to be made back. What's Randy Lerner making out of thr Premier League? Or our friend Roman?

 

We're jolly lucky for you to be able to say that there is no point balancing the books. We have that luxury because our owner is giving us money. Just because it has been spent well doesn't make it investment. It's just free money.

 

Uh - you missed the only obvious one.

 

Sell your shares.

 

1) Find someone who wants a PL club - could be for Marketing Reasons or Ego reasons

2) Launch an IPO and sell a percentage of your shares to the fans and other investors (SLH as an example)

 

Both of which are feasible ways to get your money back or even make money. Post Financial Fair Play the picture will change in the PL, those who take the longer term view could see a return.

 

Although equally - in support of your view - look at QPR's Annual Report

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/queens-park-rangers/9177492/Queens-Park-Rangers-count-56-million-cost-of-joining-the-Premier-League-elite.html

 

Their situation is slightly different in that the debts are still on the books as Shareholder Loans not as Equity.

 

Both scenarios are feasible, depends what you are aiming for