The Sunday Times - Southampton put up for sale at £250m

[SuperSAINT]

33 minutes ago, Convict Colony said:

Saw crook say that there was another party but wouldnt mention who.....

Personally saw that as him having no idea.

Crook pretends he knows everything.

All his ”I’ve been told...” stories on talksport unsurprisingly come after actual journalists have just reported them.

I’d respect him more if he just credited where the news came from rather than pretend.

Edited 11 September, 2020 by SuperSAINT

[Turkish]

9 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

Crook pretends he knows everything.

All his ”I’ve been told...” stories on talksport unsurprisingly come after actual journalists have just reported them.

I’d respect him more if he just credited where the news came from rather than pretend.

My all time favourite Crook moment was when he tweeted that he understood we had no interest in Charlie Austin, less than 24 hours later he was announced as having signed. He also likes to block people on twitter who mention this. He's clueless. 

[SuperSAINT]

20 minutes ago, Turkish said:

My all time favourite Crook moment was when he tweeted that he understood we had no interest in Charlie Austin, less than 24 hours later he was announced as having signed. He also likes to block people on twitter who mention this. He's clueless. 

All of this  

[ecuk268]

After DaGrosa sold Bordeaux he was looking to buy Roma.

This was the message sent to Roma fans by Bordeaux fans:

Roman friends, do not make the same mistake as Bordeaux with Da Grosa.
 This man and his gang (Hugo Varela) are crooks, they emptied the Bordeaux coffers and left like thieves
 (more than 50 M € deficit in 1 year) .DA GROSA OUT! ESPECIALLY DON'T SELL TO DA GROSA !

[SuperSAINT]

7 minutes ago, ecuk268 said:

After DaGrosa sold Bordeaux he was looking to buy Roma.

This was the message sent to Roma fans by Bordeaux fans:

Roman friends, do not make the same mistake as Bordeaux with Da Grosa.
 This man and his gang (Hugo Varela) are crooks, they emptied the Bordeaux coffers and left like thieves
 (more than 50 M € deficit in 1 year) .DA GROSA OUT! ESPECIALLY DON'T SELL TO DA GROSA !

Did they send it in English?*  

*MLG Notes:

- I know it probably wasn't.

- It was probably sent in Italian.  Possibly French.

[kwsaint]

Appear to be asset strippers on the basis of the previous post.  Would hate us to go the same route as Blackpool.  Problem is that Gao just wants out and will sell to anyone of the price is acceptable.  Just hope that there is some truth in the rumour of other bidders

[trousers]

1 hour ago, kwsaint said:

Appear to be asset strippers on the basis of the previous post.  Would hate us to go the same route as Blackpool.  Problem is that Gao just wants out and will sell to anyone of the price is acceptable.  Just hope that there is some truth in the rumour of other bidders

Could Katharina block any deal with her 20% share?

Edited 11 September, 2020 by trousers

[Saint J 77]

From one bad owner to asset strippers. I really hope there is someone else interested otherwise this is rather depressing. 

[djharvey]

24 minutes ago, trousers said:

Could Katharina block any deal with her 20% share?

I'd be surprised if she didn't have some sort of say/veto!

[johnnyboy]

Would DaGrosa pass the fit and proper owners test ?

[SaintsLoyal]

Yes Miss Liebherr and advisors would have a say on any sale and why she rejoined the board. 

[SuperSAINT]

11 minutes ago, johnnyboy said:

Would DaGrosa pass the fit and proper owners test ?

Pablo Escobar could probably pass it*.

*MLG Notes - I know he’s dead’s 

Edited 11 September, 2020 by SuperSAINT
MLG note added

[Badger]

11 hours ago, Convict Colony said:

From April 2020 - Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertkidd/2020/04/30/us-investor-plans-premier-league-club-takeover-to-recreate-city-football-group/#24d139407b1a

“Ultimately, we want to build a platform that will lend itself to going public at some point,” he said.

 

Does he mean a share flotation ? Didn't we try that under Rupert the Share ?

 

Look how that ended.

[Saint J 77]

1 hour ago, djharvey said:

I'd be surprised if she didn't have some sort of say/veto!

The question is would she care enough to block a move that was bad for the clubs long term future? She didn't seem to mind selling to Gao. What would be different this time? 

[trousers]

29 minutes ago, Saint J 77 said:

The question is would she care enough to block a move that was bad for the clubs long term future? She didn't seem to mind selling to Gao. What would be different this time? 

I guess it could pan out either way. She might regret selling to Goa and resolve not to make a similar mistake again. 

[Charlie Wayman]

6 hours ago, kwsaint said:

Appear to be asset strippers on the basis of the previous post.  Would hate us to go the same route as Blackpool.  Problem is that Gao just wants out and will sell to anyone of the price is acceptable.  Just hope that there is some truth in the rumour of other bidders

That's alright then, we don't have any assets to be stripped

[Matthew Le God]

Just now, Charlie Wayman said:

That's alright then, we don't have any assets to be stripped

I'm puzzled why you think that. Have you seen what relegated Bournemouth have sold this summer? Saints have a lot of players you could get a big fee for.

[verlaine1979]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

I guess it could pan out either way. She might regret selling to Goa and resolve not to make a similar mistake again. 

It would surprise me if Gao had agreed to buy 80% of the club without insisting on a drag along in the event that he wanted to sell.

[St_Tel49]

10 hours ago, Bearsy said:

This guy seems a legit football visionary 👍

He reminds me of Simon Clifford.

😀

 

[Barsiem]

7 hours ago, kwsaint said:

Appear to be asset strippers on the basis of the previous post.  Would hate us to go the same route as Blackpool.  Problem is that Gao just wants out and will sell to anyone of the price is acceptable.  Just hope that there is some truth in the rumour of other bidders

Who says Gao just wants out??  All I’ve seen is a bunch of smoke and those journalists closest to the club have denied he’s looking to sell.

I find the attitude to Gao on here bewildering tbh...  someone made a ridiculous statement that they’d rather have an American in charge, which is completely xenophobic, and people desperate for him to go.  He has been quiet about his plans for the club,  but the club is in a better place than when he took over and he deserves some credit for that.  He certainly seems infinitely better than this guy who has already owned a football club and was hated by the fans there

[Chez]

4 hours ago, djharvey said:

I'd be surprised if she didn't have some sort of say/veto!

a 20% shareholder can block a company sale, ie the whole caboodle, so long as it is written into the shareholder agreement, but I'm not sure a 20% shareholder can prevent a 80% shareholder from selling their 80% share to whoever they choose.

[Dellman]

I am not a Gao fan because |I hoped for an owner who would invesat and  there is no liklihood of that. But at least he is better than owners who uninvest ie the asset strippers. So we need to be careful what we wish for, there's a lot of sharks around. I take the point we are in a better position than when he took over and the Board and manager know the situation and appear to be working well within it. Perhaps its best not to rock the boat. 

[Saint_clark]

Imagine an alternate reality where Markus was still around with his little digital camera. We had it so good for such a short period of time. 

[Maggie May]

I can’t see this happening. It’ll be a disaster.

[benjii]

9 hours ago, Barsiem said:

Who says Gao just wants out??  All I’ve seen is a bunch of smoke and those journalists closest to the club have denied he’s looking to sell.

I find the attitude to Gao on here bewildering tbh...  someone made a ridiculous statement that they’d rather have an American in charge, which is completely xenophobic, and people desperate for him to go.  He has been quiet about his plans for the club,  but the club is in a better place than when he took over and he deserves some credit for that.  He certainly seems infinitely better than this guy who has already owned a football club and was hated by the fans there

Better place? Football wise, yes, but that’s transitory and is largely down to Ralph being better than Hughes and nothing more or less than that. 
 

We borrowed £80m before this season which is more than we’ve ever borrowed for cash flow purposes in the past and as for “keeping his plans quiet” - he doesn’t have a plan.

I agree that this newly mentioned chap also seems undesirable.

Edited 12 September, 2020 by benjii

[Cartman]

44 minutes ago, benjii said:

Better place? Football wise, yes, but that’s transitory and is largely down to Ralph being better than Hughes and nothing more or less than that. 
 

We borrowed £80m before this season which is more than we’ve ever borrowed for cash flow purposes in the past and as for “keeping his plans quiet” - he doesn’t have a plan.

I agree that this newly mentioned chap also seems undesirable.

And who hired Ralph? Who sacked Hughes? Who sacked the clowns who hired Hughes in the first place? He doesn't have a plan? He told you that did he? Because whatever non-plan we have now is a hell of a lot better than the plan we had 3 years ago.

Let's be honest here, Gao wouldn't get half the sh!t he gets if it wasn't for his nationality, to the point that some would rather have an American fraud as owner instead.

[wild-saint]

10 hours ago, Chez said:

a 20% shareholder can block a company sale, ie the whole caboodle, so long as it is written into the shareholder agreement, but I'm not sure a 20% shareholder can prevent a 80% shareholder from selling their 80% share to whoever they choose.

Typically the Shareholder agreement will give the other shareholders first option to buy the sellers shares and usually some sort of formula is written into to it on how to value it. If the option isn’t taken then they can sell to who ever they like. Well that’s what’s written into my business

[darren2]

49 minutes ago, Cartman said:

Let's be honest here, Gao wouldn't get half the sh!t he gets if it wasn't for his nationality, to the point that some would rather have an American fraud as owner instead.

I'm not so sure Gao is about nationality, but about him not having any money.  Kat used to invest cash into the club, and when she sold up it was presented as something that would help the club grow and have a future. 

It quickly became clear that Gao can't provide that, and never could.  He stretched himself as he hoped the club would grow in value and that hasn't happened. (In my opinion)

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, Cartman said:

And who hired Ralph? Who sacked Hughes? Who sacked the clowns who hired Hughes in the first place? He doesn't have a plan? He told you that did he? Because whatever non-plan we have now is a hell of a lot better than the plan we had 3 years ago.

Let's be honest here, Gao wouldn't get half the sh!t he gets if it wasn't for his nationality, to the point that some would rather have an American fraud as owner instead.

Following that logic, do you think Gao would be disliked if he was putting money in and was vocal about his plans to fans? I mean liebherr was a foreigner and no one had a problem with him. What if he had been exactly the same but a Chinaman? 

[Convict Colony]

1 hour ago, Cartman said:

And who hired Ralph? Who sacked Hughes? Who sacked the clowns who hired Hughes in the first place? He doesn't have a plan? He told you that did he? Because whatever non-plan we have now is a hell of a lot better than the plan we had 3 years ago.

Let's be honest here, Gao wouldn't get half the sh!t he gets if it wasn't for his nationality, to the point that some would rather have an American fraud as owner instead.

I wrote rubbish ignore

Edited 12 September, 2020 by Convict Colony
stupid

[S-Clarke]

1 hour ago, Cartman said:

And who hired Ralph? Who sacked Hughes? Who sacked the clowns who hired Hughes in the first place? He doesn't have a plan? He told you that did he? Because whatever non-plan we have now is a hell of a lot better than the plan we had 3 years ago.

Let's be honest here, Gao wouldn't get half the sh!t he gets if it wasn't for his nationality, to the point that some would rather have an American fraud as owner instead.

More racial stereotyping crap.

People don't like Gao because he is a terrible owner, simple as that. No one knows his intentions. If he was English, American, Swedish, Dutch and his approach was the same, he wouldn't be liked. It doesn't matter what his nationality is, but he has been a terrible owner.

In answer to your previous questions - that would have been Kruger, Reed and now Semmens. As mentioned many a time before he has no real involvement in the club, so he's all pretty much nondescript and is offering us nothing.

Edited 12 September, 2020 by S-Clarke

[Shroppie]

I think the underlying issue is where Gao got, or borrowed the money to buy into Saints, how he's servicing it and dealing with possible growing difficulty moving money in and out of China. I suspect the sponsorship deal fell for the last if these reasons.

Martin Semmens has always insisted he doesn't know that Gao wants out. Also, that a big plus is he leaves Semmens, Steele and co to run the club and the non-interference is important. We have seen big positive changes since Krueger left.

Gao doesn't have money to put into Saints, but I don't think there's evidence he's taking out. We are now hopefully on the up, which could boost the value of his investment. It's just a question of whether, for some reason, needs to get out.

 

[Pamplemousse]

https://soccer.nbcsports.com/2020/04/21/joseph-dagrosa-interview-premier-league-la-liga-newcastle-bordeaux-getafe-mls/

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/07/football/joseph-dagrosa-football-investment-premier-league-spt-intl-cmd/index.html

 

He doesn't sound like a asset-stripper.

 

Also seems like things were bad behind the scenes at Bordeaux anyway, and they were bad off the field. 

https://www.sportbusiness.com/news/us-investment-firm-gacp-sports-sells-stake-in-girondins-de-bordeaux/

 

He's in talks with two Premier League clubs. I wonder who the other is.

Edited 12 September, 2020 by Pamplemousse

[Shroppie]

8 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

As mentioned many a time before he has no real involvement in the club, so he's all pretty much nondescript and is offering us nothing.

In some ways, having no real involvement and leaving it to Semmens and co is offering benefit.

[trousers]

13 minutes ago, Pamplemousse said:

He's in talks with two Premier League clubs. I wonder who the other is.

I was assuming West Ham

[skintsaint]

23 hours ago, benjii said:

People who swap “c” for “k” are usually kunts.

Yip!

 

[UpweySaint]

1 hour ago, Cartman said:

And who hired Ralph? Who sacked Hughes? Who sacked the clowns who hired Hughes in the first place? He doesn't have a plan? He told you that did he? Because whatever non-plan we have now is a hell of a lot better than the plan we had 3 years ago.

Let's be honest here, Gao wouldn't get half the sh!t he gets if it wasn't for his nationality, to the point that some would rather have an American fraud as owner instead.

 

Tell that to Mike Ashley. English and still a c*nt. The Glazers at Utd, American but not exactly beloved.

 

Is it possible to dislike people who buy football clubs with borrowed finance and invest/contribute nothing of any significant value? Financial or otherwise? 

 

If the owner isn't going to contribute meaningfully you would at least hope it would be somebody who shares the fans affinity with the club. How many times has our owner even made the trip to watch a game? How much effort has he made to engage with the fanbase? Frankly I don't care about their nationality/ethnicity/gender/sexuality or even their favourite flavour of m&ms (the answer is crispy by the way). Could we have a worse only? Probably, just look at SISU for the alternative reality saints. Could we quite easily have it better? Absolutely! 

 

Playing the 'racism' card is poor here. The forum probably has it's share of narrow minded helmets much as anywhere but I think you're wide of the mark here.

[RedFear]

33 minutes ago, Shroppie said:

In some ways, having no real involvement and leaving it to Semmens and co is offering benefit.

Exactly. S-Clarke in particular can be particularly hysterical about Gao. He even hilariously suggested the other day he was an horrific owner.

Gao has a plan. Its to grow slowly in a self sustaining way. It may not be exciting, it may not mean signing players to deals we cannot afford,  you may not even like it, but that is the plan.

For me, the best part of this is he the steps back and lets the guys whose job it is to make this happen, do exactly that. It does though mean the success or failure falls on the people implementing it. It went sour under Les and Ross and Gao got rid. We are very lucky to have Ralph, and it would appear Semmens, and I am personally hopeful for the future.

Bournemouth spent money they didn't have on big money players and got it wrong. They are now, or certainly were, absolutely fucked. In fairness, they got some decent money for a lot of their squad, so it might not be as bad as it was, but we wont be seeing them again for a long time. Perhaps only when accompanied by rattling buckets again.

Gao either wont, or more likely cant, invest any money. This doesn't make him a bad owner, just not a rich one. This might of course change, but as of now, he does not appear to be taking money from the club.

It may be dull, he may be bland, but it could be loads loads worse then we currently have it.

[VectisSaint]

18 hours ago, trousers said:

Could Katharina block any deal with her 20% share?

She sold to Gao in the first place, so why would she block another bad deal?

[Nolan]

There's reason why the club's heavily rumoured to be for sale:

There is no more money coming from China to the premier League.

The football won't even be shown on TV there.

Chinese money is worth a lot less than it was when Gao had his other business.

 

[S-Clarke]

1 hour ago, RedFear said:

Exactly. S-Clarke in particular can be particularly hysterical about Gao. He even hilariously suggested the other day he was an horrific owner.

Gao has a plan. Its to grow slowly in a self sustaining way. It may not be exciting, it may not mean signing players to deals we cannot afford,  you may not even like it, but that is the plan.

For me, the best part of this is he the steps back and lets the guys whose job it is to make this happen, do exactly that. It does though mean the success or failure falls on the people implementing it. It went sour under Les and Ross and Gao got rid. We are very lucky to have Ralph, and it would appear Semmens, and I am personally hopeful for the future.

Bournemouth spent money they didn't have on big money players and got it wrong. They are now, or certainly were, absolutely fucked. In fairness, they got some decent money for a lot of their squad, so it might not be as bad as it was, but we wont be seeing them again for a long time. Perhaps only when accompanied by rattling buckets again.

Gao either wont, or more likely cant, invest any money. This doesn't make him a bad owner, just not a rich one. This might of course change, but as of now, he does not appear to be taking money from the club.

It may be dull, he may be bland, but it could be loads loads worse then we currently have it.

Why is it hilarious to suggest he is an horrific owner? He's amongst the worst in the PL.

We survive because of the PL income, we survive because we have players to sell and reinvest. That is our model. That model is driven because we have an owner who will not contribute or invest into us. Without PL income we would be in the financial pits.

The strategy we have is driven by Martin Seemens/Ralph et co, because it's clear they have little money to play with. I understand the views that in some ways Gao being 'silent' can be a positive, but as a fan base you still need to feel the owner is engaged to some level.

Things are going 'well' on the field at the moment, but that is purely in spite of Gao. We have struck lucky with Ralph, but it feels like he is hamstrung and we're never going to see his full potential as a manager because our owner won't invest. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking 100m/200m - but just having the flexibility to buy a couple of players without needing to work out who you can sell first - that would be a start.

We were told his ownership would take us to the next level and allow additional investment, we now have absolutely no pot to piss in. Taking secured loans out left right and centre. The model to sell before you buy is all well and good, but this relies on us being in the PL. Full stop. KL is as guilty as well, it would be nice to have her engagement on it as well, it feels like she's let us down a little.

He has made no effort to integrate with the fans, he has made no effort to share his ambitions, views or intentions with us - absolutely zero effort. No one knows what he's here for. Why should we give him the time of day? When you add together the fact he's made little or not effort with the fan base and we seemingly have no pot to piss in, there's no doubt there's ill feeling about him.

This 'new' lot sound like someone we need to avoid as well, but that does that make me anti-American? No, it makes me someone who is trying to want the best for the club he supports and it's clear to me at the moment that Gao isn't providing what is best for Southampton football club.

Edited 12 September, 2020 by S-Clarke

[MarkSFC]

6 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Why is it hilarious to suggest he is an horrific owner? He's amongst the worst in the PL.

We survive because of the PL income, we survive because we have players to sell and reinvest. That is our model. That model is driven because we have an owner who will not contribute or invest into us. Without PL income we would be in the financial pits.

The strategy we have is driven by Martin Seemens/Ralph et co. Gao has had no input in it. I understand the views that in some ways this can be a positive, but as a fan base you still need to feel the owner is engaged to some level.

Things are going 'well' on the field at the moment, but that is purely in spite of Gao. We have struck lucky with Ralph, but it feels like he is hamstrung and we're never going to see his full potential as a manager because our owner won't invest. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking 100m/200m - but just having the flexibility to buy a couple of players without needing to work out who you can sell first - that would be a start.

We were told his ownership would take us to the next level and allow additional investment, we now have absolutely no pot to piss in. Taking secured loans out left right and centre. The model to sell before you buy is all well and good, but the fact we cannot even make a squad addition before selling is a poor show for a PL club.

He has made no effort to integrate with the fans, he has made no effort to share his ambitions, views or intentions with us - absolutely zero effort. No one knows what he's here for. Why should we give him the time of day? When you add together the fact he's made little or not effort with the fan base and we seemingly have no pot to piss in, there's no doubt there's ill feeling about him.

This 'new' lot sound like someone we need to avoid as well, but that does that make me anti-American? No, it makes me someone who is trying to want the best for the club he supports and it's clear to me at the moment that Gao isn't providing what is best for Southampton football club.

What you're describing is the difference between normal businesses and football/sport. As a business we are operating normally. We generate income and spend it wisely, hopefully with a profit, or if we lose annually it does not bankrupt us as previous profits are merely reduced and cash flow protected.

As a football business we do not have an owner who wants to spunk a load of money which he will never get back. This does not on its own make him bad owner and definitely not an horrific one. 

We all would love a benefactor - one who does not loan against the club or wants his/her money back at any time but those people are few and far between. 

Until this happens I'm content with the current operational management and how they act and how they communicate. As a business I am confident of sustainability. As a football team (specifically team and not business) I am equally confident with those in placd to sustain our premier league status. 

 

This does not mean I would not welcome more investment in the team but I do believe that Semmens and Co. are doing everything they can to get the best players for Ralph.

Until we get that benefactor I am happy with the status quo. 

 

[S-Clarke]

16 minutes ago, MarkSFC said:

What you're describing is the difference between normal businesses and football/sport. As a business we are operating normally. We generate income and spend it wisely, hopefully with a profit, or if we lose annually it does not bankrupt us as previous profits are merely reduced and cash flow protected.

As a football business we do not have an owner who wants to spunk a load of money which he will never get back. This does not on its own make him bad owner and definitely not an horrific one. 

We all would love a benefactor - one who does not loan against the club or wants his/her money back at any time but those people are few and far between. 

Until this happens I'm content with the current operational management and how they act and how they communicate. As a business I am confident of sustainability. As a football team (specifically team and not business) I am equally confident with those in placd to sustain our premier league status. 

 

This does not mean I would not welcome more investment in the team but I do believe that Semmens and Co. are doing everything they can to get the best players for Ralph.

Until we get that benefactor I am happy with the status quo. 

 

As i said, I get those views and I can understand where people are coming from to a degree. But my view is that it's not sustainable long-term, there needs to be a better model driven by the owner. One bad season and relegation and that entire model is in total tatters, it's heavily reliant on us staying in the PL by hook or crook and retaining that income.

My biggest gripe has always been his lack of presence. Remember the talk of the five pledges, or whatever they were? Never heard a thing, no one knows what his plan is - I think that's part of the problem. Is he looking to develop us? develop the area? sell up quickly to any charlatan and run?

He's not built a connection with the fan base and no one knows his intentions, it's not a recipe for long-term success or development imo. Football clubs are unique and totally different to a normal business, running it like a bog standard business isn't going to provide much in the way of growth or development.

[RedFear]

40 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Why is it hilarious to suggest he is an horrific owner? He's amongst the worst in the PL.

We survive because of the PL income, we survive because we have players to sell and reinvest. That is our model. That model is driven because we have an owner who will not contribute or invest into us. Without PL income we would be in the financial pits.

The strategy we have is driven by Martin Seemens/Ralph et co, because it's clear they have little money to play with. I understand the views that in some ways Gao being 'silent' can be a positive, but as a fan base you still need to feel the owner is engaged to some level.

Things are going 'well' on the field at the moment, but that is purely in spite of Gao. We have struck lucky with Ralph, but it feels like he is hamstrung and we're never going to see his full potential as a manager because our owner won't invest. Don't get me wrong, I'm not talking 100m/200m - but just having the flexibility to buy a couple of players without needing to work out who you can sell first - that would be a start.

We were told his ownership would take us to the next level and allow additional investment, we now have absolutely no pot to piss in. Taking secured loans out left right and centre. The model to sell before you buy is all well and good, but this relies on us being in the PL. Full stop. KL is as guilty as well, it would be nice to have her engagement on it as well, it feels like she's let us down a little.

He has made no effort to integrate with the fans, he has made no effort to share his ambitions, views or intentions with us - absolutely zero effort. No one knows what he's here for. Why should we give him the time of day? When you add together the fact he's made little or not effort with the fan base and we seemingly have no pot to piss in, there's no doubt there's ill feeling about him.

This 'new' lot sound like someone we need to avoid as well, but that does that make me anti-American? No, it makes me someone who is trying to want the best for the club he supports and it's clear to me at the moment that Gao isn't providing what is best for Southampton football club.

While being careful not to turn this into a 2 way conversation because that's boring for everyone else. I'll try and answer some of that.

First of all, it was hilarious because its not true and as I said, it was a completely hysterical reaction. You could only say he was among the worst if you consider amount paid in from his own pocket, and you don't honestly measure an owner by that do you??

Unfortunately, I think your true issue is shown by the number of times you talk about how we don't 'invest' (in fact when you say that you mean spend (his) a personal fortune as the the club doesn't have it)

We only spend the money we generate because that's what we have always done. This is not a new or unique situation. The only change is the number of clubs now owned by very very rich people who are happy to throw their own money around. Depending on your point of view, and I can tell what yours is, you can decide if that's good or bad but that's simply not us. But it never has been, so I am confused why its now so terrible. Envy I guess.

If it weren't for premier league money we would be in the pits, yes, but so would 100% of clubs. I have news for you. No club goes down and their financial position improves. Very few have owners who just soak up the loss. Ashley being the only example I can think of.

We didn't 'strike lucky' with Ralph. The board and various people, who Gao has put his trust in, made that decision. When owners start making those decisions you end up with managers like Stuart Gray and Steve Wigley.

You say he has never spoken to the fans, but the person in your profile pic, who is rightly lauded on this board, never opened his mouth either. Would you recognise his voice if you heard it? He left it to Nicola, who spoke a great game, and guess what, by the time he left we were on our knees financially, having to pay twice the price for things like a training ground because he  managed to piss everyone off.

Marcus also left us loaded with loans which his daughter, who somehow has become the bad guy (girl), cleared turning them into equity. Lets not get too emotional about this either, he didn't buy us because he somehow fell in love with us over in Switzerland. He saw a premier league product, worth a bargain £15m. This was proven when we sold a single player the next season for just under the price he bought us for. It was a fantastic investment for him, and this came first. So lets not get too hung up on how important it is that we matter in an emotional sense to the owner.

Edited 12 September, 2020 by RedFear

[S-Clarke]

1 minute ago, RedFear said:

While being careful not to turn this into a 2 way conversation because that's boring for everyone else. I'll try and answer some of that.

First of all, it was hilarious because its not true and as I said, it was a completely hysterical reaction. You could only say he was among the worse if you consider amount paid in from his own pocket, and you don't honestly measure an owner by that do you??

Unfortunately, I think your true issue is shown by the number of times you talk about how we don't 'invest' (in fact when you say that you mean spend (his) a personal fortune as the the club doesn't have it)

We only spend the money we generate because that's what we have always done. This is not a new or unique situation. The only change is the number of clubs now owned by very very rich people who are happy to throw their own money around. Depending on your point of view, and I can tell what yours is, you can decide if that's good or bad but that's simply not us. But it never has been, so I am confused why its now so terrible. Envy I guess.

If it weren't for premier league money we would be in the pits, yes, but so would 100% of clubs. I have news for you. No club goes down and their financial position improves. Very few have owners who just soak up the loss. Ashley being the only example I can think of.

We didn't 'strike lucky' with Ralph. The board and various people, who Gao has put his trust in, made that decision. When owners start making those decisions you end up with managers like Stuart Gray and Steve Wigley.

You say he has never spoken to the fans, but the person in your profile pic, who is rightly lauded on this board, never opened his mouth either. Would you recognise his voice if you heard it? He left it to Nicola, who spoke a great game, and guess what, by the time he left we were on our knees financially, having to pay twice the price for things like a training ground because he  managed to pissed everyone off.

Marcus also left us loaded with loans which his daughter, who somehow has become the bad guy (girl), cleared turning them into equity. Lets not get too emotional about this either, he didn't buy us because he somehow fell in love with us over in Switzerland. He saw a premier league product, worth a bargain £15m. This was proven when we sold a single player the next season for just under the price he bought us for. It was a fantastic investment for him, and this came first. So lets not get too hung up on how important it is that we matter in an emotional sense to the owner.

I respect your views and your opinions, I don't want to throw this into a 2-way either. All I will say is that I'm ambitious about my football club, I think there's potential in here to do well and I've always felt that. Investment is part of it, of course, but having a drive from the top is equally as important - it just feels like we're treading water at the mo. Kat said she'd sold us to take us to the next level, I see no evidence of that.

Markus put significant money into this club to bring us back. We spent a fortune in L1 (on wages and transfer fee's) and he spent a fortune building the new training facilities etc, no...he didn't shout loud, but it was clear to see his input. With Gao, I can't see his input and I haven't from day one. I can't be the only one bothered by that?

Anyway, as I said - I respect your views, we agree to disagree on this subject and we'll see how the future pans out!

[Manuel]

You'd think an ambitious owner would see the potential that Ralph brings.  With what we have, Ralph and the club seem to be aiming for "top half".  Fine, who could complain, but with a bit of investment in the right places I'm sure he could lift us higher.  

[Piran]

Well done to RedFear, MarkSFC and S-Clarke for a reasonable debate, without resorting to the usual hysteria. For what it's worth. I mainly agree with the point of view of RedFear, and have never really 'got' the dissing of Gao or Kat. The club is available for sale, any one of us could just buy them out, and do things our own way. We just need to raise a couple of hundred million quid. In my experience, if something is going well, as I believe SFC is at the moment, don't underestimate the man (person) at the top.

[Shroppie]

What alarms me most about this potential takeover is that at Bordeaux the first thing they did was remove the board and manager. I gave great faith in Martin Semmens and Ralph: anyone should appreciate they are critical in taking us in the right direction.

[tajjuk]

I don't think Gao is a horrific owner, he seems pretty average and we could clearly do a lot worse.  Honestly is he any worse than the Liverpool owner, he doesn't really put money in or out and seems to just let them get on with it, just obviously Liverpool have a bigger brand to work on that generates more income. 

He's certainly IMO not worse than the likes of West Ham who throw bad money at everything, seem to flip and change their minds, have no real focus or structure on what they are doing, the owners son mouths off on social media, or the Glazers who literally take money out of Utd for example. 

Gao doesn't invest, doesn't take money out of the club and seems to let the people who know what they are doing run the club sustainably. It's not fancy or flashy, but its been fairly solid, our recent troubles have had nothing really to do with the owner but mistakes by the football people, i.e poor scouting, poor management appointments. 

I think sometimes the grass is not always greener and these rumours worry me to be honest. We have a solid and stable football foundation to build on at the moment, decent first team, a good manager, a solid CEO who seems open about the club, a decent academy system. Plenty to build on without needing dramatic changes, sure some more investment would be great but even that is hard to get right, look at Everton. 

[Convict Colony]

Red Bull Leipzeg invested 100m into the club over the years and then waived the money, thats the sort owner i'd like and it seems what wolves are also doing with suning.

https://www.web24.news/u/2020/06/red-bull-releases-rb-leipzig-from-debts-of-100-million-euros.html