floyd__streeteIan Royal perhaps you should ask the supermarkets you shop in to provide you with its business plan seeing as you're an "investor" in it.
Have you shopped in the same supermarket for your entire life then, Ian?
by Ian Royal » 09 Nov 2013 20:38
floyd__streeteIan Royal perhaps you should ask the supermarkets you shop in to provide you with its business plan seeing as you're an "investor" in it.
Have you shopped in the same supermarket for your entire life then, Ian?
by Royal Lady » 10 Nov 2013 18:06
Harpers So Solid Crew Why did anyone think that AZ would be buying the training ground, makes sense to invest some of the Premier money into the club IMHO, why should it all be pissed up on players, while someone else pays for the infrastucture?
by winchester_royal » 10 Nov 2013 18:29
Royal LadyHarpers So Solid Crew Why did anyone think that AZ would be buying the training ground, makes sense to invest some of the Premier money into the club IMHO, why should it all be pissed up on players, while someone else pays for the infrastucture?
I doubt anyone really did, but my point is, why did/do people think he is some sort of saviour when he's not spending his own money on anything other than half of Madejski's shares? Having the majority shareholding has allowed him to decide, one assumes, that he wants to buy the new training ground and may have had an influence in some of the players. He hasn't bought Roberts - that money was a loan which I expect has been repaid to him now. So, basically, other than the money for 51% of shares, he's not spending a penny on our club and, if anything, will probably end up putting us in a tricky situation if he decides to bugger off any time soon. Also leaving SJM in the mire, at a time when he'd like to sit back and perhaps enjoy a bit of retirement, as he's not getting any younger.
IMO the training ground could have been purchased when we were sure we going to be back in the Premiership, rather than leaving us with a super duper training ground, on a par with Man Utd when our team will be on a par with Scunthorpe Utd if we're not more careful. I fully expect the usual suspects to keep their RTG's firmly stuck on their face, but back in the real world, it would be wrong not to have even a hint of concern at the current situation.
by Extended-Phenotype » 10 Nov 2013 18:35
by Ian Royal » 10 Nov 2013 18:50
Extended-Phenotype Ok, seems like people disagree that a club should keep the fans informed.
I think that's quite sad, really. And I'm not just talking about the lame analogies.
by Harpers So Solid Crew » 10 Nov 2013 19:01
by Uke » 10 Nov 2013 19:11
winchester_royal What part of him saying that the football club would continue to be run as a business, i.e. using it's revenue (or financing) to fund expenditure, did people not understand?
He's not a sugar-daddy in the mould of Abramovich, but he never claimed to be. It was always clear that TSI's purchase of RFC was a business decision (the clue's in the name) so those expecting Anton to use his own money to finance multi-million pound losses every year were jumping to conclusions that had very little founding. He's just maybe a little more ambitious in the way he wants the club to run as a business (speculate to accumulate) than Sir John ever was.
If he's struggled to come up with the money to buy the extra 49% then so be it. The club will carry on because over the last year it has continued to be run on the sound business principles that it always has been.
by winchester_royal » 10 Nov 2013 19:16
Ukewinchester_royal What part of him saying that the football club would continue to be run as a business, i.e. using it's revenue (or financing) to fund expenditure, did people not understand?
He's not a sugar-daddy in the mould of Abramovich, but he never claimed to be. It was always clear that TSI's purchase of RFC was a business decision (the clue's in the name) so those expecting Anton to use his own money to finance multi-million pound losses every year were jumping to conclusions that had very little founding. He's just maybe a little more ambitious in the way he wants the club to run as a business (speculate to accumulate) than Sir John ever was.
If he's struggled to come up with the money to buy the extra 49% then so be it. The club will carry on because over the last year it has continued to be run on the sound business principles that it always has been.
If only he had a sound record of success in business though
Where has he been successful? Ever?
by Royal Lady » 10 Nov 2013 19:17
by Uke » 10 Nov 2013 19:24
winchester_royalUke If only he had a sound record of success in business though
Where has he been successful? Ever?
No idea, but given he's only in his 20's I wouldn't expect him to have a catalogue of successful businesses to his name.
Plus I'm not sure how his history as a businessman is actually related to what I said.
by winchester_royal » 10 Nov 2013 19:25
Royal Lady Oh come ON Winch - the salivating and general excitement when AZ was announced as potential new owner was palpable on here - why would people get so excited if they thought he was only going to carry on in exactly the same way that SJM did and we'd be forever filling black holes or whatever. Some people thought he was the messiah on here. And anyone who advised caution were more or less laughed at.
Like it or not, he's already reneged, for whatever reason, on buying out the remainder of SJM's shares at the time it was agreed he would, new baby or not, he's been conspicuous by his absence, not one soundbite coming from the board, except for SJM's "it's all cordial" piece, which is hardly a ringing endorsement of AZ and his plans to me. If that doesn't start ringing even tiny alarm bells in people's minds, then they, clearly, don't think as much of this club as I and some others do....
by winchester_royal » 10 Nov 2013 19:28
Ukewinchester_royalUke If only he had a sound record of success in business though
Where has he been successful? Ever?
No idea, but given he's only in his 20's I wouldn't expect him to have a catalogue of successful businesses to his name.
Plus I'm not sure how his history as a businessman is actually related to what I said.
Other than you should not be surprised when he fails to run a business.
Name one success he has had then?
He's 30 and bought us when he was 28 so he's no longer in his 20's either
by Wimb » 10 Nov 2013 19:44
by Uke » 10 Nov 2013 19:56
winchester_royal I didn't say he was going to run us as a successful business, just that his intention was that we would continue to be run as a business rather than just pumping all his daddy's money in.
I don't know his life story so no, I can't name one success he's had. Can you name his failures? All I know is that he has stressed that we'd be run as a business, he studies business in higher education, and Sir John talked a lot about his business acumen when he arrived.
by winchester_royal » 10 Nov 2013 20:07
Ukewinchester_royal I didn't say he was going to run us as a successful business, just that his intention was that we would continue to be run as a business rather than just pumping all his daddy's money in.
I don't know his life story so no, I can't name one success he's had. Can you name his failures? All I know is that he has stressed that we'd be run as a business, he studies business in higher education, and Sir John talked a lot about his business acumen when he arrived.
The failure to purchase Everton?
Like you, I'll wait and see but there does seem to be a repeating theme.
He talks a good game (literally, according to his then best mate BMcD), it looks knows the theory but when it comes to practice rather than an classroom I am not sure he has the knowledge or the backroom team (Samuelson et al) to deliver.
by Victor Meldrew » 10 Nov 2013 20:15
Wimb a fairly interesting re-read, does lend itself to the whole 'I'm not going to spunk loads of cash because I don't have lots myself' theory.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... evich.html
by NewCorkSeth » 10 Nov 2013 21:52
Extended-Phenotype Ok, seems like people disagree that a club should keep the fans informed.
I think that's quite sad, really. And I'm not just talking about the lame analogies.
by Ian Royal » 10 Nov 2013 23:05
Royal Lady Oh come ON Winch - the salivating and general excitement when AZ was announced as potential new owner was palpable on here - why would people get so excited if they thought he was only going to carry on in exactly the same way that SJM did and we'd be forever filling black holes or whatever. Some people thought he was the messiah on here. And anyone who advised caution were more or less laughed at.
Like it or not, he's already reneged, for whatever reason, on buying out the remainder of SJM's shares at the time it was agreed he would, new baby or not, he's been conspicuous by his absence, not one soundbite coming from the board, except for SJM's "it's all cordial" piece, which is hardly a ringing endorsement of AZ and his plans to me. If that doesn't start ringing even tiny alarm bells in people's minds, then they, clearly, don't think as much of this club as I and some others do....
by East Stand Tom » 10 Nov 2013 23:42
by NewCorkSeth » 11 Nov 2013 02:26
East Stand Tom I've been reading HNA for years but only now have I felt compelled to post something (looking forward to the f off newbie). I think it is plain for all of us that something is not right behind the scenes at the club, the radio silence about TSI buying the remaining 49% only heightens the speculation. Yesterday a well placed source told me about what is really happening. First things first, AZ has no money but his disappearance goes back to the Momo Sissoko saga as at a board meeting to discuss the transfer he was out voted by not only SJM but Chris Samuelson and Andrew Obolensky because the manager did not want the player. Apparently AZ threw his toys out of the pram and no one at the club has seen him since. The club is being run by SJM again and we are actively seeking new owners and it is unlikely we will see AZ ever again.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 247 guests