#SellBeforeWeDai Action/Inaction Group

[Loafer]

so nothing is actually happening then or going to happen

no wonder why our supporters are called tinpot, weaklings, feeble and an embarrassing joke

[NathStPaul]

No they just call you that.

[RoyalBlue]

I have some deep concerns about this "Sell before we Dai" movement or rather what it might become.

If it generates too much negativity for Dai Yongge he might feel it's best to wipe his hands of the club and sell the assets to save face back in China - the fact the stadium and training ground are seperate companies may be part of this plan.

Some idiots just like to protest, they jump from Blacklivesmatter, Insulate Britain and Stop Oil because they want a confrontation with authorities and not so much because they care about the subject matter. No doubt we have some of these idiots in our midst. They need to be controlled - No pitch invasions which could lead to points deductions, no targeting club employees and don't drive the owner to take desperate measures.

Any new owner isn't necessarily going to be any better

I think the issue is the club management rather than club ownership, If a competent CEO was running the show with the power to fire managers or manage the finances then we wouldn't be in this mess, probably not even in League 1. That's what we need, A Nigel Howe figure to steady the ship and ensure funds come over in good time with the knowledge of what the impact is of this not happening - I doubt our current CEO even knew we'd get a points deduction or that HMRC could wind the club up.

Dai is the person who appoints the CEOs etc. and gets rid of them. This shitshow has been going on for several years now. How long do you propose giving Dai to realise the issues, get rid of the likes of Pang and appoint capable people. The fish rots from the head and I'm afraid that head is beginning to stink.

[tidus_mi2]

I'd certainly take the risk of administration if it got rid of Dai, he's already setting the bar pretty low for the next owner and I think we're too attractive a prospect to just go under.

[Forbury Lion]

I have some deep concerns about this "Sell before we Dai" movement or rather what it might become.

If it generates too much negativity for Dai Yongge he might feel it's best to wipe his hands of the club and sell the assets to save face back in China - the fact the stadium and training ground are seperate companies may be part of this plan.

Some idiots just like to protest, they jump from Blacklivesmatter, Insulate Britain and Stop Oil because they want a confrontation with authorities and not so much because they care about the subject matter. No doubt we have some of these idiots in our midst. They need to be controlled - No pitch invasions which could lead to points deductions, no targeting club employees and don't drive the owner to take desperate measures.

Any new owner isn't necessarily going to be any better

I think the issue is the club management rather than club ownership, If a competent CEO was running the show with the power to fire managers or manage the finances then we wouldn't be in this mess, probably not even in League 1. That's what we need, A Nigel Howe figure to steady the ship and ensure funds come over in good time with the knowledge of what the impact is of this not happening - I doubt our current CEO even knew we'd get a points deduction or that HMRC could wind the club up.

Dai is the person who appoints the CEOs etc. and gets rid of them. This shitshow has been going on for several years now. How long do you propose giving Dai to realise the issues, get rid of the likes of Pang and appoint capable people. The fish rots from the head and I'm afraid that head is beginning to stink.

I'm suggesting the campaign targets this aim - a change of leadership rather than owner, It's a way for Mr Dai to save face and something that is easier to achieve than finding a new owner and something that needs to happen if there is to be any kind of club left to sell.

I think the issue is there are no good experienced football club CEO's who speak Chinese and our owner doesn't speak English, but perhaps what is needed is a good experienced football club CEO and a good translator

[WestYorksRoyal]

I'm confused.

On the one hand, I'm hearing that the aim is to get an owner in who will run the club sustainably...

On the other hand, people want new signings and to challenge for honours...

Which is it?

Given where the club is at and the finances in the EFL, wanting both seems like cakeism...

It's not cakeism. Ideally a wealthy owner can invest in infrastructure and academy, sign players who we can develop and improve for more. Through player sales this keeps us within FFP. If it was pure cakeism Brighton wouldn't be where they are.

[Linden Jones' Tash]

I'm confused.

On the one hand, I'm hearing that the aim is to get an owner in who will run the club sustainably...

On the other hand, people want new signings and to challenge for honours...

Which is it?

Given where the club is at and the finances in the EFL, wanting both seems like cakeism...

It's not cakeism. Ideally a wealthy owner can invest in infrastructure and academy, sign players who we can develop and improve for more. Through player sales this keeps us within FFP. If it was pure cakeism Brighton wouldn't be where they are.

Ok, but Bloom is very rich, as Dai is supposed to be - and has spent a lot of money, perhaps more wisely (hindsight is a marvelous thing), but also unsustainably ( if breaking even or making a profit is the criteria for 'sustainably'.

Don't we just want a 'lucky owner', rather than a 'good owner'...

[WestYorksRoyal]

I'm confused.

On the one hand, I'm hearing that the aim is to get an owner in who will run the club sustainably...

On the other hand, people want new signings and to challenge for honours...

Which is it?

Given where the club is at and the finances in the EFL, wanting both seems like cakeism...

It's not cakeism. Ideally a wealthy owner can invest in infrastructure and academy, sign players who we can develop and improve for more. Through player sales this keeps us within FFP. If it was pure cakeism Brighton wouldn't be where they are.

Ok, but Bloom is very rich, as Dai is supposed to be - and has spent a lot of money, perhaps more wisely (hindsight is a marvelous thing), but also unsustainably ( if breaking even or making a profit is the criteria for 'sustainably'.

Don't we just want a 'lucky owner', rather than a 'good owner'...

I don't know the ins and outs of Brighton's financials, but they have a lot of revenue from recent player sales. Even if Bloom is underwriting losses, they're never at risk of FFP

[Snowflake Royal]

I'm confused.

On the one hand, I'm hearing that the aim is to get an owner in who will run the club sustainably...

On the other hand, people want new signings and to challenge for honours...

Which is it?

Given where the club is at and the finances in the EFL, wanting both seems like cakeism...

A new owner who will get the foundations right so we can make decent signings and challenge for promotion.

We did it before, we can do it again. Our recordwhen spending big is actually utterly woeful. Our record when being sustainable is much better.

We also have a small young squad so signings are essential. They don't have to be expensive. Or in vast numbers.

[Snowflake Royal]

I have some deep concerns about this "Sell before we Dai" movement or rather what it might become.

If it generates too much negativity for Dai Yongge he might feel it's best to wipe his hands of the club and sell the assets to save face back in China - the fact the stadium and training ground are seperate companies may be part of this plan.

Some idiots just like to protest, they jump from Blacklivesmatter, Insulate Britain and Stop Oil because they want a confrontation with authorities and not so much because they care about the subject matter. No doubt we have some of these idiots in our midst. They need to be controlled - No pitch invasions which could lead to points deductions, no targeting club employees and don't drive the owner to take desperate measures.

Any new owner isn't necessarily going to be any better

I think the issue is the club management rather than club ownership, If a competent CEO was running the show with the power to fire managers or manage the finances then we wouldn't be in this mess, probably not even in League 1. That's what we need, A Nigel Howe figure to steady the ship and ensure funds come over in good time with the knowledge of what the impact is of this not happening - I doubt our current CEO even knew we'd get a points deduction or that HMRC could wind the club up.

Dai is the person who appoints the CEOs etc. and gets rid of them. This shitshow has been going on for several years now. How long do you propose giving Dai to realise the issues, get rid of the likes of Pang and appoint capable people. The fish rots from the head and I'm afraid that head is beginning to stink.

I'm suggesting the campaign targets this aim - a change of leadership rather than owner, It's a way for Mr Dai to save face and something that is easier to achieve than finding a new owner and something that needs to happen if there is to be any kind of club left to sell.

I think the issue is there are no good experienced football club CEO's who speak Chinese and our owner doesn't speak English, but perhaps what is needed is a good experienced football club CEO and a good translator

oxf*rd that. Dai is the problem.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

It's not cakeism. Ideally a wealthy owner can invest in infrastructure and academy, sign players who we can develop and improve for more. Through player sales this keeps us within FFP. If it was pure cakeism Brighton wouldn't be where they are.

Ok, but Bloom is very rich, as Dai is supposed to be - and has spent a lot of money, perhaps more wisely (hindsight is a marvelous thing), but also unsustainably ( if breaking even or making a profit is the criteria for 'sustainably'.

Don't we just want a 'lucky owner', rather than a 'good owner'...

I don't know the ins and outs of Brighton's financials, but they have a lot of revenue from recent player sales. Even if Bloom is underwriting losses, they're never at risk of FFP

Player sales is what has killed us really. If we'd have sold Moore, Swift and Loader, potentially it may have given us more scope to offer new deals to players so we weren't losing them on frees (like Richards) so we could have sold again.

Never against an owner wanting to keep hold of our top assets to make us a good team, but the failure to recognise that necessity when spending like he did has taken us to where we are now. Anyone can make poor decisions on player recruitment, it's not easy, but you've got to keep in line with the rules.

[Snowflake Royal]

Ok, but Bloom is very rich, as Dai is supposed to be - and has spent a lot of money, perhaps more wisely (hindsight is a marvelous thing), but also unsustainably ( if breaking even or making a profit is the criteria for 'sustainably'.

Don't we just want a 'lucky owner', rather than a 'good owner'...

I don't know the ins and outs of Brighton's financials, but they have a lot of revenue from recent player sales. Even if Bloom is underwriting losses, they're never at risk of FFP

Player sales is what has killed us really. If we'd have sold Moore, Swift and Loader, potentially it may have given us more scope to offer new deals to players so we weren't losing them on frees (like Richards) so we could have sold again.

Never against an owner wanting to keep hold of our top assets to make us a good team, but the failure to recognise that necessity when spending like he did has taken us to where we are now. Anyone can make poor decisions on player recruitment, it's not easy, but you've got to keep in line with the rules.

Moore going for £8m is actually a net gain of £14m before a replacement. Loader for a conservative £2m and lets lowball Swift similarly because of injury... that's £18m swing to the club.

P&S loss permitted £39m and we were over £50m.

So we'd have still been in a bad way, but could have snuck under the limit.

Then you think about the ~£10m spent on Joao and Puscas when we already knew we were struggling and had been under restrictions. Plus £7m and wages on Aluko.


We've pissed the best part of £30m on total flops in Aluko, Puscas and laterly Moore.

Not to mention the high wages for underperformers like Baldock, Gunter, McCleary.

And we've let so many good assets go for nothing. Dickie, Stacey, Fosu, Hyam, Laurent, Rinomhota, Richards.

It's a cavalcade of dreadful club management. All self inflicted. All caused by the man at the top appointing two dreadful CEOs when we had a good one. Losing two good DoFs, appointing shit manager after shit manager, and sacking off the one decent one we had for no reason.

[andrew1957]

I don't know the ins and outs of Brighton's financials, but they have a lot of revenue from recent player sales. Even if Bloom is underwriting losses, they're never at risk of FFP

Player sales is what has killed us really. If we'd have sold Moore, Swift and Loader, potentially it may have given us more scope to offer new deals to players so we weren't losing them on frees (like Richards) so we could have sold again.

Never against an owner wanting to keep hold of our top assets to make us a good team, but the failure to recognise that necessity when spending like he did has taken us to where we are now. Anyone can make poor decisions on player recruitment, it's not easy, but you've got to keep in line with the rules.

Moore going for £8m is actually a net gain of £14m before a replacement. Loader for a conservative £2m and lets lowball Swift similarly because of injury... that's £18m swing to the club.

P&S loss permitted £39m and we were over £50m.

So we'd have still been in a bad way, but could have snuck under the limit.

Then you think about the ~£10m spent on Joao and Puscas when we already knew we were struggling and had been under restrictions. Plus £7m and wages on Aluko.


We've pissed the best part of £30m on total flops in Aluko, Puscas and laterly Moore.

Not to mention the high wages for underperformers like Baldock, Gunter, McCleary.

And we've let so many good assets go for nothing. Dickie, Stacey, Fosu, Hyam, Laurent, Rinomhota, Richards.

It's a cavalcade of dreadful club management. All self inflicted. All caused by the man at the top appointing two dreadful CEOs when we had a good one. Losing two good DoFs, appointing shit manager after shit manager, and sacking off the one decent one we had for no reason.

But apart from that I'd say the owner's done a pretty good job so far.

[Notts Royal]

Dai is the person who appoints the CEOs etc. and gets rid of them. This shitshow has been going on for several years now. How long do you propose giving Dai to realise the issues, get rid of the likes of Pang and appoint capable people. The fish rots from the head and I'm afraid that head is beginning to stink.

I'm suggesting the campaign targets this aim - a change of leadership rather than owner, It's a way for Mr Dai to save face and something that is easier to achieve than finding a new owner and something that needs to happen if there is to be any kind of club left to sell.

I think the issue is there are no good experienced football club CEO's who speak Chinese and our owner doesn't speak English, but perhaps what is needed is a good experienced football club CEO and a good translator

oxf*rd that. Dai is the problem.

Yup exactly. How many more chances should he rightfully get? oxf*rd all…he needs to oxf*rd off

[The Green Programme]

I have some deep concerns about this "Sell before we Dai" movement or rather what it might become.

If it generates too much negativity for Dai Yongge he might feel it's best to wipe his hands of the club and sell the assets to save face back in China - the fact the stadium and training ground are seperate companies may be part of this plan.

Some idiots just like to protest, they jump from Blacklivesmatter, Insulate Britain and Stop Oil because they want a confrontation with authorities and not so much because they care about the subject matter. No doubt we have some of these idiots in our midst. They need to be controlled - No pitch invasions which could lead to points deductions, no targeting club employees and don't drive the owner to take desperate measures.

Any new owner isn't necessarily going to be any better

I think the issue is the club management rather than club ownership, If a competent CEO was running the show with the power to fire managers or manage the finances then we wouldn't be in this mess, probably not even in League 1. That's what we need, A Nigel Howe figure to steady the ship and ensure funds come over in good time with the knowledge of what the impact is of this not happening - I doubt our current CEO even knew we'd get a points deduction or that HMRC could wind the club up.

A very good post…

I completely agree….

The person who has spent the most and lost the most in this whole scenario is Mr Dai.

And yet all the vitriol is aimed at him!

If Lucas Joao and George Puscas hadn’t missed a series of crucial ‘sitters’ under Paulo - we’d have made the play offs at least and possibly even made automatic - our position may have been very different for the past two seasons and the new season ahead - and our owner would not be the subject of such hostility.

Football is a results game and the overpriced, overpaid, under average strikers (and others) - have let us down appallingly - when it mattered - and are as responsible for where we are as much as anyone else; if not more so.

At a professional level, players are paid to perform at the best, when it matters.

We have paid players vast amounts of money - draining the Club in the process - we have allowed those very same players to leave, having run down their contracts - given the Club (owner) zero return on their huge investment - those same players who have proven that they cannot deliver what matters, when it matters.

That is what I feel angry about.

Certainly more so than directing vitriol towards a man who has invested millions of pounds trying to make our Club a success.

[From Despair To Where?]

It does beg the question, who authorised the purchase of these overpriced, overpaid, under average players.

Who asked the question "How the fcuk is a carthorse like Sone Aluko worth £5m + add ons and £25k a week for 4 years"?

Who said "We've just come out of a soft embargo so let's spend £10m on 2 strikers"?

More Importantly, who gave him the job when his judgement is clearly fcuking suspect. I'm not one of the Dai out crowd but he's clearly culpable either by intervening or giving idiots the authority to make shit decisions.

[Clyde1998]

It does beg the question, who authorised the purchase of these overpriced, overpaid, under average players.

Who asked the question "How the fcuk is a carthorse like Sone Aluko worth £5m + add ons and £25k a week for 4 years"?

Who said "We've just come out of a soft embargo so let's spend £10m on 2 strikers"?

More Importantly, who gave him the job when his judgement is clearly fcuking suspect. I'm not one of the Dai out crowd but he's clearly culpable either by intervening or giving idiots the authority to make shit decisions.

There's another angle to the question: did the club believe these players were better than they actually turned out to be, and if so why? That would give context the fees/wages, especially if the club believed these players were good enough to get us to the Premier League - where the finances on those players wouldn't matter anymore. It doesn't absolve them, of course, merely suggests a different issue existed (exists?) than (or in addition to) what people are focusing on.

On Aluko specifically, his signing didn't make sense at the time (regardless of fee/wages) as we needed an out and out striker at the point - not another winger/attacking midfielder.

[From Despair To Where?]

My arguement with Joao and Puscas has always been one or the other, not both, as the finances were mad, especially seeing as we'd just come out of a soft embargo.

Aluko's signing didn't make sense because he was always an inconsistent show pony and nowhere near worth what we paid for and paid him. We already had options and had just signed Barrow.

[blythspartan]

It does beg the question, who authorised the purchase of these overpriced, overpaid, under average players.

Who asked the question "How the fcuk is a carthorse like Sone Aluko worth £5m + add ons and £25k a week for 4 years"?

Who said "We've just come out of a soft embargo so let's spend £10m on 2 strikers"?

More Importantly, who gave him the job when his judgement is clearly fcuking suspect. I'm not one of the Dai out crowd but he's clearly culpable either by intervening or giving idiots the authority to make shit decisions.

I agree with this and I am not in the Dai out crowd.

Personally, I think he does care about the club but he’s made some serious mistakes and shown some shocking judgement. It could have all been so different but it is what it is. Anyway, time will tell what the club really means to him.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

It does beg the question, who authorised the purchase of these overpriced, overpaid, under average players.

Who asked the question "How the fcuk is a carthorse like Sone Aluko worth £5m + add ons and £25k a week for 4 years"?

Who said "We've just come out of a soft embargo so let's spend £10m on 2 strikers"?

More Importantly, who gave him the job when his judgement is clearly fcuking suspect. I'm not one of the Dai out crowd but he's clearly culpable either by intervening or giving idiots the authority to make shit decisions.

Yeah this really. Even if it was Dai pushing it all, I wonder if there was ever a time when he looked and thought "is this working?"

As you say, £10m on 2 strikers (with Ejaria a further £3.5m to come a year later) and we were labouring in the bottom half of the table or in relegation scraps, other players on big contracts, not finishing anywhere remotely close to the play off places. Surely someone would have thought, is this honestly working?

I suppose the counter argument to that is we finished 7th and missed out narrowly on the play offs, but by and large we were never anywhere near. I can potentially understand pursuing the dream if we were in a position like Blackburn/Millwall, consistently finishing close every season, but we didn't. We had one season, our last chance, where we came close. Nowhere near throughout the rest.