Its all about money and we've got enough.

[krux]

Originally Posted by fugazi3973

That wasn't the point you brought up though is it? Before now moving the goalposts, you drew a comparison between the fan-owned and privately owned clubs when answering a question about financial aspects and due-diligence of private owners, not on-field success.

"How many of the 92 league clubs are fan owned? 5? 6?

of the 80 + that are privately owned, how many have turned sour?"

So, answering the point that YOU raised, I would say it is a fact that the overwhelming majority of clubs that have entered administration are privately owned, compared to fan-owned.

Either you are missing the point, or my point was badly phrased. If it was the latter, I apologise.

The context was that I was responding to a point that if we are privately owned we could go bust when the inevitable happens and the money runs out.. My point was that most clubs are privately owned and haven't gone bust. Bringing up fan owned clubs in that post was merely to highlight that most clubs are not fan owned, rather than seeking to draw direct comparison between the financial sustainability of the two models.

We are financially sustainable and there is little risk of us going bust. However I also fear that under the current model there is little risk of us playing league football either.

[krux]

Originally Posted by fugazi3973

Exeter City have been majority fan-owned since 2003. Since then have got as high as 8th in League One. OK back in League Two now, but play-offs in the last two seasons. No sugar daddy steamrolling them there, and no sugar-daddy was in place when they got out of this league.

Thats great for them, but its not allowing us to thrive.

Unless we get that draw at old trafford in the 3rd round of the cup. That may help us as it helped them. Massive football fortune is probably the ideal form of cash injection.

[Hightown Brymbo Red]

Originally Posted by fugazi3973

Exeter City have been majority fan-owned since 2003. Since then have got as high as 8th in League One. OK back in League Two now, but play-offs in the last two seasons. No sugar daddy steamrolling them there, and no sugar-daddy was in place when they got out of this league.

Trust took over Exeter in Sept 2003 However in 2004 they were in so much debt a CVA was agreed with the club. It was eventually paid off when they had the good fortune to draw man Utd away in fa cup

[John Neals Dynasty]

Originally Posted by fugazi3973

No facts were giving. Just opinion. For this to be 'factual' there needed to be something to judge the statement on. Like figures of fan-owned clubs going into administration or/and bust against privately owned clubs going into administration or/and bust.

Your point is pointless why??? Because compared to privately owned clubs fan ownership is tiny... We are where we are simple as that so let's get on with it, but don't expect to compete for the best players at our level.
Posted via mobile theme

[davewilli]

Originally Posted by krux

Thats great for them, but its not allowing us to thrive.

Unless we get that draw at old trafford in the 3rd round of the cup. That may help us as it helped them. Massive football fortune is probably the ideal form of cash injection.

Yes but that is no different to our last 50 years of being privately owned, hence why we were easy targets for Gutterman; Hamiton etc. As a football club we have only ever had real money to invest in the first team after a cup run or the sale of our best players. The club slumped into debt so many times so it's a breath of fresh air that the club is being so well run in comparison.

No genuine private investor wanted to take us on after Moss and had they done so they would probably have sold us by now, if they hadn't reclaimed all that debt from the club.

I'm not against private investment coming into the club, however, I think I would hate Wxm to be a similar model as the sugar daddy run clubs, where it is all about the rich benefactor and not about the football club and the fans.

[krux]

Originally Posted by davewilli

Yes but that is no different to our last 50 years of being privately owned, hence why we were easy targets for Gutterman; Hamiton etc. As a football club we have only ever had real money to invest in the first team after a cup run or the sale of our best players.

No genuine private investor wanted to take us on after Moss and had they done so they would probably have sold us by now, if they hadn't reclaimed all that debt from the club.

I'm not against private investment coming into the club, however, I think I would hate Wxm to be a similar model as the sugar daddy run clubs, where it is all about the rich benefactor and not about the football club and the fans.

There are plenty of examples of owners not doing that, so they might not have done.

[davewilli]

Originally Posted by krux

There are plenty of examples of owners not doing that, so they might not have done.

Plenty of examples the other way too.

[fugazi3973]

Originally Posted by krux

Either you are missing the point, or my point was badly phrased. If it was the latter, I apologise.

The context was that I was responding to a point that if we are privately owned we could go bust when the inevitable happens and the money runs out.. My point was that most clubs are privately owned and haven't gone bust. Bringing up fan owned clubs in that post was merely to highlight that most clubs are not fan owned, rather than seeking to draw direct comparison between the financial sustainability of the two models.

We are financially sustainable and there is little risk of us going bust. However I also fear that under the current model there is little risk of us playing league football either.

It does seem I misunderstood where you were coming from. Sorry!

[fugazi3973]

Originally Posted by krux

Thats great for them, but its not allowing us to thrive.

Unless we get that draw at old trafford in the 3rd round of the cup. That may help us as it helped them. Massive football fortune is probably the ideal form of cash injection.

Unless we're on different pages again () then yes, they had the draw in the cup which wiped out their debt. This put them on about the level we are at now. Debt free. It was after this they got promoted. The Old Trafford match didn't give them additional funds over where we are at now.