The way i see it the club is in a right old mess and has been for sometime slater and jimenez are a pair of jokers.
Playing devils advocate. They got rid of a manager that had a strong negative following, , bought in CP albeit 2nd choice, kept faith with him when many other owners would not have., funded last years promotion, allowed us to bring in loanees from prem clubs. I know there is lots of negative feelings re the owners but without them we could bevin a lot worse places thsn we are now.
The way i see it the club is in a right old mess and has been for sometime slater and jimenez are a pair of jokers.
Playing devils advocate. They got rid of a manager that had a strong negative following, , bought in CP albeit 2nd choice, kept faith with him when many other owners would not have., funded last years promotion, allowed us to bring in loanees from prem clubs. I know there is lots of negative feelings re the owners but without them we could bevin a lot worse places thsn we are now.
Yes and no, because 1, 2, 3 had a lot to do with Peter Varney, who is no longer part of the board, and the funding is debt, which I accept doesn't necessarily negate its value as long as there is a return in increased revenue. But I wouldn't dispute the premise that a takeover was necessary and we are in a better league position today as a consequence of it.
The way i see it the club is in a right old mess and has been for sometime slater and jimenez are a pair of jokers.
Playing devils advocate. They got rid of a manager that had a strong negative following, , bought in CP albeit 2nd choice, kept faith with him when many other owners would not have., funded last years promotion, allowed us to bring in loanees from prem clubs. I know there is lots of negative feelings re the owners but without them we could bevin a lot worse places thsn we are now.
Yes and no, because 1, 2, 3 had a lot to do with Peter Varney, who is no longer part of the board, and the funding is debt, which I accept doesn't necessarily negate its value as long as there is a return in increased revenue. But I wouldn't dispute the premise that a takeover was necessary and we are in a better league position today as a consequence of it.
I am ambivalent about this board but even with the influence of PV they still had to have made the final decision - I assume - the signing off. I appreciate that you have a great insight into them and the running of the club, but as many who were once lauding now decry them, my real point is be careful of what you wish for. Portsmouth once applauded Harry Rednap, enjoyed the sale to new owners. There was too much over hype of them when they took over, too many people talking about our great new owners, in whom we trust. Today we face the realism of new owners and the change from a paternal benevolent board to business men running the club for a profit, short or long term. The Murray days are over and we are in an era of purely financial management fore better but probably worse
The way i see it the club is in a right old mess and has been for sometime slater and jimenez are a pair of jokers.
Playing devils advocate. They got rid of a manager that had a strong negative following, , bought in CP albeit 2nd choice, kept faith with him when many other owners would not have., funded last years promotion, allowed us to bring in loanees from prem clubs. I know there is lots of negative feelings re the owners but without them we could bevin a lot worse places thsn we are now.
Yes and no, because 1, 2, 3 had a lot to do with Peter Varney, who is no longer part of the board, and the funding is debt, which I accept doesn't necessarily negate its value as long as there is a return in increased revenue. But I wouldn't dispute the premise that a takeover was necessary and we are in a better league position today as a consequence of it.
I am ambivalent about this board but even with the influence of PV they still had to have made the final decision - I assume - the signing off. I appreciate that you have a great insight into them and the running of the club, but as many who were once lauding now decry them, my real point is be careful of what you wish for. Portsmouth once applauded Harry Rednap, enjoyed the sale to new owners. There was too much over hype of them when they took over, too many people talking about our great new owners, in whom we trust. Today we face the realism of new owners and the change from a paternal benevolent board to business men running the club for a profit, short or long term. The Murray days are over and we are in an era of purely financial management fore better but probably worse
And that is why there is a Trust and why we need to build up its size and potential financial clout, now.
The Murray days are over and we are in an era of purely financial management fore better but probably worse
It is sad to say but, i think the days of when people would own and invest in football clubs is well and truely over. There is far to much money involved when a club does well for the type of invester that would who would do it for love of his club to take over as they get pushed aside by the big investment groups who are only out to do what they can to make more money with minimal cash investment.
Comments
The Murray days are over and we are in an era of purely financial management fore better but probably worse
It is sad to say but, i think the days of when people would own and invest in football clubs is well and truely over. There is far to much money involved when a club does well for the type of invester that would who would do it for love of his club to take over as they get pushed aside by the big investment groups who are only out to do what they can to make more money with minimal cash investment.