If we put the hash the Belgians are making of their 'strategy' to one side for a moment, the real issue now is more to do with:
Do we think the club can be run sustainably (self sufficient, no debt) and still maintain a competitive championship side with a tilt at the prem every now and then or do we accept that the club needs to go into ever increasing debt to do this?
This is the crux of the issue and on the basis that there are smaller clubs than us in the championship, with far inferior facilities and far less potential or track record, the answer seems to be yes.
The other fundamental question is:
Are we happy to risk the arabs buying us and running up huge debts and potentially crippling us? There is no reason to suspect they will do this but I guess on one end of the scale its RD's skinflint experiment which looks like seeing us become a regular league 1 feeder club or do we risk it with the arabs? For me, there's no question - lets get these Belgians out and lets get the arabs in. Life's too short for this experiment and there is only the period between now and when the season ticket renewals come round for it to be resolved because I'm expecting a minimum 50% drop in season ticket renewals if this current crap continues and a real shocker of a season next year - the next generation (my kids for instance) can't keep turning up and watching us lose and to make it worse the ground will be even emptier next year. Doing nothing about this is not an option.
Let the trust do what they do but lets be honest, we know nothing is going to change so I'm firmly with the 'lets try and force them out with maximum disruption' in the coming weeks idea.
0
Comments
I'm inclined to agree with you though, other clubs seem to be able to do a good job - and we have a good location and very good facilities. It's worth applauding the current regime in some ways for understanding these advantages when they originally purchased us.
However, I think one of the best ways to make your money go further in football is to make the correct managerial appointment though, and have someone who knows how to get the maximum out of the players at their disposal. Doing this will ensure good football that people will be willing to pay for. Good attitudes towards the club also results in people being more willing to spend their cash on club merchandise and catering. I wouldn't want the club to be at risk and would worry about the debts coming back and biting us, the Portsmouth fans liked their FA Cup Glory but don't think much of League 2 now.
That said, there are clubs that have got external investment where things haven't been a total and utter disaster. What would be a disaster is continuing on the path we are going down, whereby it looks relatively likely we'll be League 1 in a few months and with a board that fundamentally don't understand the game, the club or it's fans.
I think attempting to force them out with fan action, whilst allowing the trust to continue their methods is a good bet. The trust obviously have a few ideas, and I can understand why they would want to open dialog with the regime - if only in case the current regime stays. That doesn't prevent the rest of us, including even trust members, from continuing to protest and launch similar things.
RD believes he can square this circle by transforming the finances of a Championship club by owning a network of clubs, fishing for players in the cheaper non-UK market, and investing in a top-class academy. The last of these strategies is admirable and achievable (provided we maintain Championship status), but the other two have been damaging. It is not clear whether this is because the implementation has been incompetent (which it clearly has) or because the complexities of the structure mean that success is always going to be unlikely. Whatever the reason, we can say that the search for cost savings has almost certainly led to the opposite, with so much money wasted by unqualified people making too many mistakes.
Based on what we have experienced, I would say that the best chance of getting close to achieving the demanding and almost contradictory aims of sustainability and Championship status (we can forget about adding to these two the Premiership as a third aim) would be to go back to the model of stable, experienced, frugal management (eg Curbishley, Powell) – someone who earns the right to be trusted to spend the club’s money carefully, uses his contacts to ensure we bring in players of the right character, and thereby builds a team that is more than the sum of its parts. This needs to be supported by ownership willing to recognise that their job is to interpret sustainability as meaning they still have to put in a few million each year; it might not be possible to find such paragons of virtue, but that is the box that those governing English football have left us in.
1. Who owns the club?
2. What is the business plan?
3. How is the plan being financed?
4. What are the plans for the Valley?
5. What are the plans for the academy?
6. What is the exit strategy?
Stability and balance is key and the current system just doesn’t allow for that. The club has to be well run and everybody needs to be pulling together. It is in the owner’s gift to do this. He just has to accept his current plan needs refining. It isn’t the money part he has got wrong, it is the management and procurement part.
If he could find a manager like Curbs, who was such a good judge of what players brought to the team, and was always realistic in terms of what he spent, supporting the corporate line, we would have half a chance. I know he has been out of the management game for a while, but he has had is eyes and eyes close to the Championship, so it might be worth a punt on the bloke. It would change the whole atmosphere at the club for starters!
It's very interesting that you say the debt has gone up by £30,000,000... as apparently the asking price is what he paid plus £30,000,000. Certainly adds credibility to the rumour he's looking for £50m to get out, perhaps that figure is simply the price he paid in addition to the funds required to clear the debt?
If PV's lot knew this and were seriously considering it then he's nuts not to bite their hand off; as a business man he must see the club isn't worth that surely? Has he added £30m of value in to the club? He has added value, even his biggest critics can't argue that off the pitch and board/staff aside the club should be worth more money; better facilities and infrastructure count for a lot - but a 150% increase?
If anything, the levels of debt that he's run up suggest a massive flaw in his grand scheme for sustainability - and should be put directly to the board in light of Murray's Q&A session yesterday. Sustainability doesn't mean that you spend a pittance on players and run up debt elsewhere.
The only logical explanation is that they've created so much negative press about the "brand" of CAFC that it's now worth £30,000,000 less than £0..
Just seems like there is only one way out. CAFC goes bust and Roly and cronies go home, and we re-start a la Portsmouth - which incidentally is rebuilding itself slowly- and momentum is gathering.
Unless owning a football club has altering purposes for you I.e raising the profile of your country/local businessman done good/money laundering I have no idea why you would invest in one.
*i know you weren't saying that they should be cut out completely, it's more a comment on the obvious flaw of Roland's strategy
Never going to happen though. What we really need is a proper manager with autonomy.