Stewart Donald anyone.....

I’d still say he makes us suffer today to some extent;

High rent, no income revenues, extremely poor upkeep of stadium/pitch management whilst increasing the rent, not allowing the club access to stadium (see Rotherham manager’s comments yesterday about access), moves goalposts on stadium valuation and I’m sure there’s many more.

He still maintains a unhealthy stranglehold over the club (yes it may have improved over the last few months, but that’s only because he stands to gain again).

He reminds of the woman out of the film ‘Misery’, oh and Scrooge prior to the visits from the ghosts.
The high rent, lack of income is mainly down to the man who agreed to sign the papers of that agreement...Nick Merry.

FK was always going to try and get the best deal for him and he got lucky when Merry turned up all to ready to sign the paper work.

FK might not of helped us out that much and I’m no way keen on the man but the blame for the current lease which strangles our club is down to NM and IL.
 
So FK had a go at being a club chairman and he was pants at it with poor managerial appointments, yes there were stories floating around about the cost cutting at the end of his tenure which were tough to accept as a fan, but that was 10 years ago and you are still trying to justify a statement that things would of been better without years of suffering if he never stepped in to save the club.
I get you despise him and he hasn't covered himself in glory with some of his decisions, but to say we as a club are suffering today is a bit of a stretch.
If folk want to talk about "asset strippers" then FK is a prime example.

He manipulated any number of people, organisations and local authorities into allowing him to override covenants and licencing agreements to first build his (now named after him) leisure centre then sell the Manor to developers for a vast profit, all under the guise of "saving" OUFC and moving them to a brand new ground. (also named after him)
Having tired of running a football club, something which he didn't understand and was patently incompetent at learning, he found another "mug" and gave them the football club for a quid and, astonishingly, got them to agree to a 25 year licence at a ridiculous cost to use the ground which, he never even finished.
He walked away with more money than he could ever have imagined he could have made out of a lower league football club. Free of all liabilities and guaranteed an income if, the club wanted to have somewhere to play.
He didn't save the club he condemned it to years of scratching around for one benefactor after another to meet the bills with no hope of ever making any money from football.
The worst thing of all is that the club still has to pay him lip service to allow them to actually use the stadium outside of the contractual terms and with the hope that he might meet the minimum requirements of the upkeep of the stadium. And, laughably, he still uses the self given title of "guardian" of the club.
 
I get you despise him and he hasn't covered himself in glory with some of his decisions, but to say we as a club are suffering today is a bit of a stretch.
The deal that Kassam offered the club was not one that someone who wanted to help the club in any way would have offered. It was one that a businessman offered to try and make the most money. Which is fine, if you don't care much about the club - he is a businessman and the people buying the club were stupid enough to sign it. But to say that the club isn't suffering as a result of the deal is frankly a bit daft - it is self evident that the club IS at a (financial and therefore footballing) disadvantage.
 
I’d still say he makes us suffer today to some extent;

High rent, no income revenues, extremely poor upkeep of stadium/pitch management whilst increasing the rent, not allowing the club access to stadium (see Rotherham manager’s comments yesterday about access), moves goalposts on stadium valuation and I’m sure there’s many more.

He still maintains a unhealthy stranglehold over the club (yes it may have improved over the last few months, but that’s only because he stands to gain again).

He reminds of the woman out of the film ‘Misery’, oh and Scrooge prior to the visits from the ghosts.
Is the rent really an issue?
3 owners have agreed to take the stadium on at the agreed terms of the licence, if we are suffering because of the costs of running the ground then you have to question what these 3 owners are playing at, why take the club on if they can’t cope with outgoings, that’s bad management on the part of the owners.
 
The deal that Kassam offered the club was not one that someone who wanted to help the club in any way would have offered. It was one that a businessman offered to try and make the most money. Which is fine, if you don't care much about the club - he is a businessman and the people buying the club were stupid enough to sign it. But to say that the club isn't suffering as a result of the deal is frankly a bit daft - it is self evident that the club IS at a (financial and therefore footballing) disadvantage.
Is that because the owners didn't have the cash to run the club after taking it on.
 
If folk want to talk about "asset strippers" then FK is a prime example.

He manipulated any number of people, organisations and local authorities into allowing him to override covenants and licencing agreements to first build his (now named after him) leisure centre then sell the Manor to developers for a vast profit, all under the guise of "saving" OUFC and moving them to a brand new ground. (also named after him)
Having tired of running a football club, something which he didn't understand and was patently incompetent at learning, he found another "mug" and gave them the football club for a quid and, astonishingly, got them to agree to a 25 year licence at a ridiculous cost to use the ground which, he never even finished.
He walked away with more money than he could ever have imagined he could have made out of a lower league football club. Free of all liabilities and guaranteed an income if, the club wanted to have somewhere to play.
He didn't save the club he condemned it to years of scratching around for one benefactor after another to meet the bills with no hope of ever making any money from football.
The worst thing of all is that the club still has to pay him lip service to allow them to actually use the stadium outside of the contractual terms and with the hope that he might meet the minimum requirements of the upkeep of the stadium. And, laughably, he still uses the self given title of "guardian" of the club.
How didn’t he save the club? Wouldn’t we have gone out of business?
I really don’t get this continuously blaming Fk because the owners can’t pay or afford to pay the licence they agreed to, if it’s that bad and they are stupid enough to sign it who’s to blame, if the “rent” is creating a problem you have to question the 3 owners for getting us in to that position, they are as culpable.
 
Is that because the owners didn't have the cash to run the club after taking it on.
Quite possibly. But the financial drain of the rent etc played (and still plays) a big part in that. It may well be (as you say in another post) that the people who signed the deal on the club's behalf are at least as culpable in the matter - but the club IS still suffering from the deal that Kassam got them to sign, which is what you very strangely said wasn't the case.

If jolly Uncle K really was the 'guardian' of the club as he self-righteously proclaimed some time ago then it is certainly within his gift to make that a much less onerous burden. Of course as a 'businessman' there is no reason he should do that - and that (rather than any custodian of the club) is what he is.
 
Quite possibly. But the financial drain of the rent etc played (and still plays) a big part in that. It may well be (as you say in another post) that the people who signed the deal on the club's behalf are at least as culpable in the matter - but the club IS still suffering from the deal that Kassam got them to sign, which is what you very strangely said wasn't the case.

If jolly Uncle K really was the 'guardian' of the club as he self-righteously proclaimed some time ago then it is certainly within his gift to make that a much less onerous burden. Of course as a 'businessman' there is no reason he should do that - and that (rather than any custodian of the club) is what he is.
I did use the word if, what does hold the club back IMO, owners who can't service the charge they took on at the detriment of other financial responsibilities that can help make this club move forward.
The "rent" obviously wasn't a problem when FK was in charge, IL oversaw the signing of the new licence, DE didn't mention it until he got himself in trouble and his finances had to be reined in, Tiger was/is fine with it but then had his "cash flow" problems which then emphasised the "rent", FK has done a lot of s**t over the years and is no angel but I think the "rent" issue is more a concern of some supporters and their view of FK than the owners when they took the club over.
 
So if we owned a leasehold ground (not the land) then we wouldn`t pay "rent" per se. Probably some sort of lease holders fee but that`s all.

;)
 
Best in the world ? They're not even the best in their home. Cannot stand that football club. Hope Donald drives them out business.
? Just seen this. Making me laugh. I'm curious why an Oxford fan would have such strong opinions on Sunderland.
Bizarre but funny
 
I used to have a bit of a soft spot for Sunderland, but after glancing at their forum a few times over the last couple of months I’ve gone off them a bit. They need a dose of humility. Man City developed it with their drop into level 3. We definitely did with our time in the conference, although it took at least a season (maybe we were to the conference what the Mackems are to us?).
Where you are is the new normal: build from there. That way you’ll be happy with success rather than disappointed with failure.
We dot come over well on social media but your average sunderland fan is pretty humble, I believe. Going down to the third division last time firmly managed our expectations and the ghost of 'the Bank of England club' was firmly exorcised. We're pretty down to earth on the whole. The dick heads on social media tend to be roundly condemned and not sure many go to matches, as you never hear that nonsense in real life, so to speak.
 
Dear god, they are deluded. Do they not understand basic economics? They have hounded him into selling the club, so why pray tell would he spend money now when he's not going to be around to see any improvement in league position resulting from said purchases, or thus the increase in value of his investment. They basically expect a parting gift. Maybe he can take a dump in the middle of his office floor on his way out.
Your view has been reflected by thousands of sunderland fans. Don't tar the many by the few, but amazed by the strong reactions to us on here. We quite like you lot.
 
Sunderland fans are another kind of arseholes. Unbelievably arrogant, I've come to the conclusion that they're actually the most deluded set of supporters in the entire football league pyramid. The team have turned a corner and they're all jumping on SD. The bloke is a diamond and he doesn't deserve the crap he's got. I hope they asset strip the **** out of the club on the way out.
We've been called many things but arrogant a new one on me. Have you actually talked to any sunderland fans?
 
Back
Top Bottom