Scotchegg
Well-known member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2017
- Messages
- 13,917
Shame some posters on this thread didn’t take more interest in the running of their own club
We're still waiting for your book to spill the beans!!!
Shame some posters on this thread didn’t take more interest in the running of their own club
You are right that players contracts would not be part of the due diligence process, but they would have been clearly known and it was always going to be optimistic to offload all the high earners. It shows a little naivity which could come back to bite all involved. The infamous DE quote that the deal to buy Oxford was not in the club's best interests (due to delays or other details) was mocked by many. But maybe the naivity shown at Sunderland could explain DE's concerns. All guesswork of course, but worthy of comment with or without attached agendas.
I think it is pretty clear that SD and Charlie were heavily involved in the Satori bid, and Satori is now involved at Sunderland. It is not unreasonable to therefore draw connections between the two deals even if only from a speculative point of view, and consequently worth mentioning on here (outside of agendas either way).Of course the players' contracts should have been part of the due diligence - you check everything.
DE's statement was from a seller's point of view (I know you're hazy on substance but you do recall that he was (not) selling the club to Sartori, right?). Which means what you say is gibberish - it's the buyer who does due diligence; all the seller is concerned about is getting the cash.
Dear oh dear. I know you're in the rabid rebuttal squad, but do try to take a breath before your knee jerks.
It would appear that whoever did the due diligence for Donald/Methven failed to dig deep enough.
https://www.sunderlandecho.com/spor...y-transfer-window-will-be-challenge-1-9340946
I’m sure Tiger was more diligent when buying OUFC.
Wowee, that 3 million from Sartori won't hit the sides.
If you were doing due diligence, you would have factored in the wages of those players - you can't assume that you will get rid of them. In fact, given that they were/are reportedly on Prem wages, you'd have to find a Prem club willing to have them to match that - and given their performance it was always possible they would refuse to leave to a lower division and take the wage cut that was likely to entail!
Due Diligence was lacking in terms of underestimating the likelihood of players staying and the financial impact to the business. Did the owners push enough to get the premier league players out? Did they consistently speak to the agents of Ndong, etc, or moan about agents in the press?
In some respects, they didn't do the due diligence and were naive. To an extent it's understandable with the timelines of the deal, but it has made the money side more of a nightmare than perhaps it needed to be. Clubs managed to shift the resident bad eggs like Marvin Johnson if they really wanted them gone.
I'm no fan of the Chinos Kid, but think that the finances of a team in our league (with the connections of SD etc) is worthy of comment - especially in light of our own financial stability being questioned. You are right that players contracts would not be part of the due diligence process, but they would have been clearly known and it was always going to be optimistic to offload all the high earners. It shows a little naivity which could come back to bite all involved. The infamous DE quote that the deal to buy Oxford was not in the club's best interests (due to delays or other details) was mocked by many. But maybe the naivity shown at Sunderland could explain DE's concerns. All guesswork of course, but worthy of comment with or without attached agendas.
As for the due diligence process here, you will also recall that DE ultimately pulled out of the sale and I merely suggested that any concerns now been played out at Sunderland may have caused DE concerns for Oxford. Of course this could also be total gibberish!
I'm no fan of the Chinos Kid, but think that the finances of a team in our league (with the connections of SD etc) is worthy of comment - especially in light of our own financial stability being questioned. You are right that players contracts would not be part of the due diligence process, but they would have been clearly known and it was always going to be optimistic to offload all the high earners. It shows a little naivity which could come back to bite all involved. The infamous DE quote that the deal to buy Oxford was not in the club's best interests (due to delays or other details) was mocked by many. But maybe the naivity shown at Sunderland could explain DE's concerns. All guesswork of course, but worthy of comment with or without attached agendas.
Did he?!Why did Eales go back to Sartori etc for more money if they weren’t the right people for the club?
Shame some posters on this thread didn’t take more interest in the running of their own club
What like the HMRC debacle you irresponsibly pushed out there, before finding out it was settled before you even 'broke the news'?
What like the HMRC debacle you irresponsibly pushed out there, before finding out it was settled before you even 'broke the news'?
Shame some posters on this thread didn’t take more interest in the running of their own club
Still got your panties in a bunch over earlier this year I see. You silly cultWhat a load of tosh!
Did he?!
Seems right Pete.My own summary, based on nothing but the Sunderland Echo report: things appear tougher for SD and CM than they originally thought.
A good day for Magpie fans.