Due diligence

Scotchegg said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
PC said:
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.
Click to expand...
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).

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!

And you are right that the players contracts would have been known which is why I suggested it was optimistic and naive to not consider what would happen if they couldn't offload a few more. I think it was also naive to dismiss the role of agents at the point of the takeover as they are a necessary evil when bringing players in or getting rid.

But as Hawk stated, I am more interested in what is happening at Oxford even if it would be fun to see Charles a little less smug in the coming months!
 
Witney Wag said:
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.
Click to expand...

Not sure about the due diligent commentvas they were aware of it, but haven’t been able to offload two players on high salaries.

I guess they’re trying to manage the fans expectations or trying to force the fans to put pressure on these two or what clubs will want for players if & when they do request a player etc.

Put it this way, I wouldn’t mind a £11m players wage bill!!
 
ZeroTheHero said:
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!
Click to expand...

So would have known about!
 
Gary Baldi said:
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.
Click to expand...

What a load of tosh!
 
Scotchegg said:
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.
Click to expand...

Really!
 
Scotchegg said:
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!
Click to expand...

Oh god. No they wouldn't. Eales pulled out because he got the sniff of a more personally lucrative offer (in the best interests of the club, my a**e) while Sartori was doing due diligence. Eales pulling out had nothing to do with due diligence except that somebody else was doing it on what he was selling.

Erm, Sartori (with or without SD's help) was doing diligence on OUFC when Eales blew him out. SD (with or without Sartori's help) seems to have overlooked or taken a risk he may find he regrets.

Slippery had no concerns about due diligence, all he was interested in was the same as Ellis whatnot - getting shot of the liability with as little loss / much profit as possible.
 
Scotchegg said:
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.
Click to expand...

Why did Eales go back to Sartori etc for more money if they weren’t the right people for the club?
 
Simon Bradders said:
What like the HMRC debacle you irresponsibly pushed out there, before finding out it was settled before you even 'broke the news'?
Click to expand...

At the risk of introducing unseemly mirth into this sewer, Mr B, this is like the editor who, when brought the news of a renowned homosexual's marriage refused to run the story 'as it would only last 5 minutes' thus depriving himself of not one but two juicy stories......
 
Daryl pulled out of the deal with Sartori for Daryl, not for the club. It’s obvious he thought he could get a better deal, there has been no other explanation put forward that is anything other than fanciful.

SD and CM would have been well aware of the contracts at Sunderland. They spun the wheel, and lost. You win some you lose some. It creates a problem but its not fatal, not yet anyway.

I fail to see how this means we have had some sort of spurious “lucky escape”. We could be in exactly the same position of an owner spinning that roulette wheel here, because we still don’t really know where we stand with Tiger and there are unanswered questions about how wealthy he actually is. Sheffield Wednesday and Birmingham are worrying examples of foreign investment that has gone south quickly after an initial s**t or bust investment has failed, because the owners didn’t have deep enough pockets.

Let’s not let the fact that Charlie upset some egos on here cloud our judgement.
 
Simon Bradders said:
What like the HMRC debacle you irresponsibly pushed out there, before finding out it was settled before you even 'broke the news'?
Click to expand...

You damn yourself. Hush hush. Sweep it under the carpet. And revisionism too.
Not the way a supporters’ group should be conducting itself.
 
The Hawk said:
Shame some posters on this thread didn’t take more interest in the running of their own club
Click to expand...

There's a difference between the above and taking much of what you say seriously.
 
Many of the comments below the initial linked article are familiar.
 
Pete Burrett said:
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.
Click to expand...
Seems right Pete.
There were the couple of additional legal costs that turned up (circa 2 @£10m ?)Then not hugely surprisingly players on ridiculous money presumably have not been able to get the same wages elsewhere or the moves that they want and so have decided to stay put (It seems to be the modern way with some footballers).
The big thing though will be whether they can get promoted or not. They still have relatively a huge salary bill for this league and should still walk it.
Having been to Sunderland and seen the way that we outplayed them (followed by Fleetwood nearly knicking a win there) , I would imagine that there are some slight concerns as to whether they have enough quality
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom