Looks like Charlie has got his wish.

  • Thread starter Deleted member 222
  • Start date
Anyway, we could find that Stewart and Charlie reappear a few years down the line. It's not implausible that they make a fortune on Sunderland, and are then ready to pick up the pieces if Tiger runs out of money here.

Oh yes, let's not kid ourselves. Anyone hoping that Charlie (or indeed Stewart) will never be seen around these parts again (whether on the forum or elsewhere) is going to be sorely disappointed.
 
Anyway, we could find that Stewart and Charlie reappear a few years down the line. It's not implausible that they make a fortune on Sunderland, and are then ready to pick up the pieces if Tiger runs out of money here.

Oh yes, let's not kid ourselves. Anyone hoping that Charlie (or indeed Stewart) will never be seen around these parts again (whether on the forum or elsewhere) is going to be sorely disappointed.

Why would anyone want to leave Sunderland after moving there? Beautiful part of the world.
 
I don’t agree. It makes absolutely no financial sense if all Ka$$am is getting is our rent. His fortune is about 315 million and he is 63 years old.
Rounding because I don’t know the actual amounts.
With the sale of the manor ground and the massively downgraded facilities at Grenoble Road, plus our rent so far he must be about even if not in profit from the original venture.

The stadium is worth say 15 million.
We pay about 500k per year so it would take a minimum of 30 years for him to make more than the sale would. He’s 63 so he’d need to live until he’s 93!
That doesn’t take into account he has to pay for upkeep, which is only going to get worse by the year.
I think it’s more a case of our various owners not being willing to pay out what Ka$$am thinks is a fair price.
You’re forgetting the importance to FK of legacy and the fact that his children are now very much involved in the running of the business. The fact that FK may be 63 is irrelevant.
 
But my point is he (Ashley) won't be making much of a profit on that I don't think? If SD has shelled out £40m for a Div 1 side, he (& others) are going to have to pump, what, £100m + in to get them back into the EPL. If they put that sort of money in and DON'T get back to the EPL then SD could be kissing goodbye to most, if not all of his fortune.

Remember what John Madejski said:
"The quickest way to become a millionaire in England is to be a billionaire and then buy a football club".
 
But my point is he (Ashley) won't be making much of a profit on that I don't think? If SD has shelled out £40m for a Div 1 side, he (& others) are going to have to pump, what, £100m + in to get them back into the EPL. If they put that sort of money in and DON'T get back to the EPL then SD could be kissing goodbye to most, if not all of his fortune.

"In addition to the loans Ashley has invested a further £134 million in shares in the club, taking his total investment to £278 million. Rumour is he is trying to sell if for £400 million, but this price looks optimistic for a business that realistically has a 1 in 4 chance of losing its main source of income (PL TV money) at the start of each year." From an analysis of Newcastle United accounts for 2016/7.
 
This thread has certainly raised a wry smile. It's funny how the "bitter" tag gets thrown around, particularly at Charlie, but the bitterest comments are coming from those who have been most vocal against him.

Let's take a bit of a reality check here. Firstly, if SD and JS had "their pants pulled down" over WE, why would they now be involving Charlie in what is likely to be an even bigger project? Maybe those who are peddling that line still want to perpetuate the myth that there was no deal agreed with DE?

Since SD and CM have taken over at Sunderland, they have: confirmed that the club is debt free; explained the mechanics by which they are paying Ellis Short; implemented significant change in the management structure; outlined the plan for how they want to take the club forward. And that's in one week.

Since Tiger took over, can we say ANY of that has happened here?

So, rather than having extremely wealthy, engaged owners who, regardless of personal opinions, would've worked hard to drive the club forward, we now have an absentee owner with dubious funding, who seems to be more interested in documenting his culinary exploits on Instagram. And people are celebrating that....
 
All I will say is that someone is already being "resourceful with the facts" about the budget for this season. Top ten? Absolutely. Top eight? Maybe. Top five? Not a chance.
 
I think that all but the most credulous are suspending judgment as far as Tiger is concerned. He has appointed a decent manager - although I still feel that we may have been lumbered with a 'big name' if things had worked out as he wanted - apart from that, we will see. The players we manage to sign over the summer will be some indication (and Eastwood's signing a new contract was a very good start) - but *if* Tiger has some investors with deep pockets lined up, I don't blame him for keeping schtum or the price of players (and their wages) will rocket. The moral question of where such money might have originated is of course another question entirely - but let's see if he has actually got any before it is even worth asking that question! ;)
 
This thread has certainly raised a wry smile. It's funny how the "bitter" tag gets thrown around, particularly at Charlie, but the bitterest comments are coming from those who have been most vocal against him.

Let's take a bit of a reality check here. Firstly, if SD and JS had "their pants pulled down" over WE, why would they now be involving Charlie in what is likely to be an even bigger project? Maybe those who are peddling that line still want to perpetuate the myth that there was no deal agreed with DE?

Since SD and CM have taken over at Sunderland, they have: confirmed that the club is debt free; explained the mechanics by which they are paying Ellis Short; implemented significant change in the management structure; outlined the plan for how they want to take the club forward. And that's in one week.

Since Tiger took over, can we say ANY of that has happened here?

So, rather than having extremely wealthy, engaged owners who, regardless of personal opinions, would've worked hard to drive the club forward, we now have an absentee owner with dubious funding, who seems to be more interested in documenting his culinary exploits on Instagram. And people are celebrating that....
Would we rather have SD running oufc. Yes would be the answer that most people would conclude. Would we want CM involved, my guess is that most people would answer no to that one. This thread has nothing to do about Tiger, in my mind it’s about peoples response to being verbally abused for daring to give an opinion.
 
U were very critical that tiger has agreed to stage payments to Darryl to allow investment straight away ?
Not for the first time Dave, you're claiming I've said something which I haven't. The criticism I had about the arrangement at OUFC was around Darryl's previous claims about everything he does is in the best interests of the club, but then his exit deal was very much in the best interests of himself. Then couple that with the lack of transparency and real critical analysis of the deal by those who really should be looking closely. Do we yet have any clarity of the debt which DE has written off?
 
All I will say is that someone is already being "resourceful with the facts" about the budget for this season. Top ten? Absolutely. Top eight? Maybe. Top five? Not a chance.
Just out of interest do you have the figures for all clubs budgets and also this season doesn’t finish until today so I couldn’t give a s**t about that anymore it’s next season that matters. Also are you an ex employee of the club?
 
Think ur claiming something I’ve not said as well. In fact I think I asked u if it meant that once this debt was paid off we would be debt free !
But I haven't claimed that you've said anything?

Anyway back to the question, how truthful would u describe that interview ?? In your own way I know u do have Oufc’s best interests at heart, do u remember one man being so vital in every aspect of the club and our rise back from non league ??
I don't think Charlie has falsely claimed anything in that interview. I do think there is an awful lot of "we" in there which people have decided to read as "I" so they can use it as a stick to beat Charlie with.
 
Wait what is this ? Donald was in on the deal with Sartori that was scuppered, according to the interview in the Oxford Mail story, and that the £40million being spent on Sunderland could have been spent on Oxford.

Well that's a change of tune. Last year he was merely inviting Sartori to watch a game in an exec box, and brokering an introduction to Eales. All the news stories about the collapse of the deal were about Eales / Sartori, with no mention at all of Donald being involved.

Perhaps he just forgot to mention it at the time.
 
Just out of interest do you have the figures for all clubs budgets and also this season doesn’t finish until today so I couldn’t give a s**t about that anymore it’s next season that matters. Also are you an ex employee of the club?
Don't understand why you seem so hostile and aggressive in your tone to be honest. But yes, I am talking about next season, when the budget will be reduced from the amount that Pep squandered. And far from saying exactly how I know that, it's evident in the fact that nobody has said the budget is going up. We only hear about a "competitive budget" and shrinking down our existing "embarrassingly large squad". At no point has it even been implied that the budget will be added to or even maintained, so it's definitely going down while still being a decent and acceptable amount. You don't need sources to figure that out on your own.

Now let's look at the other clubs in League One next season:

Sunderland - biggest L1 budget ever, hands down. No secret.

Barnsley - large despite relegation. It'll be right up there, probably double ours.

Bradford - always a very, very decent budget for this division, will be no different this time. No way will we match it.

Charlton - really good budget for this level. Double ours, could even be more if their takeover bears fruit.

Portsmouth - mega bucks. The Eisner money will make itself known this season. Playoffs absolute minimum, but should be pushing for automatic.

Luton - would've had a really solid L1 budget last season let alone next, and they'll now add to it. I would wager that theirs will be marginally higher than ours by a few hundred grand.

Scunthorpe - always very financially competitive despite small crowds. Can't see that changing now.

Fleetwood - really solid financially. Will it be bigger than our budget? Maybe, but if not it'll be really, really similar.

Burton - not tiny. They may have had comfortably the smallest budget in the Championship but they still invested. They'll have planned well for the 'yo-yo' and will definitely be able to compete on some level.

Bristol Rovers - really solid. Not as flush as people perhaps expected with their middle eastern ownership, but they can compete and have a very decent size squad indeed.

So that's about nine or ten clubs right off the bat who are going to be either level with or greater than us financially. Five or six will 100% have more than us to splash around even if we creep above a few, so this "top four or top five" nonsense a certain individual is throwing around up north is categorically untrue. They're just planting seeds because they know it'll get out on here, and that people will raise expectations and subsequently kick off if it's a bit ropey. It's just mischief and nonsense.

Realistically we will probably have a budget around about eighth or so. Somewhere between eight and ten, so top half would be about where we should be based on resources, and a playoff place would be a slight overachievement. And when you consider the size of the club, where it would be in the table attendance wise and all that jazz, that's absolutely fine. We are a top half L1 club and that's exactly where the budget will be placed.

I stopped posting before when I got a load of grief for saying things that turned out to be true, so hopefully we can be a bit more grown up and level headed this time around. If not, fine.

And yes, I worked for the club many years ago, and then went on to cover football for national newspapers as well as doing some light scouting for several football league clubs. So while I'm not the oracle and would never profess to be, I do have an idea of how football works, and I still know people in the game who have more information than most about what's actually going on. And I post under my own name, so I'm hardly looking to cause trouble from the shadows. I'm easy to find.
 

Sunderland fan did an Interview with Charlie here

Mentions us quite alot in the interview. Including he thinks we've got a top 5 budget and will be one of Sunderlands biggest competitors in this league.

Top five? Top half more like. As has been previously mentioned there's some big fish in this league next season. It's going to be ultra competitive

That pizza looks horribly greasy by the way!
 
Don't understand why you seem so hostile and aggressive in your tone to be honest. But yes, I am talking about next season, when the budget will be reduced from the amount that Pep squandered. And far from saying exactly how I know that, it's evident in the fact that nobody has said the budget is going up. We only hear about a "competitive budget" and shrinking down our existing "embarrassingly large squad". At no point has it even been implied that the budget will be added to or even maintained, so it's definitely going down while still being a decent and acceptable amount. You don't need sources to figure that out on your own.

Now let's look at the other clubs in League One next season:

Sunderland - biggest L1 budget ever, hands down. No secret.

Barnsley - large despite relegation. It'll be right up there, probably double ours.

Bradford - always a very, very decent budget for this division, will be no different this time. No way will we match it.

Charlton - really good budget for this level. Double ours, could even be more if their takeover bears fruit.

Portsmouth - mega bucks. The Eisner money will make itself known this season. Playoffs absolute minimum, but should be pushing for automatic.

Luton - would've had a really solid L1 budget last season let alone next, and they'll now add to it. I would wager that theirs will be marginally higher than ours by a few hundred grand.

Scunthorpe - always very financially competitive despite small crowds. Can't see that changing now.

Fleetwood - really solid financially. Will it be bigger than our budget? Maybe, but if not it'll be really, really similar.

Burton - not tiny. They may have had comfortably the smallest budget in the Championship but they still invested. They'll have planned well for the 'yo-yo' and will definitely be able to compete on some level.

Bristol Rovers - really solid. Not as flush as people perhaps expected with their middle eastern ownership, but they can compete and have a very decent size squad indeed.

So that's about nine or ten clubs right off the bat who are going to be either level with or greater than us financially. Five or six will 100% have more than us to splash around even if we creep above a few, so this "top four or top five" nonsense a certain individual is throwing around up north is categorically untrue. They're just planting seeds because they know it'll get out on here, and that people will raise expectations and subsequently kick off if it's a bit ropey. It's just mischief and nonsense.

Realistically we will probably have a budget around about eighth or so. Somewhere between eight and ten, so top half would be about where we should be based on resources, and a playoff place would be a slight overachievement. And when you consider the size of the club, where it would be in the table attendance wise and all that jazz, that's absolutely fine. We are a top half L1 club and that's exactly where the budget will be placed.

I stopped posting before when I got a load of grief for saying things that turned out to be true, so hopefully we can be a bit more grown up and level headed this time around. If not, fine.

And yes, I worked for the club many years ago, and then went on to cover football for national newspapers as well as doing some light scouting for several football league clubs. So while I'm not the oracle and would never profess to be, I do have an idea of how football works, and I still know people in the game who have more information than most about what's actually going on. And I post under my own name, so I'm hardly looking to cause trouble from the shadows. I'm easy to find.
Having checked on another thread only Charlton and Portsmouth payed their players a higher average wage than us that are still in this league and we had a massive squad. Also Barnsley only payed £700 more on average than us and Burton a bit more. None of these other massive budgets you mention were more than ours per player. Nothing aggressive in my previous post just asked questions. I also have a fair knowledge of how the game works
 
Having checked on another thread only Charlton and Portsmouth payed their players a higher average wage than us that are still in this league and we had a massive squad. Also Barnsley only payed £700 more on average than us and Burton a bit more. None of these other massive budgets you mention were more than ours per player. Nothing aggressive in my previous post just asked questions. I also have a fair knowledge of how the game works

You're referring to the wage data used in a computer game?
 
This is a tad confusing. Surely a budget is a budget, not a cost per head average.
 
This is a tad confusing. Surely a budget is a budget, not a cost per head average.
A budget is a budget indeed although 1 where you pay 20 players 2.5k a week is less than 1 where you pay 30 players 2.5 k a week
 
Back
Top Bottom