As a double standard, why hasn't Brucey been sacked yet for his comments about the budget? Barmby said less and got the heave-ho? I mean he's right to be royally ****ed off and it's a sad indictment of the state we are in that we're having to get Peter ****ing Odemwingie in on trial to bolster the numbers, but it's odd the owners haven't pulled him up on it. Unless they just don't care.
They tried to do Barmby on a disciplinary and ended up having to pay him off instead. They hate doing that. Even for relatively cheap admin staff they're really awkward about paying people off. Adam Pearson's PA was heavily pregnant when they got rid of her and they tried to snake their way out of paying her what she was entitled. They failed. They can get rid of Bruce whenever they want but they'd have to pay him off because he's done nothing wrong, just like Barmby. What Ehab would actually want is for him to resign or agree a settlement and be silenced. I believe that's a reason he hasn't resigned.
I think you'll find that completely wrong. No one could buy Nick off. He couldnt be muzzled, too proud and he told all in a big exclusive. I know this cos Olm is ITK the know and told us Nick would tell all.
Olm suggested the deal was dead and it's now being reported as dead. Olm posts quite a lot of reliable information. I haven't seen any scorn for burns, in fact it seems the opposite. James works for the club so hardly an argument for those saying burns is as itk as any of us.
Don't be daft. External valuations can be performed with the sales process resulting in a gain or loss on sale. The carrying amount can be revalued based on later valuations.
You'll have to explain to me which bit is daft. Buyers define how much something is "worth" otherwise there is no sale.
They define how much the product is worth to them, yes. So you're telling me if I get my property valued, and someone comes along and pays less than the value, that the valuation was wrong? The valuation is independent of supply/demand factors, it's an objective valuation of the property. You could sell for less than its worth for any number of reasons. If that buyer then sells it in 12 months for more than your initial valuation, what is the correct value? Market value is the external valuation, but the price it goes for in reality reflects the gain or loss you make on the carrying amount - which is usually marked to market. To put it another way. If the Allams sold the club for 20m, and the new owners sold Robertson alone for 30m, is the club valued at said 20m, or did they sell at a loss on disposal?
(1) Most likely. Whoever independently values the property is taking into account the supply/demand climate. They boost their evaluation in a low supply/high demand environment. The seller makes the decision to accept. (2) Absolute rubbish.
..That was my point. The selling price isn't the intrinsic value of the property, it's the price that the buyer and seller agree, which can incorporate any number of factors beyond merely the value of the asset.
The valuation cannot fully and accurately account for supply/demand factors, maybe that would have been a more accurate way to put it. The comment was that if the club sold for 50p it was worth 50p. That was not true.
Certainly less misleading. Supply/demand does however heavily influence asset valuation - which you seemed to dismiss. In fact it's the driving force of increasing/decreasing intrinsic value.
But quite difficult to measure for unique assets with no active transactions to perform a relative valuation from. How do you measure demand for the purchase of a football club? How many get bought and sold each year in England? How many in the Premier League?
The more folk post the more it becomes clear that many are finally, really understanding the owners as some of us have for a number of years now. This is a forum that rolls on and some fool demanding otherwise is just that, a fool; regardless of what opinion he believes he must read. I dislike and do not trust the owners. They handle most things badly and treat customers poorly; I doubt they treat employees any differently. I have no idea how they have treated the prospective buyers, probably badly, too, but that's simply a guess. The club is worth what a determined and structured sales strategy can close a deal on; anything higher in value would be potential or ambition, which might feel tangible but really isn't. The later we get in the sales process is poor for the owners, as the worth of their business is heading down a financial peak and will meet with reduced offers. Peter Ob ... Says it all. Bruce won't leave without a wedge from someone. We really are a basket case of a club, yet apologists still stroke the Allam mane.
Shipbuilding huh? I'll tell you what, in Sunderland they've forgotten more about shipbuilding than was known in Hull since WW2. All they ever built in Hull was boxes. And anyway, it wasn't serious shipbuilding, it was ship repairs, which never is pretty anywhere or at any time. Ship repair is for opportunists, hagglers, cowboys, bullies, and anyone that loves doing something quickly but not thoroughly. Bloody hell ... they are experts at painting in the rain.
Quite an interesting listen, Burnsy has a bit of a rant (about 10 mins in)... http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03zyq4d
