When they took our club on we were told that there was money already made available for improving our team. I would hazard a guess that a very large chunk of the £33m that the Liebherrs allowed to be traded for shares was spent on improvements to to Staplewood and amenities. We have a rigid pay scale and as far as I can see all the club did was raise the £33m by releasing shares which were paid for by the family. Nicola has already been quoted as saying that we have spent less in getting to where we are than expected. Not even close to being similar to Pompey. I would also suggest that the vast majority of Pompey fans had no idea when the club was buying these players that caused the club to go broke, that the Russians would bail out as they did.
Comparing the finances between Saints and Pompey is like comparing the finances of a well run football club with that of a bloody awfully run football club.
This evening I wrote a cheque for £1 000.00 made payable to Portsmouth Supporters Trust as I have been keen to help out where I can. Unfortunately just as I was about to put it in an envelope for posting the very lovely Mrs Godders grabbed the cheque from me and pushed it through the shredder. She said something about a very silly little man throwing away good money and stormed out of the room. It was the very last cheque in the book. So now I can't help Pompey and the very lovely Mrs Godders is as mad as hell with me. I'll never try to do a good turn again. I also think I shall be sleeping in the spare room tonight.
I wonder if a similar scenario will be played out in households in Portsmouth now those that have pledged funds have to now transfer them to the PST.
100% this We were a good investment in the first place - there was infrastructure, asset value, goodwill and a strong fan base. The key word here is investment - we had a base from which to build which meant that good money spent was good money after good...not pi ssing away money that we didn't have - or worse had stolen from others. Buying Lambert was an investment made on a sound, structured basis to enable the club to grow sustainably in income as success brought larger crowds, a trophy and ongoing investment then produced back to back promotions thus delivering a substantial 'dividend' on that investment. Should the Liebherr Trust want to sell there is a tangible asset to sell and given that the investment has been ongoingly sustainable there are likely to be buyers who recognise that value....could anyone really ever see value down the road? No ground, car park, training ground owned, no investment in an academy for the future, no plan going forward, no goodwill (the very opposite given the well-publicised shafting of taxpayers and charities) - and now the Trust who (understandably) only want to see a club to support have not enough money to run the series of negatives listed above - it really is time to reform and do an Aldershot. There can be no sustainable value in what's left...the fan base would be quite good for a non-league club as, despite the trumpeted self-proclaimation there aren't really that many supporters...at best enough to provide a base income for a L1 team but, in my opinion, they have sacrificed the right to that by the behaviour displayed over the last decades. I note Neil (I'll say what the fans want to hear) Allen says that Chanrai going is the best thing and has united the fans...he's not gone, Neil - you wish - he still holds the keys and the cards.
Anyone who thinks Chanrai is not holding all the aces is deluded. He didn't walk away out of the kindness of his heart or out of the good of PFC, he walked away because it suited him. He calculated that the best way to get the most money back was liquidation or PST, rather than run the club. The PST have to either buy the ground off him or rent it off him, and for all Birch's bluster he is a secured creditor.He's been ahead of the curve since day one. Who is your money on, a ruthless money lender or a well meaning bunch of deluded bell ringers?
BBC Solent Sport ‏@solentsport #pompey agree one-month contracts with 10 players, who can play v #afcb on Saturday. List to follow..... BBC Solent Sport ‏@solentsport New #pompey players: K Djilali, M Dumbuya, J Harley, B Howard, I MacLeod, L Williamson, S Eastwood, J Compton, L Rodgers, L Walker Also... earlier today: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19286219
Its still a team they can't afford, still a reluctant owner, so nothing has changed. I say we get a new deadline, feel a bit lost without it.
If Appleton has a budget and is working within it, what's the problem? Said budget is probably determined by the administrator and is based on income streams including sponsorship, catering, tickets, programmes and so on, I sincerely doubt the administrator would let Appleton spend more than we have coming in. Contrary to popular belief, we do have some income.
Yes, and that income should be used to pay off some of the creditors the club has repeatedly shafted.
Firstly, I'm sure a large amount of our income will go towards paying off creditors, the days of players salaries comprising 80% of our income or more are over I think. Secondly, if we get relegated again after playing kids all season, there'll be even less money for creditors. Or why don't we get rid of every single player, our manager and our admin staff and so on and forfeit every game so creditors get all the money? It wouldn't work like that I'm afraid.
Have you evidence that the 'month contract loanees' are being paid less than the youth and development players they are replacing? I suspect that you know they will be considerably more expensive. As loanees they won't add a penny of value to the club nor I suspect add enough to the gate to make up the probable difference in cost. So once again the club is stretching rules in a way that no other club has previously (to my knowledge)done and is spending yet more to add no value. At the same time the fees for Birch are racking up at about 300k per week and the creditors are once again the losers. To suggest that you (collectively remember?) should be allowed to sign better players that you can't afford so that you don't slip down to a lower league position is just insulting...have you (collectively) learnt nothing from your long experience of paying more than you can afford to gain a competitive advantage? It seems not - I find it incredible that you seek to defend this given your (I thought sensible) conclusion to your post re a phoenix club earlier in this post...and you wonder why it's so easy to slip in to tarring you all (collectively) with the same brush?!
That's the thing is though, based on our income streams we probably can afford them (unless Birch is as incompetent as Lampitt) and they probably are on sensible salaries. It's not like we're giving them massive 5 year contracts. Appleton is most likely working to a budget and this budget would be decided by the administrator based on income and outgoings (including the CVA). Plus you say they won't add much to the gate money, but if we're getting pasted each week 5-0 or whatever, how high do you think the average attendance at Fratton Park will be? 10k? 8k? Less? Now if we get a competitive team and do okay, the average attendance could be 12k, 14k, maybe even higher if we're going for the play offs. That's a fairly large difference. I still think a phoenix club was always the best idea, but seeing as that's not what's happened I guess we should try to make the best of what we've got. Don't get me wrong, I don't want us to start signing loads of players on really high salaries and go for promotion. I just want us to be competitive within the financial constraints that exist. It's a balance between being competitive and being financially responsible, in the past we've leaned far more towards the former but now under Michael Appleton we seem to be a bit more balanced in our financial dealings. Please don't tar me in the same brush as those who think we should be spending our way to the league title.
