If you think along the lines, that Bates and mates took around £5m out of the club coffers each year, and then compare it to GFH taking out any legitimate profit for their investors, which also includes share trading etc. The GFH regime will be working to the letter of the law and still leave us financially much better off post-Bates. The problems stem from 9-years under Bates and mates and the club sliding backwards, whilst smaller clubs took advantage, invested in squads and earnt millions in promotion to the prem. Bates grew his bank account with our/your money and said fook the team. We are now miles behind any ambitious club because we don't have a pot to piss in without external investment. The squad is worse than it was 4-seasons ago so we cannot compete above top 10 at best this season. GFH are steadying the ship but it needs more than a steady hand, it needs a transfusion of funds, and not Man City money or being stupid.
As much as I hate to say it, you cant compare ourselves with any club in the premiership, due to the amount of money they receive, and you cant blame GFH for this. I don't recall either Norwich or Southampton being big spenders in league 1 or the championship ( I may well be wrong), they were just run a lot better than ourselves. Now unfortunately it takes time to turn around a badly run business, whether GFH are the ones who can do this, is another matter, but the club as a whole has shown a bit more ambition than it has in recent years. Whilst it would be nice to go forward in leaps and bounds, there arent exactly many multi billionaires out there wanting to throw money at us, then if it means taking slow gradual steps, then so be it, as long as we are making some sort of progress short term then I won't be getting too disillusioned, it takes a lot of time to turn around a slow lumbering sinking ship, which in reality is what we were under Bates Excellent article in the Telegraph yesterday about transfers during the summer in the Championship http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...20670/Championship-Summer-Transfers-2013.html Of those transfers disclosed, only Forest, QPR, Wigan and Bolton have spent more than ourselves, and both Wigan and QPR have funded their purchases from sales. 14 clubs have spent less than £1 million on transfers, 10 of which haven't spent anything. So yes we are behind the spending of the likes of Norwich and Southampton, and maybe we shouldnt be, but those clubs have been run a lot better than ours was, and it may take time for us to become a well run club, but surely if we are going to compare financial power then, it has to be with clubs in our own division, and not those who earn millions just for not being relegated from the Premiership
True, but even Southampton were in dire straits for a while, but yes those two clubs are run well and have reaped the rewards. It just seems we've been treading water for years, so you can understand the frustrations of our supporters.
You can now add Crystal Palace to the other two. Almost banjaxed a couple of years back financially and now they're made up as well
