The OP must be that Chris wetherspoon fella.
Just out of interest, is there anything I could do to prove that I am not that person? I mean apart from some pretty fundamental differences in how we see this whole situation?
The OP must be that Chris wetherspoon fella.
I was just curious that was all. Apologies if it seemed like a dig, wasn't meant that way.Just out of interest, is there anything I could do to prove that I am not that person? I mean apart from some pretty fundamental differences in how we see this whole situation?
Just out of interest, is there anything I could do to prove that I am not that person? I mean apart from some pretty fundamental differences in how we see this whole situation?
Can anyone on here vouch for you? Loads on here know me for instance.Just out of interest, is there anything I could do to prove that I am not that person? I mean apart from some pretty fundamental differences in how we see this whole situation?
Can anyone on here vouch for you? Loads on here know me for instance.
Can you elaborate? The two most cited sources in the OP are Stewart Donald and Charlie Methven. Whatever you take from this, I don't know how it could be that the sources aren't good enough, because they're first hand accounts by the owners themselves!
For some reason the conversation reminds me of Trump.
'Its a witch hunt!'
'No, there is evidence from multiple sources that he did it'
'The evidence is ridiculous and agenda driven! I refuse to believe it'
'He has said that he did it'
'Yeah... but... even if he did it, is it wrong
)I really hope Sunderland win some games and buy a good player or two in January then we can all talk about the football again![]()
)
Big businesses move money round all of the time for a variety of reasons , that is why they employ good accountants to help and advise . They also have to produce accounts so that transactions are visible and auditable , SAFC are no different to any other company . Most fans have a level of trust that the club is being run at a sustainable level and their support for the club is not being taken for granted but want the owner to do all in his power to get the club back to the Premier League . We can all speculate as to what is going on but as a fan of many years standing I would like to talk about football rather than talk about finance , speculation can be damaging .
A bit like those teams who sold their stadiums and bought them back at a lower rate (or was it the other way round).ps. what gets people backs up is when clubs are leveraged. Buyers essentially use the clubs own money to buy it and then get the clubs to pay off the debts which they, the owners, had saddled it with. The Glazers at Man Utd are an excellent example of this and Hicks and Gillett tried the same at Liverpool. The difference here is that Sunderland were not in a healthy state when Donald and Methven came in so I have less issue with it. There were no billionaires riding into town to take the club on, yes they are doing it on the cheap but at least they are doing it (and trying to find others with good money who will help)
This is exactly what I think too. Now, if that business was SAFC, then you would be absolutely correct.
However, because Madrox is a small company and does not have audited accounts, we actually do not have this level of transparency, despite them administering tens of millions of SAFC's money.
Effectively, once the money goes out, it goes behind a screen and we don't see where it goes after that. This is why there is even debate, so while I agree with your broad point, the club is being run in a way that doesn't allow for any oversight of where money goes.
"the club is being run in a way that doesn't allow for any oversight of where money goes."
That being the case, what's your aim?
Do you believe you can convince people to storm the gates at a time when they're hoping for billionaires to invest/buy the club?
Few things for me on this thread, besides the fact that you’re scary obsessive about this.
1) you need to get out more or get a hobby.
2) why is this remotely interesting to anyone else, other than to feed your obsession or your need for attention?
3) your logic is 2 + 2 = 5, the companies you name belong to sd, and as you rightly state, he’s done nothing wrong in moving monies between them, why then spend all that time highlighting this ok transaction, and casting it in a negative light?
4) you need a girlfriend, real or imaginary.
5) you need to get out more, or get a hobby.
6) are you chris, or did you, have you, a business in seaburn?
7) fresh air and a hobby.
8) is this any of your business? I know for a fact it’s none of mine or for that matter anyone’s I personally know.
Other than that well done, longest pointless post I’ve ever seen on this or any other board.
But you’re missing the whole point in this one reply, the owner owns the club, it’s his to do with as he thinks fit, the misinformation comes from individuals like you, who have an agenda and who, as smug says, are simply there to either stir up trouble or seek attention, either one is bad.No. I think people should be aware that there is a situation where the club apparently needs money, the owner owes a substantial amount of money to the club, but the club is not calling that debt in, nor is there any arrangement to do so. In fact, the owner is now saying he won't be putting that money back for the foreseeable future.
I also think that taking a club's cash reserves and replacing them with a debt, as they have done with the loan in April, is not ok when we are on such tight margins as a club.
With regards to the takeover, neither of us know truly what is going on, even if they do come on board, there's no guarantee about the nature of the deal right now. I'm not suggesting we storm the gates, I'm suggesting there's a lot of misinformation out there, and it's better off that instead of reading ridiculous whatsapps that accuse the owners of all sorts, we just read the facts as a timeline and when the accounts come out in April, we know what we're looking at/for.
Just out of interest, is there anything I could do to prove that I am not that person? I mean apart from some pretty fundamental differences in how we see this whole situation?
But you’re missing the whole point in this one reply, the owner owns the club, it’s his to do with as he thinks fit, the misinformation comes from individuals like you, who have an agenda and who, as smug says, are simply there to either stir up trouble or seek attention, either one is bad.