RK Speaks

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Cortese didn't leave over a possible sale of the club...there is certainly no imminent sale and a lot of effort is being put into place to get good staff into place. Even if the plan is to get us into a super state for a sale...it looks like it would be a long term plan.
 
Joe! said:
That's a far more reasonable assumption than "he was a tyrant who wanted to take her business for a joyride". Though I think those rumours about it being to do with if/when/how the club should be sold might be key.
Click to expand...

Ok, I think that's the point spacedsaint was making, though maybe in slightly more inflammatory terms.

I think your contention that the club's potential sale had anything to do with it are just as speculative as the stuff you objected to though.
 
fran-MLs little camera said:
Cortese didn't leave over a possible sale of the club...there is certainly no imminent sale and a lot of effort is being put into place to get good staff into place. Even if the plan is to get us into a super state for a sale...it looks like it would be a long term plan.
Click to expand...

Well sure, if Kat does want to sell then either she thinks she can get the club even more valuable than it already is or it's in her best interests to sell now. The club is a prime candidate for a takeover because it's currently owned by someone who never wanted it, the facilities are great and it has definitely shown big potential. It'll happen in the next few years if not this one, I'm sure. I can only speculate on what the disagreement was about but I bet that did have something to do with it. It was the BBC who reported that she wanted to sell and he disagreed.
 
pass the football said:
Ok, I think that's the point spacedsaint was making, though maybe in slightly more inflammatory terms.

I think your contention that the club's potential sale had anything to do with it are just as speculative as the stuff you objected to though.
Click to expand...

You're right to think that but at least I'm a) admitting it's speculation rather than claiming it's fact, and b) citing rumours and media speculation to support it.
 
Joe! said:
The one major flaw in this otherwise fascinating story is that he couldn't (and didn't) just keep leveraging cash injections from the board because that wouldn't comply with FFP. Transfers were paid for with money the club stood to earn.
Click to expand...

What does FFP have to do with anything?

He couldn't keep leveraging cash injections because at some point the board decided enough is enough and they didn't want to keep pouring cash into a vision/project they did not believe in.

Ultimately, Cortese was not as a good a salesman as he thought because he couldn't convince KL to sign on. Unfortunately, he'd already convinced MP and some players apparently to sign on. Now they're not going to get what they thought they were and so they want to go. That's Cortese's fault.
 
I Sorry I Ruined The Party said:
What does FFP have to do with anything?

He couldn't keep leveraging cash injections because at some point the board decided enough is enough and they didn't want to keep pouring cash into a vision/project they did not believe in.

Ultimately, Cortese was not as a good a salesman as he thought because he couldn't convince KL to sign on. Unfortunately, he'd already convinced MP and some players apparently to sign on. Now they're not going to get what they thought they were and so they want to go. That's Cortese's fault.
Click to expand...

What does FFP have to do with anything? You mean the rules that exist to prevent a club from running on cash gifts from its owner's personal wealth? I think probably a lot.

The Liebherrs have funded many things at this club, but transfers are not one of them.
 
The club belongs to Katharina, so any money earnt is hers. Of course, most businesses are run as separate entities, but still hers. You buy a ticket...the money is hers...she lets the money rest in SFC's account from the goodness of her heart.
 
fran-MLs little camera said:
The club belongs to Katharina, so any money earnt is hers. Of course, most businesses are run as separate entities, but still hers. You buy a ticket...the money is hers...she lets the money rest in SFC's account from the goodness of her heart.
Click to expand...

Corporate veil, yo. It's entirely not hers until she makes it so.
 
Joe! said:
You're right to think that but at least I'm a) admitting it's speculation rather than claiming it's fact, and b) citing rumours and media speculation to support it.
Click to expand...

Find the place I claimed something was a fact and I'll post you fifty quid. Otherwise, sit down puppy.
 
fran-MLs little camera said:
If you are the only person who can sell something and run off into the sunset, you own it.
Click to expand...

It's not quite that simple. It's a corporation which means it's effectively a person in the eyes of the law. For example if the club were to go bankrupt, she wouldn't have to personally pay off the debts. But if her dog ****s in the park, she has to pay the fine. Work that one out.
 
pass the football said:
It's not quite that simple. It's a corporation which means it's effectively a person in the eyes of the law. For example if the club were to go bankrupt, she wouldn't have to personally pay off the debts. But if her dog ****s in the park, she has to pay the fine. Work that one out.
Click to expand...

That's the ticket. Katharina owns the club, but the club's money isn't her money. Ticket revenue is money which used to be owned by the fans and is now owned by the club. Indirectly the same is true for TV money. The club's revenue is what is spent on transfers, ergo transfers are not in any way funded by Liebherr. The money was never hers. She can't even take the money if she wants to.
 
spacedsaint said:
Find the place I claimed something was a fact and I'll post you fifty quid. Otherwise, sit down puppy.
Click to expand...

Every word you said was a statement of fact, kitten. You don't have to literally say "this is a fact" to be stating something as a fact.
 
Joe! said:
That's the ticket. Katharina owns the club, but the club's money isn't her money. Ticket revenue is money which used to be owned by the fans and is now owned by the club. Indirectly the same is true for TV money. The club's revenue is what is spent on transfers, ergo transfers are not in any way funded by Liebherr. The money was never hers. She can't even take the money if she wants to.
Click to expand...

She controls 100% of the assets of the club. When Saints buy a player, who approves the sale? Certainly not the fans. Point being, Cortese can't promise a transfer budget or wages or anything else. Only KL can. Not a cent is spent without her stamp of approval. For all normal, common usage, intents in purposes KL owns and funds the club.

If you want to get all legalese about it, liability and ownership are separate constructs under the law. You can be liable without ownership, and you can own something without being personally liable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back