| Welcome to bcfcforum.co.uk. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| I've Been Doing Some Thinking. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 23 2006, 12:01 PM (487 Views) | |
| dr.nick | Mar 23 2006, 12:01 PM Post #1 |
![]()
Trevor Francis
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
i have been unable to fathom how the board could still be backing SB and i have thought along different lines to the money and injury storys, what if because they have lost out to the NEC there thinking of selling up? if this is so it would answer the why he's still here question. lets face it if they sell up they dont have to give SB 3.5 mill it then becomes the problem of the new owner. also they must now realise that the birmingham city council will never support them in anything they try to do for the city and they must be thinking why should we stick around if the council wont even back something that would of benifited the whole city and not just BCFC. this is of course just an opinion and i have facts to back it up and i suppose if i was in there shoes i would seriously consider selling up if i could'nt get the backingof the local council, seeing as they dont have any ties to the city. |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 23 2006, 12:07 PM Post #2 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
imo mate, there's one glaring weakness in your argument - who on earth would want to buy shares in a business plunging towards a crisis that could take years to recover from? if the board were in this just for cash they would have sold when we were 4th and looking like european contenders, not when we're heading down in a straight line...just my view is all :blink: |
![]() |
|
| hughesie | Mar 23 2006, 12:12 PM Post #3 |
|
Ian Bennett
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
sully said last night on radio 5 that he will not sell until we are 6th in the prem. he has said himi and the golds will not quit this club |
![]() |
|
| dr.nick | Mar 23 2006, 12:20 PM Post #4 |
![]()
Trevor Francis
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
too true but in the past they have said they would sell if someone came in and do as good or better job for us. so the question is are they now going to or are they just going to wait untill someone comes in . as i say i dont know if there gonna do this just trying to fathum them out over the money thay seem to be holding back while still putting ST's up. |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 23 2006, 12:26 PM Post #5 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
same conundrum as replacing sb - who? i don't recall reading about people beating a path to the boardroom with suitcases full of cash any time recently, in fact at any time since the current board have been here!...unless, of course, you know differently??? :rolleyes: |
![]() |
|
| dr.nick | Mar 23 2006, 12:32 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Trevor Francis
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
no your missunderstanding me , i'm not saying this is the cass , i'm just thowing into the ring so to speek as maybe another option as to why the lack of action. i'm not saying i believe this is what is happening , i'm just keeping an open mind on it. it's not something you could say is happening or is not going to happen. |
![]() |
|
| mr penguin | Mar 23 2006, 01:16 PM Post #7 |
|
Sponsored by Flybe.com
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So I if follow what you're saying... You have Been Doing Some Thinking and basically haven't got a ******* clue :lol: |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 23 2006, 01:33 PM Post #8 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
:lol: :lol: you've met him too, then? :D |
![]() |
|
| Bluenose Cobby | Mar 23 2006, 01:37 PM Post #9 |
![]()
Jiri Jarosik
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I have and it was against Middlesbourgh at home e loast 3-0 and Sully was going off his head!! Since that game I'm sure we havn't really picked oursleves up from game have we <_< |
![]() |
|
| dr.nick | Mar 23 2006, 01:49 PM Post #10 |
![]()
Trevor Francis
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
thats about te size of it . :lol: |
![]() |
|
| midland red | Mar 23 2006, 02:01 PM Post #11 |
![]()
Mikael Forssell
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I tend to agree with you Dr Nick. To a certain extent :D I think it has been their intention to sell out all the time, but only when they could get a £multi-million style offer. Meanin that they would be consolidated in the Prem, edging into or getting a European place each year. I think they believed that Bruce was the guy (witness the best buy-out contract in British football, outside Old Trafford) - and I also think that their limited knowledge of football led them to believe Bruce's litany of excuses for nearly 2 years. Understandable really when you consider how long it has taken some myopic fans to see through the garbage he has spouted. If they sell now though, they wouldn't recoup a great deal,if all, of their investments. And money comes first to them. I think they will sell, but when and if we get back into the Premiership - not before.(imo) **thumbup |
![]() |
|
| gene autry | Mar 23 2006, 02:20 PM Post #12 |
![]()
Alex Govan
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
He also said, on SKY, that they were "more likely" to sell if they were sixth in the Premiership - and that they wouldn't desert a struggling club. In the past two years they have made it easier for themselves, to buy each other out, but not nessecarily to have the club bought by an outside body. Its a very tangled web of cross-ownership and debt, involving many different companies. Some owned by one, two or all three of them. No one in their right minds, as Proccy says, is going to buy such a can of worms, when we are sliding into the knacker's yard of income generating. We need to be a Premiership club, with a regular top 7 finnish - then they will find buyers, one would think. |
![]() |
|
| Blues4ever | Mar 23 2006, 05:55 PM Post #13 |
![]()
Bob Hatton
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Looks like he'll still be here when he's deadly dougs age then... ;) |
![]() |
|
| Charlie | Mar 23 2006, 06:20 PM Post #14 |
|
Joe Hart
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
(I think they believed that Bruce was the guy (witness the best buy-out contract in British football, outside Old Trafford) - and I also think that their limited knowledge of football led them to believe Bruce's litany of excuses for nearly 2 years.) Just a question....Why should their knowledge of football be considered 'LIMITED'; When they have been involved in Football ,with us AND West Ham, for Donkeys Years..Dont forget one of the Golds was attached to W.H.Ut as Youth. So they have far more knowledge of Football than those on here who knock them porbably. |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 23 2006, 07:43 PM Post #15 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
**thumbup agreed |
![]() |
|
| xZulubabex | Mar 23 2006, 08:55 PM Post #16 |
![]()
Geoff Horsfield
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
dr nick you know you and thinking always ends you up in trouble :P |
![]() |
|
| darenblueblue | Mar 23 2006, 10:07 PM Post #17 |
|
Geoff Horsfield
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Surely its simple. The reason they won't sack Bruce until we are relegated is that it will cost them 50% less to do so then. |
![]() |
|
| nibzyboy | Mar 23 2006, 10:16 PM Post #18 |
![]()
Peter Enckelman
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I suspect you're right - to understand why Bruce is still here, look no further than the 3.5M to offload him :( |
![]() |
|
| valleyblue | Mar 23 2006, 10:23 PM Post #19 |
|
Paul Tait
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I've been thinking that as well - but wouldn't it be nice if DS or someone came out and said "We will not sack Mr Bumble as he has a very generous compensation clause in his contract while we are still mathematically a Premiership side and we don't feel that his performance has earned that pay off and that it would be unfair to the fans to commit the club to making such a payment to someone who has dragged it's name so low" I know they wont because of the possible ramifications (Mr Bumble would probably have his lawyers on them in a flash - there again if his choice of lawyer is as good as his choice of players we'd probably be OK) |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 24 2006, 07:54 AM Post #20 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
as i keep saying, it wouldn't cost them a penny, it would be the club's liability not the boards... ;) |
![]() |
|
| mr penguin | Mar 24 2006, 09:11 AM Post #21 |
|
Sponsored by Flybe.com
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Isn't that a bit academic though, proccy ? If they own a business with assets worth £50m (say) and that business then incurs an extraordinary £3m cost, then the value of their stakeholding will be £47m. If the club pays then the value of the club goes down & the club, ultimately, is part of their personal wealth, so they are still paying indirectly. |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 24 2006, 09:37 AM Post #22 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I see your point but its not academic at all imo - the long-standing argument has been "they wont sack him because it will cost THEM £3.5m". if the decision to sack him is the right one in the boards view they can do so with impunity, in that it wont personally cost them a penny. yes, they are the guardians of the clubs' coffers but it would be dereliction of their duty to not sack him for financial reasons surely? isnt their primary "care of duty" as directors for the greater good of the whole? and prem footy would be for "the greater good" would it not? people have been saying since October he should go but wont because of the compo clause - well we stand to lose considerably more than £3.5m if we do go down as looks inevitable. so i see it differently, in that we'd gain about £37m if we stayed up vs losing £3.5m if he takes us down. just an opinion :blink: |
![]() |
|
| mr penguin | Mar 24 2006, 09:41 AM Post #23 |
|
Sponsored by Flybe.com
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
That's not my opinion, btw. I think that it's more about loyalty. My point is just that if you own 100% of a business and that business has to pay someone £3m, then ultimately it will hit your pocket. |
![]() |
|
| proccy_blues | Mar 24 2006, 09:44 AM Post #24 |
|
Joe Bradford
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
i suppose they'd take a hit on their shareholding in the short term, but long term it wouldnt make any difference unless we do get relegated, in which case their shareholding will be worth squat all anyway... |
![]() |
|
| darenblueblue | Mar 24 2006, 11:32 AM Post #25 |
|
Geoff Horsfield
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sorry, when I said THEM - I meant they as in the club and shareholders (including myself!) That said, the 15% drop in share price after Tuesdays result was probably more costly..... |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Blues Chat · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2





![]](http://z4.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)









7:03 PM Jul 11