Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
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:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Board; 14 years on
Topic Started: May 3 2007, 08:26 PM (854 Views)
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sam Tyler
May 4 2007, 08:49 PM
bornblues64
May 4 2007, 08:16 PM
Sam Tyler
May 4 2007, 08:10 PM
Riddle me this : which other football club, anywhere, ever, has achieved so little over so many years whilst under the leadership of such fabulously wealthy owners ?

The Vile for one :LMAO:

Sadly untrue. For most of the time that Blues have had billionnaire owners Vile were owned by Deadly Doug, who was nowhere near their league financially. Despite that vile have spent all of that time in the top flight whereas we have spent more time out of the top flight than in any other 14 year period in our history.

Next.

This board have given Bruce 50 million (approx) to spend on players, its not their fault it wasnt spent right or things went wrong.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Peter Burnett
James McFadden
[ *  * ]
I think the board deserve a round of applause for what thy have done, even the BIG mistakes :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :Blues:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

bornblues64
May 4 2007, 08:58 PM
This board have given Bruce 50 million (approx) to spend on players, its not their fault it wasnt spent right or things went wrong.

but that wasn't the question
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

Peter Burnett
May 4 2007, 09:21 PM
I think the board deserve a round of applause for what thy have done, even the BIG mistakes :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :Blues:

i rest my case

Quote Post Goto Top
 
SWB
Bob Hatton
[ *  *  *  * ]
The Board:- Magnificent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sam Tyler
May 4 2007, 09:29 PM
bornblues64
May 4 2007, 08:58 PM
This board have given Bruce 50 million (approx) to spend on players, its not their fault it wasnt spent right or things went wrong.

but that wasn't the question

Maybe not but the fact that the board have given that amount to their manager proves that they are investing and backing the manager, the board cannot be held responsible for what happens on the pitch.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
anglo-welsh bluenose
Bob Hatton
[ *  *  *  * ]
we haven't got Billionaire owners we just have very well off owners who have not bought an established club but have indeed tried to make us one with good business practice and I for one respect them for it. We were in the 5hit when they brought us and we have since then had sustained growth (even during this season). If you wanted a boil in the bag solution then you need a Russian businessman I don't think that is the style of our owners.

CP
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wisel
Unregistered

Not picking on you Sam, but I do agree with Blacksmith in his issue with negative Brummies and in partic Blues supporters. Consider it this way, and using just three boxes for simplicity.

Some people are positive all the time, some have balanced views giving both positive and negative views of things, but some folk, and you see examples of it on here all the time, seem just able to post negatives, they do not seem to have positive views of the club, Bruce, the players, the type of football. Now I would say both totally positive and totally negative viewing people are unbalanced in their views, but the postive ones are less of an issue because they do not have a detrimetal impact on our beloved club. So my main issue is with the people who cannot see anything good, and for some reason they tend to be more (textually) vocal than the other types of people. Wanting to thrust their damning of our club onto everyone else all the time.

I was tempted to go into some of the psychology there, but resisted as it was a thought too far at this stage.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
spliffy
Geoff Horsfield
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
bornblues64
May 4 2007, 08:58 PM


Next.

This board have given Bruce 50 million (approx) to spend on players, its not their fault it wasnt spent right or things went wrong. [/QUOTE]
i'm never sure why people say thay gave bruce 50 mil to spend,if you look at the accounts you'll see the club has and continues to make a profit,so its not unreasonable to asume that whoever was in charge would have had access to the same or similar funds.

now you say the board has backed bruce,,but they didnt in the jan transfer window the last season in the prem,a couple of mill then and we might well have stayed up !

tbh i really dont know if i love or hate the board,half of me says they are great at maximising the revenue and the club needs to do that to compeat,but i dont buy into the saviour thing,they are making money out of the club and thats their main interest,not the club or the fans or the sport,,just money

imo of course (if im allowed one ) :whistle:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Blacksmith
Member Avatar
Jeff Hall
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I think the board did make a massive mistake in last January's transfer window and I was as annoyed as anybody that we didn't get Scharner or Davies, but they backed Steve in the summer at the start of this season. I'm sure they will have learnt from their mistakes and won't make the same ones this time.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
spliffy
May 5 2007, 10:16 AM
bornblues64,May 4 2007
08:58 PM


Next.

This board have given Bruce 50 million (approx) to spend on players, its not their fault it wasnt spent right or things went wrong.

i'm never sure why people say thay gave bruce 50 mil to spend,if you look at the accounts you'll see the club has and continues to make a profit,so its not unreasonable to asume that whoever was in charge would have had access to the same or similar funds.

now you say the board has backed bruce,,but they didnt in the jan transfer window the last season in the prem,a couple of mill then and we might well have stayed up !

tbh i really dont know if i love or hate the board,half of me says they are great at maximising the revenue and the club needs to do that to compeat,but i dont buy into the saviour thing,they are making money out of the club and thats their main interest,not the club or the fans or the sport,,just money

imo of course (if im allowed one ) :whistle: [/QUOTE]
If i remember didnt the board and the management team sort of agree that Blues would be ok when all of the injuries had cleared up and so thought splashing out wasnt needed, we stuffed Pompey if i remember correctly and it looked as if the injuries had cleared up i am not apportioning blame but at the time it seemed to me that board and management were in harmony and decided to stick with what we had.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Albert T
Jose Dominguez
[ *  *  * ]
For me the positives far outweigh the negatives. They've bought stability and provided cash, sometimes maybe not quite enough and certainly the inactivity of January 2006 was strange. But the cash they've put in hasn't always been spent wisely, by all the managers they've had not just SB who actually has probably spent it better than the others, but you can't blame them for that, if anything they've been too trusting of their managers and probably over loyal but that's hardly a crime.
The disapointments in my opinion is the faliure to invest long-term in the future of the playing side particularly on the youth side. And that for all the good they've done we've still not established ourselves in the premiership something I think we've been capable of but never quite achieved.
If we do it this time then I think that that's job done for them and their regieme can be considered a totally successful one.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
BornBlueNosed
Member Avatar
Martin Grainger
[ *  *  * ]
IMNSHO, this thread is unnecessary as their record speaks for itself and it is good. BCFC is financially sound, is playing in the top tier of English football with good players on the books and some good potential in the academy.

To Sam Tyler and those of similar opinion have you remorgaged your house to invest in Blues or perhaps forgone those ISAs or other savings which you were investing for your family, maybe just settled for a 16" CRT 4:3 TV instead of a big LCD or plasma widescreen to put the money in the club? No so why should the board put their personal future and that of their families, their other businesses and the livelyhoods of their employees at risk to pour their every penny into the club as some think they should? The fact of the matter is you have put as much money as you are prepared to into the club and not a penny more so why should they be any different.

The board deserve our congratulations for an overall excellent reign and long may it continue.

BBN
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stevo1977
Martin Grainger
[ *  *  * ]
When you compare what occured before they took over...Ken Wheldon, The Kumars. It doesent bear to think about, just how close we came to oblivion.

We have now got a fantastic stadium, a fantastic set of players, an ex-premiership player managing us and we were the pioneers are schemes that other clubs have now copied with things like Kids for a Quid.

Reading this message board gives a very slanted and off kilter view of Birmingham City because you would think we had a rubbish manager, had only maintained a mid-table position and be on the verge of collapse in a rubbish stadium that needs a lick of paint.

But the reality of it is that we are now a Premiership team after one of our best seasons ever.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mlbblue33
David Langan
[ * ]
Let me tell you; I would much prefer this board than any of the new American owners we're seeing in the Premiership. The foreign investors we're starting to see in the English game now are not in it for the good of the English game.

They're here for the unbelievable amounts of money coming into the top flight of English football. Premier League football is a multi billion pound industry that is the richest league in the World and has become comparable to the finances of the American NFL.

Do you think the likes of Learner et al have any real interest in the club they've bought, the history, community etc.?

They're here to expand on the product, to export it to the far east markets and create franchises that will make them even more money!

I fear for the English game.. but maybe that's another thread.

Anyway, up the blues!

KRO :Blues:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Stevo1977
May 5 2007, 02:17 PM
and we were the pioneers are schemes that other clubs have now copied with things like Kids for a Quid.


And we copied others by charging adults 40 odd quid.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joe
Geoff Horsfield
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sam Tyler
May 4 2007, 06:41 PM
proccysotv
May 4 2007, 07:11 AM
agreed - and we have no right to expect them to plough in their personal cash anymore than any of us plough in our spare cash.

Thousands of us do plough in our spare cash. Pro rata far far more than any of the owners have.

They are entitled to spend their money however they choose & we are entitled to criticise their choices. If they had invested (not wasted) a small amount of their fortunes on growing the club then - after 14 years - we could by now have been firmly established as the number one club in the midlands. They have sat on their money and settled for mediocrity.

The amazing thing is that their spin has been so good that some fans still hail them as saviours.

Agreed. They have made profit year on year, try to tell us they 'dig deep' and treat fans like cash machines. In his five/six years, Bruce has spent a net average of £3.5 million a season, which is chickenfeed when you consider how much has been raked in during that time, four seasons of PL television revenue for a start. Rumours are that Bruce has £5 million to spend this summer and that's it. As for this 'Bruce has spent £50 million', what rubbish. He has brought in £25 million - £30 million, £9 million this season alone. Will be the same for any manager - you have to generate money to spend money.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ricky_rodent
Member Avatar
Geoff Horsfield
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Joe
May 5 2007, 09:03 PM
Sam Tyler
May 4 2007, 06:41 PM
proccysotv
May 4 2007, 07:11 AM
agreed - and we have no right to expect them to plough in their personal cash anymore than any of us plough in our spare cash.

Thousands of us do plough in our spare cash. Pro rata far far more than any of the owners have.

They are entitled to spend their money however they choose & we are entitled to criticise their choices. If they had invested (not wasted) a small amount of their fortunes on growing the club then - after 14 years - we could by now have been firmly established as the number one club in the midlands. They have sat on their money and settled for mediocrity.

The amazing thing is that their spin has been so good that some fans still hail them as saviours.

Agreed. They have made profit year on year, try to tell us they 'dig deep' and treat fans like cash machines. In his five/six years, Bruce has spent a net average of £3.5 million a season, which is chickenfeed when you consider how much has been raked in during that time, four seasons of PL television revenue for a start. Rumours are that Bruce has £5 million to spend this summer and that's it. As for this 'Bruce has spent £50 million', what rubbish. He has brought in £25 million - £30 million, £9 million this season alone. Will be the same for any manager - you have to generate money to spend money.

Bruce was given the money to spend first and recouped it by selling players later. The vast majority of the money recouped came from the sales of Heskey, Pennant and Upson - all after relegation, following upwards of £40 million spent
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Where does all this "net spend" rubbish come from ffs
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
blueblackpool
Kenny Burns
[ *  *  *  * ]
we always want more as fans....however...they have done a great job...rebuilt most the ground...given us top level football...well done i say! :Blues:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

BornBlueNosed
May 5 2007, 01:22 PM
To Sam Tyler and those of similar opinion have you remorgaged your house to invest in Blues or perhaps forgone those ISAs or other savings which you were investing for your family, maybe just settled for a 16" CRT 4:3 TV instead of a big LCD or plasma widescreen to put the money in the club? No so why should the board put their personal future and that of their families, their other businesses and the livelyhoods of their employees at risk to pour their every penny into the club as some think they should?

Ridiculous.

Like most fans I have to make sacrifices to afford to watch the Blues. Our owners could invest tens of millions without it affecting their living standards one iota.

Our owners have a combined wealth of at least £1b. The interest alone on that is going to be somewhere in excess of £50m pa, a million pounds every week... that's just the interest.

The notion that they could not invest more of their fortune in Blues without putting their future at risk is frankly laughable.

Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

Stevo1977
May 5 2007, 02:17 PM
When you compare what occured before they took over...Ken Wheldon, The Kumars.

"Better than Ken Wheldon, They're even better than Ken Wheldon"

It isn't exactly a resounding endorsement is it ?

Why are supporters of the owners so loathe to engage in discussion of what they have actually achieved (or not) and so eager to rely on comparison with bogeymen from previous times ?

(A: Because it's hard to defend the owners based on actual achievements).
Quote Post Goto Top
 
george__
Member Avatar
Paul Devlin
[ *  * ]
Sadly economical muscles is crucial for any team that wants to be in the top of their leagues today. However, to say that we would have been more successful if the owners had contributed with even more money, isn't true. That's just speculations and even if money plays a big part in today's football it's no guarantee that we would be in a different position than in the one we are today.

The board has made some mistakes over the years and they have shown some bad judgement. But now we're back in the Prem and hopefully they've learned from their mistakes. I like to be hopeful and optimistic and think that we're lucky to actually have wealthy owners that can put in big sums to the club.

And regarding the owners saviour status: if one can speculate that we would have been a top team by now if the owners had put in more money, one can also speculate that if the owners hadn't bought us we maybe wouldn't exist today.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

george__
May 7 2007, 03:39 PM
one can also speculate that if the owners hadn't bought us we maybe wouldn't exist today.

Supporters of the owners (and the owners themselves) like to claim that as a fact.

But answer me this :

There have been dozens of stories over the last 30 years of football clubs being close to going out of existence, some have even been forced into administration, but how many of the 92 football league clubs have ever actually gone out of existence ?

Quote Post Goto Top
 
valleyblue
Paul Tait
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sam Tyler
May 7 2007, 03:47 PM
george__
May 7 2007, 03:39 PM
one can also speculate that if the owners hadn't bought us we maybe wouldn't exist today.

Supporters of the owners (and the owners themselves) like to claim that as a fact.

But answer me this :

There have been dozens of stories over the last 30 years of football clubs being close to going out of existence, some have even been forced into administration, but how many of the 92 football league clubs have ever actually gone out of existence ?

Only 1 I know of - Accrington Stanley - and even they're back!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Blues Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Forum Design by Hirsty.