New takeover

[Sutekh]

if you look at the Italian guy who bought Leeds when they were in the Champ, then he's made a great profit when you compare his selling price(s) to his purchase price. However, difficult to tell without further analysis about how much he had to spend (or borrow) to generate that profit.

But it's clearly the model that any "financial investor" looks to take. Buy low, sell high.

As long as the club don't get caught like QPR did with Briatone and Ecclestone and then Fernandes as owners. While bills were paid the players purchased and salaries given make the recent transfer strategy here look well defined and managed.

[3points]

if you look at the Italian guy who bought Leeds when they were in the Champ, then he's made a great profit when you compare his selling price(s) to his purchase price. However, difficult to tell without further analysis about how much he had to spend (or borrow) to generate that profit.

But it's clearly the model that any "financial investor" looks to take. Buy low, sell high.

As long as the club don't get caught like QPR did with Briatone and Ecclestone and then Fernandes as owners. While bills were paid the players purchased and salaries given make the recent transfer strategy here look well defined and managed.

Exactly - while I get the sentiment behind the SBWD campaign, I really hope it doesn't become a case of "be careful what you wish for" or "Frying pans and fires". Dai's money (while badly spent and poorly advised) has been relatively low risk - imo he's not seeking a "return" and it's more of a plaything for him. I'm very concerned about any "financial" investor coming into the club and lending money and needing interest to be paid and for it to be paid back at some point

[Snowflake Royal]

if you look at the Italian guy who bought Leeds when they were in the Champ, then he's made a great profit when you compare his selling price(s) to his purchase price. However, difficult to tell without further analysis about how much he had to spend (or borrow) to generate that profit.

But it's clearly the model that any "financial investor" looks to take. Buy low, sell high.

As long as the club don't get caught like QPR did with Briatone and Ecclestone and then Fernandes as owners. While bills were paid the players purchased and salaries given make the recent transfer strategy here look well defined and managed.

Exactly - while I get the sentiment behind the SBWD campaign, I really hope it doesn't become a case of "be careful what you wish for" or "Frying pans and fires". Dai's money (while badly spent and poorly advised) has been relatively low risk - imo he's not seeking a "return" and it's more of a plaything for him. I'm very concerned about any "financial" investor coming into the club and lending money and needing interest to be paid and for it to be paid back at some point

Can it really get a great deal worse than two pounts deductions, separating the club from its assets, relegation, years of transfer embargos and not paying the players and taxman on time?

[From Despair To Where?]

Yes it can. If a new owner "loans" the club money rather than just dipping into his pocket then the club gets loaded with debt. It's essentially what Madejski did, albeit at a sustainable level and i don't think he charged interest.

Or you could get someone doing what the Glazers did at United, borrowing money to buy the club but loading the debt onto the club. You can maybe get away with it at a club that generates billions in revenue.

As it stands at the moment all debts are Dai's.

[3points]

As long as the club don't get caught like QPR did with Briatone and Ecclestone and then Fernandes as owners. While bills were paid the players purchased and salaries given make the recent transfer strategy here look well defined and managed.

Exactly - while I get the sentiment behind the SBWD campaign, I really hope it doesn't become a case of "be careful what you wish for" or "Frying pans and fires". Dai's money (while badly spent and poorly advised) has been relatively low risk - imo he's not seeking a "return" and it's more of a plaything for him. I'm very concerned about any "financial" investor coming into the club and lending money and needing interest to be paid and for it to be paid back at some point

Can it really get a great deal worse than two pounts deductions, separating the club from its assets, relegation, years of transfer embargos and not paying the players and taxman on time?

Yes - no club at all

[Snowflake Royal]

Exactly - while I get the sentiment behind the SBWD campaign, I really hope it doesn't become a case of "be careful what you wish for" or "Frying pans and fires". Dai's money (while badly spent and poorly advised) has been relatively low risk - imo he's not seeking a "return" and it's more of a plaything for him. I'm very concerned about any "financial" investor coming into the club and lending money and needing interest to be paid and for it to be paid back at some point

Can it really get a great deal worse than two pounts deductions, separating the club from its assets, relegation, years of transfer embargos and not paying the players and taxman on time?

Yes - no club at all

There are seasons that would have been an improvement tbh.

More likely to happen the longer Dai is in charge too.

[Royalwaster]

Yes it can. If a new owner "loans" the club money rather than just dipping into his pocket then the club gets loaded with debt. It's essentially what Madejski did, albeit at a sustainable level and i don't think he charged interest.

Or you could get someone doing what the Glazers did at United, borrowing money to buy the club but loading the debt onto the club. You can maybe get away with it at a club that generates billions in revenue.

As it stands at the moment all debts are Dai's.

Never really understood the issue of the moaning Man Utd fans with all their managers given millions to spend on players and still they protested. I don't think it was a case of lack of investment, but just really really bad investment ...

[From Despair To Where?]

The big issue was always about how they raised the money to buy the club. Basically, all the risk was loaded onto the club, not the Glazers.

[Elm Park Kid]

Yes it can. If a new owner "loans" the club money rather than just dipping into his pocket then the club gets loaded with debt. It's essentially what Madejski did, albeit at a sustainable level and i don't think he charged interest.

Or you could get someone doing what the Glazers did at United, borrowing money to buy the club but loading the debt onto the club. You can maybe get away with it at a club that generates billions in revenue.

As it stands at the moment all debts are Dai's.

Then we go into administration and get bought out by someone else and start again. It's not really that big an issue apart from the increased points deduction.