Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I think its a very good analogy.
In 2003, DW contributed a (then) significant sum of money on quality players in an attempt to get Wigan from 3rd division to Premier league as quickly as possible. In 2015, the amount that would be needed to repeat the feat would be around 10 times the amount spent on the likes of Roberts, Ellington etc.
Wigan circa 2015 is about developing young local players, not buying imported merceneries.
Your understanding of that analogy is as subtle as a hand grenade is a barrel of sh1t. The ruse is to provide more information about a difficult concept by comparing it to an already understood idea. But then, it’s what I expected.
You ‘scattergun’ some information in your post relating to the money Mr Whelan contributed during a specific period in the clubs history. How much is ‘significant’? How do you realise the cost differential to be ’10 times the amount spent on the likes of Roberts, Ellington etc’? Why do you think that the boards policy may or may not have included the purchase of ‘imported merceneries’ (sic)? How would you explain or consider the relationship between total revenue profits of player purchases/sales and total costs when you calculate the overall value of the clubs overall business.
Now tell us all again how that was a good analogy.[/quote]
So are you saying my analogy was s**t?[/quote]
Now that, Garswood, was funny.
Hats off chap.
Yes.In 2002/3, they made a loss of £5,803,351 that Mr Whelan covered, on top of the £16,678,917 that was already being covered. That season, they paid £1.2 million for Nathan Ellington. Wages cost £4,949,582. Income was £2,874,626.
In 2003/4, in the 2nd division, on income of £3,610,035, they posted a loss of £4,845,675. Wages accounted for £6,165,699
Compare 2003/4 with 2013/14 (which was a successful season in the 2nd tier), where the income was £37m and salaries were £30m. That’s a tenfold increase on income and a fivefold increase on wages.
Now do you get it?
No.
Let’s deal with the simple stuff first. What the hell has that overly simplistic splash got to do with the original question of whether the analogy was good or bad?
All you have tried to do there, and not very cleverly I may add, is pad out your last post with little substance, if indeed any at all. Are you really trying to convince me (us) that what you have stated represents the income/expenditure of all business related activities associated with Mr Whelan, the football Club, his ‘other’ financial interests, sponsorship etc and that this would answer the questions I last asked of you. My last junior could have googled that information and made more sense of it than you have (tried to).
So, look back at what was said, forget your feeble backtracking, try to stay focused on how you saw the analogy, remember how I described it (I was doing you a favour) in that… “is to provide more information about a difficult concept by comparing it to an already understood idea”, and please tell us, as simplistic as you please, how it was a good analogy.
I think its a very good analogy.In 2003, DW contributed a (then) significant sum of money on quality players in an attempt to get Wigan from 3rd division to Premier league as quickly as possible. In 2015, the amount that would be needed to repeat the feat would be around 10 times the amount spent on the likes of Roberts, Ellington etc.
Wigan circa 2015 is about developing young local players, not buying imported merceneries.
Your understanding of that analogy is as subtle as a hand grenade is a barrel of sh1t. The ruse is to provide more information about a difficult concept by comparing it to an already understood idea. But then, it’s what I expected.
You ‘scattergun’ some information in your post relating to the money Mr Whelan contributed during a specific period in the clubs history. How much is ‘significant’? How do you realise the cost differential to be ’10 times the amount spent on the likes of Roberts, Ellington etc’? Why do you think that the boards policy may or may not have included the purchase of ‘imported merceneries’ (sic)? How would you explain or consider the relationship between total revenue profits of player purchases/sales and total costs when you calculate the overall value of the clubs overall business.
Now tell us all again how that was a good analogy.
I don’t know why I bother, but let me try and explain the finances again.Imagine you’ve had a job that pays £40,000 pa. You’ve got yourself a nice house and bought a BMW.
However you lose that job. You’ve got some redundancy money coming your way, that will last a you a couple of years maybe, but after that you will have to claim benefits if you don’t find a job. You almost had one, but it fell through. Your income has hugely dropped.
Now – do you hold onto your BMW in the belief that it will get you to job interviews better (although it isn’t as reliable as it used to be and costs a fortune in petrol), or do you sell it, get yourself a smaller more economical job that could still get you to job interviews?
Are you able to now use the money you now have to continue to pay the gas, electric, council tax etc that still have to paid, while still being able to feed yourself and the family? Or do you hold onto the BMW, see your redundancy money disappear, and find you can’t pay the bills and become bankrupt?
Which is it to be?
Garswood…that is a very poor analogy indeed and in no way does it reflect how the finances of such a large organisation, such as we have, operates. To oversimplify in this manner does more damage to peoples perceptions than it does explain.
I agree that transfer dealings, wages, signings, contracts, buildings and fixtures, fluidity, profit and loss etc are complex matters to grasp, however, I think a better, maybe bullet point, set of notes would have been better rather than a rambling shaggy dog story.
Some people may just not grasp these concepts…it does not make them thick, deluded or stupid; they just have different skill levels.
I don’t think anyone should have a pop at any time served military personnel, especially by those who may have been there themselves.I stretch that, even, to the Sunderland Bell.
What an unusual viewpoint from, at least, one of those who have had ‘a pop’ in the past. There, too, was an unusual undertone within, that I am obviously not party to. Ah well, I suppose your Bell (sic) has its uses here.
As opposed to a washed up clerk in blue eh?
You forgot to mention the eight medals I earned in a distinguished career that took me to some of the most dangerous places on earth. I wonder what your epitaph will say.[/quote]
Oh I see. I suppose those ‘medals’ include maybe a queens jubilee perhaps; a long service medal thrown in, a ‘hey I did 90 days to qualify for this’ medal and a couple of “I was there after the fighting was done having a brew” medals. Don’t kid yourself fella, nor try to kid those on this board either (there are some very clever people here). As for “dangerous places on earth” you have no idea where I, or indeed any other member of this board, have been over the years. However, I do know that you and your cronies positively wet yourself with pleasure talking about admin and policy on your little military chat site. What next eh? Military grade pens that write in the wet or camouflaged paper.
Combat clerk my arse.
Oh! on my epitaph will be the words…missed, adored, gentleman, spirited – I could go on. I suppose yours will be a house brick with a picture of your medals with a recording of Jim Bowen saying “Just look what you could have won”.
In writing of course. It should be a shoe-in for a literary genius such as you!
As opposed to a washed up clerk in blue eh?
Can you ask whoever took that photograph of your new toy to explain the dangers, as outlined in the top right hand corner of the package, to you.
Wouldn’t want you to suffer from a choking incident, would we.
Friendlies? What are they good for? Absolutely nothing, say it again…Oh sorry – got carried away there.
People seem to miss the point of friendlies. It’s not about seeing how the squad play together necessarily. It’s looking at individual players in a match situation rather than training.
Completely disagree there garswood…on both points. Your Edwin Starr reference is wide of the mark and your interpretation of the reason behind friendlies is also not, fully, correct. The main priority of these games is to improve match fitness which, I think you would agree, is a completely different approach to their normal training regime. Further, these ‘behind closed doors’ matches some allude to are also designed to improve on the players match fitness. I agree, the manager gets the opportunity of looking at individuals during these times but he also has that opportunity during training – hence the chopping and changing throughout the season.
If you really judge how we’re going to do, how we’re going to play, who is going to play, etc etc, by friendlies then you need to give your heads a wobble.Bit harsh that. I think it’s those without the fullest of information who need heads wobbled.
I think my favourite memory of old SP was a non football related incident. Like others have said there was trouble everywhere you went away but sometimes it was in the stands as well. I remember (very early 70’s) this one guy looked out of his tree and was getting louder and more threatening. Then out of the corner of my eye I saw this copper gently sidling up to him from behind when all of a sudden this bloke pulled out a knife. Quick as a flash the copper had his truncheon out, back of the head and the bloke hit the floor like a sack of spuds. All over in an instant and everyone back watching the game after about 30 seconds. Thinking back now it was totally surreal.
He may have learnt the lessons from his time here from the ups and the downs. You’ve got to admit that was a cracking end to his first season.
Leopard and spots and all that, but if he can contain his arrogance and single bloody minded approach to the players then he may have turned a corner.
Or the corner may be at the end of the corridor leading to the exit door.
I think Connor Salmon was a pretty shit signing as well! Might have to compile a top 5 or 10 even!I wonder if we could manage a ‘team’ out of all these, however, I think this may have been done before.
You lot crack me up, you really do
You’re just like Sky – football didn’t exist before 1990
Nah we are just not all old feckers ;) ;) i am 30 and i first went in 93 so you have to be at least 35-40 but i would say about 45.
I think one poster did mmention his age group and how long he had been going.
So who is in your top 3?Mine (from what i remember) and taking into account the levels of football at the time etc would be :- in descending order (and consistently playing, not just a few games = a dog shit player) but i need 4
4. Peter Kennedy
3. Michael O’Neil
2. Brian McLaughlin
1. Alan McLoughlin[/quote]Michael O’Neill? Another from a long list of those who got undeserved stick from fans who couldn’t spot a decent player if their lives depended on it.[/quote]
Undeserved, not really, The O’Neil era saw me going to every home and away game so it’s a considered view. For every one good game he would completely outweigh it with 5 stinkers, long passes to nowhere, no pace, limited skill and great vision with no end product. Bit like Jordi Gomez was[/quote]
Sort of proves my point.[/quote]
I must admit Sammy, that when I first saw his reply it did bring a large grin to my face as well.
not sure about that Garswood. We got our biggest earners off the payroll a while back and we are supposively self sustainable now so dont see why we shouldnt spend the cash on the squad. agreed crowds will be down though.Not only that Crammy but I think that we will take a substantial hit on the amount of money we receive from the Football League for the drop to League 1, it all adds up you know.
You would be very surprised to hear how much it takes to ‘oil the wheels of business’ these days and priority must remain with the clubs solvency. I agree with Garswood and the comparison he made with Portsmouth.
Play on words – it’s called satire , look it upSo much to say, so little time to say it in. First of all changing “Championship” to “Championshit” is not considered a ‘play on words’ – that is complete nonsense.
Secondly, please, before advising a fellow to look a word up that one has used, have the courtesy to have looked it up oneself beforehand. It prevents one from looking the fool whilst trying, at the same time, to make someone else look the fool.
Once you have mastered this then maybe your opinions may become valued rather than just laughed at.
