WHO Poll
Q: 2019/20 With seven games to go will West Ham stay up
a. Our demise was sealed when the idiots on the Board appointed Moyes, we're down
25%
  
b. Despite the efforts of Moyes and the players, we will stay up by the smallest of margins
50%
  
c. I'm beyond caring & couldn't give two hoots either way
25%
  



chav_corner 2:17 Mon Jul 27
Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.

Gold,Sullivan and Brady Challenged




Life has changed, but our position as your supporters’ group has not.




http://hammersunited.com/goldsullivan-and-brady-challenged/

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

Willtell 9:24 Thu Jul 30
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
TV rights are massive because the draw of PL football continues undiminished.

I wouldn't feel comfortable with TV rights being 75 - 80% of a businesses income. Easy come, easy go

Willtell 9:24 Thu Jul 30
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
TV rights are massive because the draw of PL football continues undiminished.

I wouldn't feel comfortable with TV rights being 75 - 80% of a businesses income. Easy come, easy go

Mike Oxsaw 6:12 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
The "Big 6" fucking off and joining a European "Super League" would certainly make the Premier League much less attractive to Sky/BT.

Apart from a few Asian betting syndicates, who around the world would the fuck be interested in Brighton v Sheffield United?

No Big 6 = no TV money. Could be just what we need.

GreenStreetPlayer 6:02 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Talk now and again of these selling up when the time is right, driven by certain dates.
In the shorter term, the quickest way would be for the TV money to dry up. Some huge occurrence where Sky and BT fell into difficulty , getting the PL finished this season was important for a whole host of reasons.
If it’s not making money, the owners aren’t interested they have just about sold everything that doesn’t without thinking about the how these tie in with the club and you need certain non profit making areas to make the club tick and grow.
A hard correction would probably be good for football, make it more of a level playing field again so to speak.

Sir Alf 12:31 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Sullivan cant compete and never could. He lied about things to get the old ground sold. But for 30 million it would not even buy a decent player. So the move must only been to avoid having to invest in a new ground ( Spuds spending best part of three quarters of a billion). So if we are avoiding that cost but not seeing any of it in relative terms to other teams not even teams like Bournemouth if those tables of net spend are true ( TransfMkt?), what was the point?

None of it makes sense. Yes we spend very poorly on players that's clear. West Ham is just a hobby for the Sullivan's to fill up their day and a route to 120 million a year in TV money.

They thought a couple of marquee signings and a manager who once won things at far richer clubs was all that was needed? But even this lie , blatant lie peddled about the 200 million spend on players under Pellegrini continues to mask the truth. They are including wages and fees again. They also fail to mention the sales and removal of wages at the start of last season which led to Pellegrini padding out the squad with utter sh*t like Sanchez, Ajeti and Roberto.

Everything about them cries "dishonest" "con men"

Johnson 12:20 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
It came out of the OSB meeting chav, so I suspect it's one of those, just quietly drop the subject\\lie about how many are on it by getting rid of it.

flyingV 11:50 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
What needs to be looked into closer is the sale of the old ground. Wasn’t it sold then immediately flipped for a profit?

I think I’m right in saying there was a share reissue recently to raise £30m which suggests concerns over cash flow. The Haller transfer fee debacle can’t be a coincidence.

Anyone know if the club are still taking out payday loans secured against season ticket sales? Could get interesting over the next few months if that’s the case.

Lots of questions to be asked.

Willtell 11:43 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Camel,
Talking sense doesn't fit the WHO agenda mate...

camel-with-3-humps 11:24 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Ultimately, it’s all academic.

Sullivan will sell up soon enough.

He’s not stupid.

West Ham are in the ‘have nots’ part of the PL.

You have the top big clubs United, Chelsea, Spurs, Arsenal, City, Liverpool.

Clubs financed heavily by vast wealth of owners E.g. Villa (watch them spend), Leicester, Wolves and likely Newcastle.

The rest fighting for mid-table and avoiding relegation.

chav_corner 11:13 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Johnson.we spent the day yesterday talking to the club about the S.T. renewals and had a degree of success.To be honest I wasn't aware they had scrapped the waiting list.Is this on their website mate?

Takashi Miike 11:06 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
*premise*

Takashi Miike 11:06 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
much like your clueless views on players, you've missed the point again. THEY talked about a next level and european football. THEY sold the ground on the premier that they were interested in competing and progressing. THEY lied

camel-with-3-humps 11:04 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Us

camel-with-3-humps 11:03 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Correct WT

The supporters, because of their lack of understanding of finance, ask questions on unremarkable aspects of the business.

A better question is this:

You stated that increased gate receipts added £10m to turnover following the stadium move, why would this take is to ‘the next level’ of European football?

Sven Roeder 11:02 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
The loans should be interest free or better still converted into shares.

I think the asset comment is in relation to Upton Park which I understood was sold by the club to one party and then sold on shortly after at an increased price
Presume the sale was initially to a developer and the on sale to a builder but it raises questions.

Johnson 11:02 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
chav - are HU picking up the waiting list thing and seeking written clarification from the board that they have refunded everyone's £10 seeing as they have disbanded the waiting list?

Johnson 11:00 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Firstly, that's exactly what they have done with the 100% upfront ST rouse. That's an interest free loan from fans.

Secondly, the claim to support the club and want to make it a success. Even Mike Ashley doesn't charge Newcastle interest on his loans to them.

If they can't do that without resisting the urge to cream off a slice for themselves then they need to sell up.

chav_corner 10:58 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Camel.Hammers united have accountants on our committee who most definitely understand finance.we have challenged GSB to refute our claims so lets see what they do.

Willtell 10:56 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
Johnson
I don't like the owners either but Camel is right in what he says.

The owners levied interest on loans but didn't draw that interest down so they weren't actually lying when they said it. Of course they knew the day would come when they would draw the cash when the club could afford it.

Interest on loans is a legitimate practice but of course doesn't compare with owners that give their clubs huge cash injections. But that is never sustainable.

Interest rates have fallen from what they were just a few years ago so you can put a negative onto them reducing the rate but at least they have done it....

I'm only going from memory here but I don't remember them taking 8-10% and only remember it being 7%.

And I'll bet you'd be the first to moan like fuck if they asked you to lend the club some your pension fund without getting any interest on it?

Johnson 10:44 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
If the interest wasn't unusually high, why did it get HALVED down to 4% following fans kicking off about it?

Remember that Gold originally lied to fans that NO interest was payable.

Why would he have done that if they original 8-10% wasn't unusually high?

camel-with-3-humps 10:40 Wed Jul 29
Re: Gold,Sullivan,Brady challenged.
- Shareholder loans are par for the course in many business. If Sullivan doesn’t charge interest, it is effectively benefiting other shareholders. The interest was not unusually high.

- Selling fixed assists cheaply.....On what basis is that claim made?

- Delayed injection of equity.... They did inject equity £30m. When they needed to.

These things are written by people who don’t understand finance.

It is far better to concentrate on bad transfer dealings, poor club infrastructure etc, false promises etc.

There is no malign financial mismanagement. Sullivan is acting within the confines of his resources.

The issue at stake is that he can’t compete with other owners such as Wolves, Leicester and Villa. They can give big equity injections and interest free shareholder loans because they are 100% shareholders and have infinite resource.

Page 1 - Next




Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: