Bowen

[LeroysBoots]

Saying all the right things ! https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/footba ... 09575.html

[pdcwhu]

Winner in Bellewstown Ireland today Bowensonfire 7/1

[onsideman]

To be fair to the owners, they only sell our best players when they make it clear they want to leave. Over the years, it has been Parker, Arnautovic, Payet and Rice. All the others have gone because the manager was happy to let them go.

For this reason, I would be very surprised if Bowen went, unless he or the manager wanted it.

well you can add Ferdinand, Defoe, Cole, Carrick et al to that list...  actually, add Peters and probably 30 others between then and now. They leave because they can see the compete lack of ambition, focus, direction. Same as it ever was... with the exception of Payet, of course who just got caught out 

[ATHammer]

If that's the case then wouldn't the easier and better solution be to just fuck off Potter instead..

 

Absolutely. But he ain't going nowhere until he has royally fucked up (probably Christmas). For him to go Brady and Sullivan have to go first. Otherwise they will find an even more useless cսnt than Potter.
Their search criteria is: Out of Work; Cheap; Grateful for a Job; Premier League Experience (not necessarily any good.)
I would love to see Potter gone and a manager who could harness the skills of our better players, I.E. play with some flair. While Brady and Sullivan are around we will have no marks who enable them to sell the best players and not often at the best price. But, a deal is a deal and Sullivan can't live without making a deal. It is easier for him to flog players than recognise that a good manager is a key component of success, and good ones don't come cheap.

[Massive Attack]

If that's the case then wouldn't the easier and better solution be to just fuck off Potter instead..

[ATHammer]

He has been great since he came here in terms of goals. Moyes got a tune out of him and played to his strengths, although sticking him up front was stupid. Love his attitude and he clearly gets the supporters.
But, here is the rub for me. If Potter is staying, as it seems he is, then we will see more anonymous performances like last season. Potter wants Bowen about as much as he wants Kudus, he doesn't play with wingers, will play him up front on occasion and will frustrate him with his slow style of play which nullifies his impact.
If I was Bowen I would be looking for a move and who could blame him.  It is a short career and Potter could well run the rest of Bowen's.

[El Scorchio]

Sullivan and Brady whoring out almost all our players and letting everyone know we are desperate is just beyond dumb.

[scott_d]

To be fair to the owners, they only sell our best players when they make it clear they want to leave. Over the years, it has been Parker, Arnautovic, Payet and Rice. All the others have gone because the manager was happy to let them go.

For this reason, I would be very surprised if Bowen went, unless he or the manager wanted it.

I'm not sure the owners deserve any credit for selling players when the only option available is to sell those players.  

[El Scorchio]

They have absolutely let it known they are taking offers for almost anyone with a sale value, though. 

[Iron Duke]

To be fair to the owners, they only sell our best players when they make it clear they want to leave. Over the years, it has been Parker, Arnautovic, Payet and Rice. All the others have gone because the manager was happy to let them go.

For this reason, I would be very surprised if Bowen went, unless he or the manager wanted it.

[Fauxstralian]

All well and good talking about ‘business sense’.
Our owners have none of that & even less ‘football sense’
If we sold Bowen we’d not only be relegated but finish 20th while getting beaten home & away by Sunderland 

[Hello Mrs. Jones]

Pay him stupid money

[El Scorchio]

If he has plans to buy out the other shareholders tanking the value is totally in his intrests.

Would he get away with this legally?

His defence case is already public record, PSR, 100m projected loss next year, 80m the year after etc...

That is definitely very true. I would believe he's trying purposely to tank the club if that's his game. BUT in that case you'd fully expect the other big shareholders to band together and absolutely veto anything he tried to do with a view to purposely driving down the value, unless they are absolutely sleepwalking through this.

[Mr Anon]

While this is probably true, Is this what you would want to happen? Or would you prefer the club kept him?

Ideal world, keep them both, that's one position completely covered and with their versatility it's probably another position covered too. It represents the only position where an injury doesn't weaken us.

Not being an ideal world, I prefer Bowen for the here and now but if we got huge money for him and had a Kudus who wanted to be here, I'd accept that rather than selling the younger one with more potential and a higher future fee rather than keep the guy who this time next year will be 30 with no world class replacement.

In reality I expect us to sell the prospect, keep the older guy as captain, he gets the hump as he knows he could have his pick of clubs, doesn't play to his best and we go down so he goes for peanuts anyway. That's why I say business-wise, with no emotion, selling Bowen makes sense even though I don't want it to happen. He's from Hereford, not Plaistow, we'll get over it.

At any other club, it could make business sense.

At West Ham, there is very little faith that A) we would be able to negotiate a worthy fee for Bowen and B) any replacements brought in will be anywhere near the same level.

There is no business sense at West Ham in selling any of our players that have been better than average.  It's like playing russian roulette with Sullivan in charge.

Agreed, selling Rice made business sense, but typically for us it's moved us backwards

[scott_d]

Given their ages and values, including the fact that Bowen is English, it would make better business sense to sell Bowen now for an inflated fee whilst he is at his peak, and keep Kudus who is younger and yet to hit that peak,  at which point he would be worth more.

The problem is that Kudus won't want to stay at a club who sells Bowen.

While this is probably true, Is this what you would want to happen? Or would you prefer the club kept him?

Ideal world, keep them both, that's one position completely covered and with their versatility it's probably another position covered too. It represents the only position where an injury doesn't weaken us.

Not being an ideal world, I prefer Bowen for the here and now but if we got huge money for him and had a Kudus who wanted to be here, I'd accept that rather than selling the younger one with more potential and a higher future fee rather than keep the guy who this time next year will be 30 with no world class replacement.

In reality I expect us to sell the prospect, keep the older guy as captain, he gets the hump as he knows he could have his pick of clubs, doesn't play to his best and we go down so he goes for peanuts anyway. That's why I say business-wise, with no emotion, selling Bowen makes sense even though I don't want it to happen. He's from Hereford, not Plaistow, we'll get over it.

At any other club, it could make business sense.

At West Ham, there is very little faith that A) we would be able to negotiate a worthy fee for Bowen and B) any replacements brought in will be anywhere near the same level.

There is no business sense at West Ham in selling any of our players that have been better than average.  It's like playing russian roulette with Sullivan in charge.

[Pub Bigot]

That's why I say business-wise, with no emotion, selling Bowen makes sense even though I don't want it to happen. He's from Hereford, not Plaistow, we'll get over it.

Business argument makes perfect sense. But I like to think - naively perhaps - that we are more than simply a business. True he ain't a cockney, but he's married into a cockney family. Must count for something.

The club's definitely grown on him. If one of the bigger clubs that are challenging for trophies came in for him, the three questions he'd need to ask himself are: 

1. Will I start? 

2. Will it help me solidify an England place? 

3. How much wedge are they paying me? 

I think Gank's got in spot on. On a purely business basis we should move Bowen on if anyone, but a proper football club wouldn't want to sell either him or the mardy Ghanian.

Another thing to bear in mind is that Bowen might be comfortable and happy enough where he is, thinking that he's at his peak now and from 30 onward it's a slow decline to petering out, and it's not likely he'll still be at our club come 33 onward. 

He's definitely one of us, not only because of the family he's married into, but because he's experienced the best moments of his career here and forged a real bond with the support. 

[Percy Dalton]

If Bowen was sold you wouldn't trust that lot to spend the money wisely.
Didn't work out great with the money we got from selling Rice.

[wils]

That's why I say business-wise, with no emotion, selling Bowen makes sense even though I don't want it to happen. He's from Hereford, not Plaistow, we'll get over it.

Business argument makes perfect sense. But I like to think - naively perhaps - that we are more than simply a business. True he ain't a cockney, but he's married into a cockney family. Must count for something.

[Gank]

Given their ages and values, including the fact that Bowen is English, it would make better business sense to sell Bowen now for an inflated fee whilst he is at his peak, and keep Kudus who is younger and yet to hit that peak,  at which point he would be worth more.

The problem is that Kudus won't want to stay at a club who sells Bowen.

While this is probably true, Is this what you would want to happen? Or would you prefer the club kept him?

Ideal world, keep them both, that's one position completely covered and with their versatility it's probably another position covered too. It represents the only position where an injury doesn't weaken us.

Not being an ideal world, I prefer Bowen for the here and now but if we got huge money for him and had a Kudus who wanted to be here, I'd accept that rather than selling the younger one with more potential and a higher future fee rather than keep the guy who this time next year will be 30 with no world class replacement.

In reality I expect us to sell the prospect, keep the older guy as captain, he gets the hump as he knows he could have his pick of clubs, doesn't play to his best and we go down so he goes for peanuts anyway. That's why I say business-wise, with no emotion, selling Bowen makes sense even though I don't want it to happen. He's from Hereford, not Plaistow, we'll get over it.

[GBHammer63]

You're either missing the point or don't understand it.

Even relegated to League One the club is likely still worth more than his inestment even when adjusted for inflation. Yes the assest has lost value but he hasn't any money because he never had it in the fisrt place because the gain was unrealized. The assest value is nothing but 
The value of the assest only ever matters at the point of purchase or sale. It's why unrealized capital gains are untaxable.

There is no atual cost to Sullivan in the event of relegation.

No I understand it plenty well. It’s a bare fact he will sell the club for a lot more money as an established premier league team than a championship team or a yo yo club. Sure he might not make a loss on his original investment but it’s still insane. 

it’s like buying a house for 100k, building its worth to 200k, then purposely having it fall into disrepair or depreciating its value and eventually only selling it for 125k. Or having to invest another 75k to get it back up to that 200k value Sure you’ve made a small profit but you’ve just chucked away a potential 75k. It’s a completely inexplicably idiotic thing to do. 

 

Actually no, you don't understand it.

The analogy of a house is nonsensical in the context unless the house is an asset used to generate income in which case you could run it's value down to zero and as long as it had earnt more than the cost price and any incurred debts, costs and taxes you have still made money on it. You don't need to invest to recover the value because you already earnt the investment back over the expected life of the asset and as it's net book value is zero and disposal income is more profit.

If Sullivan tanks the value he hasn't lost a penny and will use the club's revenue or capacity to borrow to rebuild it's value not personal investment.

The only was it harms him is his capacity to borrow against his shareholding.

If correct, and the unknown time of when or if Sullivan wants out, doesn’t being relegated also have a monetary value to him? i.e. parachute payment?

[wils]

Given their ages and values, including the fact that Bowen is English, it would make better business sense to sell Bowen now for an inflated fee whilst he is at his peak, and keep Kudus who is younger and yet to hit that peak,  at which point he would be worth more.

The problem is that Kudus won't want to stay at a club who sells Bowen.

While this is probably true, Is this what you would want to happen? Or would you prefer the club kept him?

[dealcanvey]

3 bids in for Bowen yet not one word about it from
anyone? 

[honky cat]

Tbh i wouldnt blame him after last season and its now or never age wise. Is he ambitious, or does he love Essex life and doesnt want the upheaval for his family?

​​​​​i think kudus will certainly be moving on, even if bowen left. He seems unhappy.

[Gank]

Given their ages and values, including the fact that Bowen is English, it would make better business sense to sell Bowen now for an inflated fee whilst he is at his peak, and keep Kudus who is younger and yet to hit that peak,  at which point he would be worth more.

The problem is that Kudus won't want to stay at a club who sells Bowen.

[THUNDERCLINT]

If he has plans to buy out the other shareholders tanking the value is totally in his intrests.

Would he get away with this legally?

His defence case is already public record, PSR, 100m projected loss next year, 80m the year after etc...

[THUNDERCLINT]

 

Because getting relegated obviously absolutely destroys the value of the club and getting promoted and re-established when you gutted the squad before you went down costs hundreds of millions with no guarantee of getting what you want. 

Yes he might sell the club for approx the same or a touch more than be bought it for but he’ll be losing out on/costing himself tens of millions if not hundreds of millions if we go down. It’s far cheaper and far less risky to not sell every player of value this summer. By all means sell the ones who want out and have some value (Paqueta, Kudus, Aguerd, Alvarez) AND replace them all with prospects but any more than that is enormously risky. 

Yes this is chickens coming home to roost for him as he’s responsible for all this mess, which is grounds for smirking, but unfortunately it damages our club too. 

You're either missing the point or don't understand it.

Even relegated to League One the club is likely still worth more than his inestment even when adjusted for inflation. Yes the assest has lost value but he hasn't any money because he never had it in the fisrt place because the gain was unrealized. The assest value is nothing but vanity.

The value of the assest only ever matters at the point of purchase or sale. It's why unrealized capital gains are untaxable.

There is no atual cost to Sullivan in the event of relegation.

No I understand it plenty well. It’s a bare fact he will sell the club for a lot more money as an established premier league team than a championship team or a yo yo club. Sure he might not make a loss on his original investment but it’s still insane. 

it’s like buying a house for 100k, building its worth to 200k, then purposely having it fall into disrepair or depreciating its value and eventually only selling it for 125k. Or having to invest another 75k to get it back up to that 200k value Sure you’ve made a small profit but you’ve just chucked away a potential 75k. It’s a completely inexplicably idiotic thing to do. 

 

 

Actually no, you don't understand it.

The analogy of a house is nonsensical in the context unless the house is an asset used to generate income in which case you could run it's value down to zero and as long as it had earnt more than the cost price and any incurred debts, costs and taxes you have still made money on it. You don't need to invest to recover the value because you already earnt the investment back over the expected life of the asset and as it's net book value is zero and disposal income is more profit.

If Sullivan tanks the value he hasn't lost a penny and will use the club's revenue or capacity to borrow to rebuild it's value not personal investment.

The only was it harms him is his capacity to borrow against his shareholding.