Harry Palmer Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Potter needs help.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/d/dundee_utd/8334649.stm Or mindgames? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinydancer Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Potter needs help.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/d/dundee_utd/8334649.stm Or mindgames? I think CL is using his intelligence when he reads/hears reports that Spud Murphy has used his position to influence the banks to save a "Scottish team" then it should include his!!!!! Might no happen though - Clachnaccudin???????? FTH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heartsfc_fan Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Potter needs help.... http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/d/dundee_utd/8334649.stm Or mindgames? Doesn't help when the diddy team that you manage only get about 7K every week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted October 31, 2009 Author Share Posted October 31, 2009 I think CL is using his intelligence when he reads/hears reports that Spud Murphy has used his position to influence the banks to save a "Scottish team" then it should include his!!!!!Might no happen though - Clachnaccudin???????? FTH I noticed the "Jim Murphy" GUFF; what did he do? Influence some dick; GTF. Will you save my team Murphy, MP? (If I needed to write to someone it would be someone else...) atm the Chancellor.....for the next few months. He is my local Dickhead. He needs to sort those eyebrows... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jambomickey Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 he's got a lt to say these days that's for sure, most of it is claptrap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 he's got a lt to say these days that's for sure, most of it is claptrap. Is CL not a bit irresponsible? They must have known they were living near the edge but still took on the wage bills of Judas (loan), Cadamarteri and that new forward (Spanish?) they've got. Now they want help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jambomickey Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Is CL not a bit irresponsible?They must have known they were living near the edge but still took on the wage bills of Judas (loan), Cadamarteri and that new forward (Spanish?) they've got. Now they want help. don't know about that but i do know he has got a big mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I think this is a dodgy route to take, Essentially the tax payer owns the bank, and not every tax payer like football, or if they do, like or support the teams concerned, so why should they finance football clubs who have been irresponsible, at their expense. Imagine if you ran a business, and you were responsible, but you still had financial trouble, so the bank shut you down. You had to tell your colleagues that they have lost their jobs. How would you feel, if a business (which is what football lcubs are) with far greater debts, often through lack of responsibilty, got let off the hook. I would be mightily p1$$ed off. Is it right though that if Jim Murphy is going down that line, it can not be for Rangers only, as it seems he is doing, since he only now has intervened, but I as I said this route is dodgy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 I think this is a dodgy route to take, Essentially the tax payer owns the bank, and not every tax payer like football, or if they do, like or support the teams concerned, so why should they finance football clubs who have been irresponsible, at their expense. Imagine if you ran a business, and you were responsible, but you still had financial trouble, so the bank shut you down. You had to tell your colleagues that they have lost their jobs. How would you feel, if a business (which is what football lcubs are) with far greater debts, often through lack of responsibilty, got let off the hook. I would be mightily p1$$ed off. Is it right though that if Jim Murphy is going down that line, it can not be for Rangers only, as it seems he is doing, since he only now has intervened, but I as I said this route is dodgy. Um - have you been living on an iceberg these past few years? Dundee United: debts ?6.4m, wage bill ?3.3m (7th biggest in the SPL). Heart of Midlothian: debts ?30m, wage bill ?11m-?12m! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Is CL not a bit irresponsible?They must have known they were living near the edge but still took on the wage bills of Judas (loan), Cadamarteri and that new forward (Spanish?) they've got. Now they want help. No, not really. Their wage bill is tiny: it's incredible he's achieved what he was there. They need their overdraft to be increased - and in case you hadn't noticed, Hearts have "needed help from the bank" for years. They need 700K; whereas in Summer 2008, we needed a ?12m debt for equity conversion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Um - have you been living on an iceberg these past few years? Dundee United: debts ?6.4m, wage bill ?3.3m (7th biggest in the SPL). Heart of Midlothian: debts ?30m, wage bill ?11m-?12m! That is my point, if I banked with Lloyds, I would be p!$$ed off with those figures, espeically if they were allowed to continue, and especaiily if I had a busness that was closed down. Our situation too would not normally be tolerated, and probably should not be, both now, and particulalry in the Pieman days. I say more so with Pieman, becuase we were with mainstream bankers, who many people in the UK and beyond used, though the tax pay did not own them then. Under VR, it is more complex, in that our debt is not with a UK Bank, or a Bank owned by the tax-payer, and the fact, we are part of the bank's own portfolio - and it is probably just as well we are, or we probably would have been by now, or soon, closed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 That is my point, if I banked with Lloyds, I would be p!$$ed off with those figures, espeically if they were allowed to continue, and especaiily if I had a busness that was closed down. Our situation too would not normally be tolerated, and probably should not be, both now, and particulalry in the Pieman days. I say more so with Pieman, becuase we were with mainstream bankers, who many people in the UK and beyond used, though the tax pay did not own them then. Under VR, it is more complex, in that our debt is not with a UK Bank, or a Bank owned by the tax-payer, and the fact, we are part of the bank's own portfolio - and it is probably just as well we are, or we probably would have been by now, or soon, closed down. Indeed. History may show that we got astoundingly, almost impossibly lucky: not just in being taken over by someone who could guarantee the stadium and debt, but who meant we could bank with a company not based in the UK! Dundee United run their affairs well though: their wage bill is low enough as it is, and they're hardly an irresponsibly run club in any way TBH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Indeed. History may show that we got astoundingly, almost impossibly lucky: not just in being taken over by someone who could guarantee the stadium and debt, but who meant we could bank with a company not based in the UK! Dundee United run their affairs well though: their wage bill is low enough as it is, and they're hardly an irresponsibly run club in any way TBH. They are. just not relative to other clubs. I read this that Craig Levein is asking the bank to allow them to increase their debt, for a bank owned by the tax payer, that would be irresponsibler, unless it can guarantee success and greater returns, which it would not do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Dover Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 One thing that I'd question is this crippling TV loss that clubs keep quoting ? Are they basing that on what they received last year or on projections of the ?125m fantasy deal that Setanta struck before going t*ts up Serious question as they say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted October 31, 2009 Share Posted October 31, 2009 Indeed. History may show that we got astoundingly, almost impossibly lucky: not just in being taken over by someone who could guarantee the stadium and debt, but who meant we could bank with a company not based in the UK! Dundee United run their affairs well though: their wage bill is low enough as it is, and they're hardly an irresponsibly run club in any way TBH. This also show how moronic the Vlad GTF posts are, until someone else can gaurantee the same debt, or Vlad or UBIG decide they no longer can, he is the best option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.