Interview with Neil Hart

[MACCA]

Then why are we in this situation yet every other Premier League club seemingly isn’t, considering we’re supposedly so well run?

Because every other premier league club is up for sale, with their chairman wanting to make as much money as possible out of the deal.

The sooner it's all sorted out the better.

[NewClaret]

If you really need to ask that first question then there doesn’t seem any point discussing this.

As for your second paragraph, I’m not ignoring the musings of the manager, I’m sensing someone who is frustrated by our financial constraints. Someone who has a vested interest in spending as much money as he can. Not somebody who necessarily has the clubs best interests at heart. He also seemed to change his tune when we held on to Tarkowski.

Why are you hanging on Dyche’s every word but dismissing the CEO, who without doubt will have a better grasp of the position we’re in than our manager?

Don’t really think Hart and Dyche have said anything contradictory, have they?

Dyche said the club is well run and well placed financially. Hart said the same about being well run and didn’t contradict that we are in good shape.

He said we’d lose “tens of millions” - that could be £15m or £40m. He didn’t qualify or discuss our cash reserves so that’s hard to gauge. We all know we will be losing revenue, but also benefiting from lower expenses, so it’s the cash in the bank that matters most. If we still had £40m stuffed away, it’s harder to understand why we wouldn’t invest some on players this summer.

If he’d given a higher ball park figure, I’d be more understanding. Not sure why as I guess we’ll all find out exactly when the accounts are out. When are they usually filed, by the way?

I think if the messaging had been “we estimate we will lose £XXm this year and since we don’t know when covid will resolve itself, we wanted to keep substantially cash reserves to see us through this period, so we decided to prioritise retaining our existing players over signing new, but in the interim have been working hard to secure additional investment so we can be active in future windows” that would be fine with me. He almost did say that, just not quite as explicitly so leaves you reading between the lines a little.

[Rileybobs]

Don’t really think Hart and Dyche have said anything contradictory, have they?

Dyche said the club is well run and well placed financially. Hart said the same about being well run and didn’t contradict that we are in good shape.

He said we’d lose “tens of millions” - that could be £15m or £40m. He didn’t qualify or discuss our cash reserves so that’s hard to gauge. We all know we will be losing revenue, but also benefiting from lower expenses, so it’s the cash in the bank that matters most. If we still had £40m stuffed away, it’s harder to understand why we wouldn’t invest some on players this summer.

If he’d given a higher ball park figure, I’d be more understanding. Not sure why as I guess we’ll all find out exactly when the accounts are out. When are they usually filed, by the way?

I think if the messaging had been “we estimate we will lose £XXm this year and since we don’t know when covid will resolve itself, we wanted to keep substantially cash reserves to see us through this period, so we decided to prioritise retaining our existing players over signing new, but in the interim have been working hard to secure additional investment so we can be active in future windows” that would be fine with me. He almost did say that, just not quite as explicitly so leaves you reading between the lines a little.

You're right, he pretty much did say exactly what you wanted him to say. He said we're losing tens of millions of pounds due to Covid, we're seeking outside investment, and he hinted that it may not be far away.

Asking him to give precise figures is totally unnecessary, particularly as those figures aren't yet known. We don't have a right to know those figures and making them public will only weaken our position in the transfer market.

[BurnleyFC]

If you really need to ask that first question then there doesn’t seem any point discussing this.

As for your second paragraph, I’m not ignoring the musings of the manager, I’m sensing someone who is frustrated by our financial constraints. Someone who has a vested interest in spending as much money as he can. Not somebody who necessarily has the clubs best interests at heart. He also seemed to change his tune when we held on to Tarkowski.

Why are you hanging on Dyche’s every word but dismissing the CEO, who without doubt will have a better grasp of the position we’re in than our manager?

With all due respect, up until very recently, I very much doubt the CEO did have more of an understanding of what was going on at the club. He’ll be on about 10% of the salary of Dyche and is nowhere near as influential.

Football is a business like no other.

[NewClaret]

You're right, he pretty much did say exactly what you wanted him to say. He said we're losing tens of millions of pounds due to Covid, we're seeking outside investment, and he hinted that it may not be far away.

Asking him to give precise figures is totally unnecessary, particularly as those figures aren't yet known. We don't have a right to know those figures and making them public will only weaken our position in the transfer market.

My point was that he wasn’t really specific, was he? All a bit vague. Fair point he might not know the full impact yet, hence my reference to a ball park figure. To your point it’s not our right to know - we’ll all find out eventually when accounts are published. Not until next March for last season though, so a while to wait yet.

Presumably he’d only weaken our position in the transfer market if in fact we are well-placed financially? If we were struggling he could spell it out in all its gory detail because it wouldn’t matter either way - we wouldn’t be operating in the transfer window as we haven’t this season.

In summary, whilst I thought it was a good interview, I just think we deserve a fuller understanding why this window has been so ineffective in terms of recruitment - a clearer explanation of the strategy, if there were one, What we were seeking to achieve (if anything), what went wrong/stopped it working. I give credit where it’s due for retentions.

Re investment, his choice of words was interesting there. Doesn’t sound like a full takeover? Presumably issuing new shares to bring in some funding. I think that’s a pretty good outcome & better than a full takeover?

[taio]

Don’t really think Hart and Dyche have said anything contradictory, have they?

Dyche said the club is well run and well placed financially. Hart said the same about being well run and didn’t contradict that we are in good shape.

He said we’d lose “tens of millions” - that could be £15m or £40m. He didn’t qualify or discuss our cash reserves so that’s hard to gauge. We all know we will be losing revenue, but also benefiting from lower expenses, so it’s the cash in the bank that matters most. If we still had £40m stuffed away, it’s harder to understand why we wouldn’t invest some on players this summer.

If he’d given a higher ball park figure, I’d be more understanding. Not sure why as I guess we’ll all find out exactly when the accounts are out. When are they usually filed, by the way?

I think if the messaging had been “we estimate we will lose £XXm this year and since we don’t know when covid will resolve itself, we wanted to keep substantially cash reserves to see us through this period, so we decided to prioritise retaining our existing players over signing new, but in the interim have been working hard to secure additional investment so we can be active in future windows” that would be fine with me. He almost did say that, just not quite as explicitly so leaves you reading between the lines a little.

To be fair "tens of millions" doesn't mean £15m.

[Jakubs Tash]

I'm not sure why it's so difficult for some to understand.

We are a well run club, don't have any debt and have saleable assets. I believe this is what SD means when he has stated we are financially stable.

However, this pandemic has hit us hard and, because we unfortunately don't have the billionaire owners most other Premier League clubs have, it has meant that it has hit our cash reserves and we now don't have much money at all in the bank. Who knew it would be much easier to navigate your way through this summer window with extremely rich owners, eh?

As mentioned above, losing "tens of millions" means more than one ten million - it could mean 20, 30 or 40 million. Either way, we aren't as cash rich as we were, hence the poor window and lack of investment in the squad this summer.

By saying we are going to have a more active January and next summer window suggests the CEO thinks we'll be in a much stronger position financially by then. Or why would we be more active? We still wouldn't have money. Therefore, this suggest a takeover/outside investment is close.

Whilst it has certainly been an extremely frustrating few weeks and the lack of incoming transfers hasn't been ideal, at least some communication today has started to explain the situation and the hopes for moving forward.

To start having a dig at the Chairman without knowing the finer details and exact figures seems unfair.We need outside investment to continue to evolve - Mike Garlick needs to hand over the reigns. However, some supporters calling him "tight" and wanting him to spend money that isn't there are just plain thick.

[NewClaret]

To be fair "tens of millions" doesn't mean £15m.

Fair enough. I was meaning >£10. The plural probably does suggest >£20?

[Rileybobs]

With all due respect, up until very recently, I very much doubt the CEO did have more of an understanding of what was going on at the club. He’ll be on about 10% of the salary of Dyche and is nowhere near as influential.

Football is a business like no other.

You don't think the CEO of BFC would have a better understanding of the club's financial position than the first team manager?

[BurnleyFC]

You don't think the CEO of BFC would have a better understanding of the club's financial position than the first team manager?

Dave Baldwin, yes. A cheap appointment from a glorified charity?

No.

[Rileybobs]

Presumably he’d only weaken our position in the transfer market if in fact we are well-placed financially? If we were struggling he could spell it out in all its gory detail because it wouldn’t matter either way - we wouldn’t be operating in the transfer window as we haven’t this season.

We operate in every transfer window whether we sign players or not. We have valuable assets that other clubs want to sign.

[NewClaret]

We operate in every transfer window whether we sign players or not. We have valuable assets that other clubs want to sign.

Fair point. I was thinking more of incomings.

Fingers crossed the investment is forthcoming and we rectify in January. Doesn’t sound like the investment is the billionaire we need to put us on a level playing field based on the ALK rumours, so hoping Harts positivity in that interview means he knows something we don’t.

[dpinsussex]

I thought he came across pretty well.
Nothing we probably hadn't worked out but good to hear it from the top.

[Belial]

I thought he came across well generally too. Maybe the bit about him paying the PPV he could have acknowledged that other fans might not be able to afford it (particularly if they're already paying for the season ticket without a refund). For those who didn't like his 'smarmy' ways, as someone in that position, he'd be better off being as positive as possible rather than negative if he wants the morale of the club and fans to be lifted, and I thought he did that quite well considering how the Covid situation has clearly hit us in a different way than some of the other PL clubs

[Belial]

It was OK. What you'd expect from a CEO even if he is not a real one. Mind you a cheap jacket. Contrast stitching on the button hole a very poor show.

Definitely a Boundary Mill special!

[Rileybobs]

Definitely a Boundary Mill special!

I’m not sure Burnley fans would take to an Armani suit and Gucci loafers. A lot can’t seem to handle players who deviate from a short back and sides.

[9thMay1987]

Much better than nothing. Bit like a party political broadcast, questions and answers decided before the event.

But overall feel a bit chirpier, it was the nothingness that kills you.

[brexit]

CEO of the club no clarets tie or badge.
The comment over PPTV "you have a choice" came over as contempt for the fans.
Never liked him, don't trust him, very superficial and possibly using us as a stepping stone.

[Rileybobs]

CEO of the club no clarets tie or badge.
The comment over PPTV "you have a choice" came over as contempt for the fans.
Never liked him, don't trust him, very superficial and possibly using us as a stepping stone.

No claret tie. Classic.

[BurnleyFC]

CEO of the club no clarets tie or badge.
The comment over PPTV "you have a choice" came over as contempt for the fans.
Never liked him, don't trust him, very superficial and possibly using us as a stepping stone.

A stepping stone for what? I bet he can’t believe his luck that he’s managed to get himself a job as CEO of a Premier League football club.

[Belial]

I’m not sure Burnley fans would take to an Armani suit and Gucci loafers. A lot can’t seem to handle players who deviate from a short back and sides.

Tru dat. I know which I'd prefer and it ain't the one with skinny pants and no socks on