Nick Pope

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by taio » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:03 pm

elwaclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:45 pm
I don’t disagree with any off your working out, but it does not allow for saved wages… a substantial consideration. But he’s gone and things are what they are. One thing is certain wishing the board to fail now does nothing to help Burnley football Club.

There is zero point complaining and nothing can come of constant debate about sales we had no power to stop in the first place.
Who are you saying wants the Board to fail?

It's a wholly relevant discussion point for this messageboard.

fidelcastro
Posts: 7236
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2016 8:45 pm
Been Liked: 2195 times
Has Liked: 2179 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by fidelcastro » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:05 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:01 pm
So the fact that no club would pay that much becomes the board's (old or new?) fault, then?
Yes. It's 25 million or nothing... Otherwise we keep a player here against his will, and then lose him for nowt if we don't go up!

Sound business is that! ;)
This user liked this post: boatshed bill

Stayingup
Posts: 5551
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 914 times
Has Liked: 2726 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Stayingup » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:16 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:01 pm
So the fact that no club would pay that much becomes the board's (old or new?) fault, then?
Not the point is it. He was sold at a knockdown price because the club had a debt to pay because the club was sold to people with no money. Thats the point. And if no club would pay more then we should have kept him. I think we sold a few players below their market value because of this fiscal situation.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by RVclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:18 pm

Stayingup wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:16 pm
Not the point is it. He was sold at a knockdown price because the club had a debt to pay because the club was sold to people with no money. Thats the point. And if no club would pay more then we should have kept him. I think we sold a few players below their market value because of this fiscal situation.
Watford just sold Dennis to Forest for 15m, less than what we got for Cornet. They’ve made almost 60m in sales this summer. Are they selling for the same reason?

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by KRBFC » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:23 pm

elwaclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 7:45 pm
I don’t disagree with any off your working out, but it does not allow for saved wages… a substantial consideration. But he’s gone and things are what they are. One thing is certain wishing the board to fail now does nothing to help Burnley football Club.

There is zero point complaining and nothing can come of constant debate about sales we had no power to stop in the first place.
As a moderator of this messageboard, this is a weird take, almost like you would rather posters swept the finance issue under the rug and not spoke about it on here.

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by KRBFC » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:29 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:18 pm
Watford just sold Dennis to Forest for 15m, less than what we got for Cornet. They’ve made almost 60m in sales this summer. Are they selling for the same reason?
I don't know how the financial picture of BFC is so alien to you, Chester and others have literally broken it down for you but you still fail to see it. You aren't even being objective with the club/ALK, straight on the defensive.

Should we not be objective? criticise ALK for the academy downgrade but praise them for hiring Kompany? praise Pace for facing the fans and not hiding but ask questions like why the hero pictures were taken down?

Are we just supposed to praise every decision and question nothing? just sit here making constant excuses for whatever?

Newcastleclaret93
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 pm
Been Liked: 1559 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Newcastleclaret93 » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:41 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:18 pm
Watford just sold Dennis to Forest for 15m, less than what we got for Cornet. They’ve made almost 60m in sales this summer. Are they selling for the same reason?
No Watford for the last view years have been about operating a net zero expenditure.

Last season they had a net spend of 35-40m this season they have a net profit of about 30m.

It’s a completely different scenario.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by RVclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:43 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:29 pm
I don't know how the financial picture of BFC is so alien to you, Chester and others have literally broken it down for you but you still fail to see it. You aren't even being objective with the club/ALK, straight on the defensive.

Should we not be objective? criticise ALK for the academy downgrade but praise them for hiring Kompany? praise Pace for facing the fans and not hiding but ask questions like why the hero pictures were taken down?

Are we just supposed to praise every decision and question nothing? just sit here making constant excuses for whatever?
Its not alien. I’m interested though in the answer to my question posed above?

What is objective is that we’ve currently spent the most money in the division and still have more to go. It will probably put us up there in the top 10 spenders ever seen in this division. Maybe even top 5 (I’ve not looked). I just prefer to look at it from that perspective.

Stayingup
Posts: 5551
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 914 times
Has Liked: 2726 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Stayingup » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:43 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:18 pm
Watford just sold Dennis to Forest for 15m, less than what we got for Cornet. They’ve made almost 60m in sales this summer. Are they selling for the same reason?
Not interested in Watford. I have commented on what I believe to be our situation.

Indecisive
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 8:21 pm
Been Liked: 394 times
Has Liked: 68 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Indecisive » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:44 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:29 pm
I don't know how the financial picture of BFC is so alien to you, Chester and others have literally broken it down for you but you still fail to see it. You aren't even being objective with the club/ALK, straight on the defensive.

Should we not be objective? criticise ALK for the academy downgrade but praise them for hiring Kompany? praise Pace for facing the fans and not hiding but ask questions like why the hero pictures were taken down?

Are we just supposed to praise every decision and question nothing? just sit here making constant excuses for whatever?

A 100% we need to question the stuff that stinks, but acknowledge the positives.

I’m pretty conflicted with a lot of what is happening at the club. But, like politics, everyone seems to want you to tie your colours to a mast.

Is it alright to be happy with some of the progress we are making, but a bit sceptical at the same time?

Personally for me, I like a lot of what Kompany is working towards… I am massively grateful for Dyche and the remarkable success he had with us…. I realise that ultimately Pace’s motivations are to make some money for himself …. But equally I realise that that the clubs success increase the likelyhood of that happening.

Maybe I’m being naive and putting too much faith in his previous working life… but I don’t currently see Pace as a complete chancer, a la Matt southall at Charlton or Laurence Bassini.

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1009 times
Has Liked: 275 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Big Vinny K » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:45 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:18 pm
Watford just sold Dennis to Forest for 15m, less than what we got for Cornet. They’ve made almost 60m in sales this summer. Are they selling for the same reason?
Every report I have seen says it was £20m.
I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make here but I’d suggest that Watford in the last 10 years or so are not exactly the best example of how a football club should be ran.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by RVclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:49 pm

Stayingup wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:43 pm
Not interested in Watford. I have commented on what I believe to be our situation.
What’s your comments on us being the top spending club in the league and likely soon to be one of the top spending clubs ever seen in the league?

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by KRBFC » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:50 pm

Indecisive wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:44 pm
A 100% we need to question the stuff that stinks, but acknowledge the positives.

I’m pretty conflicted with a lot of what is happening at the club. But, like politics, everyone seems to want you to tie your colours to a mast.

Is it alright to be happy with some of the progress we are making, but a bit sceptical at the same time?

Personally for me, I like a lot of what Kompany is working towards… I am massively grateful for Dyche and the remarkable success he had with us…. I realise that ultimately Pace’s motivations are to make some money for himself …. But equally I realise that that the clubs success increase the likelyhood of that happening.

Maybe I’m being naive and putting too much faith in his previous working life… but I don’t currently see Pace as a complete chancer, a la Matt southall at Charlton or Laurence Bassini.
I have zero issue with anyone's opinion on either side, it just annoys me when people aren't objective. The main reason I avoid politics/religion, because I disagree/agree with both sides on varying things. RV is just being political and blindly supporting/defending ALK regardless of if its good/bad for the club. I have praised ALK and Pace for things and questioned other things. I agree with certain things ALK have done and disagree with others. I wish people were more objective in general, this blind opinion stuff is annoying and not really opinion.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by RVclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:50 pm

Big Vinny K wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:45 pm
Every report I have seen says it was £20m.
I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make here but I’d suggest that Watford in the last 10 years or so are not exactly the best example of how a football club should be ran.
John Percy, most reliable there is out there, said 15m.

Newcastleclaret93
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 pm
Been Liked: 1559 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Newcastleclaret93 » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:50 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:43 pm
Its not alien. I’m interested though in the answer to my question posed above?

What is objective is that we’ve currently spent the most money in the division and still have more to go. It will probably put us up there in the top 10 spenders ever seen in this division. Maybe even top 5 (I’ve not looked). I just prefer to look at it from that perspective.
I’ve looked, unless we are going to spend another 20-30m this window, we won’t even get close to the top ten.

Duffer_
Posts: 2309
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
Been Liked: 792 times
Has Liked: 1353 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Duffer_ » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:50 pm

Some people seem to be tying themselves in knots on the Pope sale. If you say we needed the cash (flow) to start the rebuild are you not recognising a distressed sale, maybe even a fire sale ("any sale at a deep discount to raise money")?

Indecisive
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 8:21 pm
Been Liked: 394 times
Has Liked: 68 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Indecisive » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:52 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:49 pm
What’s your comments on us being the top spending club in the league and likely soon to be one of the top spending clubs ever seen in the league?
This definitely makes you sound like you are on Pace’s payroll and I’m not even bothered 😂

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jakubclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:53 pm

Big Vinny K wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:45 pm
Every report I have seen says it was £20m.
I’m not really sure what point you are trying to make here but I’d suggest that Watford in the last 10 years or so are not exactly the best example of how a football club should be ran.
It tells you something when Dennis will more & likely be an automatic starter & Moyes decides to give cornet a 5 min runout plus injury time when seeking an equaliser, I can get my trusty crayons out & bog roll & shove it where the sun doesn't shine politely put in terms of where both will feature this season in the grand scheme of things.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by RVclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:54 pm

Indecisive wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:52 pm
This definitely makes you sound like you are on Pace’s payroll and I’m not even bothered 😂
No I’m just curious, some people seem obsessed with the sales paying off debt narrative (I’m open to that being the case to an extent btw and it’s quite likely) but fail to comment on what I mentioned.

taio
Posts: 11520
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:17 am
Been Liked: 3220 times
Has Liked: 340 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by taio » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:55 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:49 pm
What’s your comments on us being the top spending club in the league and likely soon to be one of the top spending clubs ever seen in the league?
What's the net spend comparisons?

Newcastleclaret93
Posts: 11039
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:29 pm
Been Liked: 1559 times
Has Liked: 359 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Newcastleclaret93 » Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:57 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:54 pm
No I’m just curious, some people seem obsessed with the sales paying off debt narrative (I’m open to that being the case to an extent btw and it’s quite likely) but fail to comment on what I mentioned.
Which point do you want people to comment on?

Highest spenders this season? Fair comment, Burnley will also have the largest net profit this window.

Top 10 spenders in championship history? More than ten teams have spent over 30m at championship level before with 4 spending over 50m. Probably ranks somewhere around 20th

Indecisive
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 8:21 pm
Been Liked: 394 times
Has Liked: 68 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Indecisive » Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:06 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:54 pm
No I’m just curious, some people seem obsessed with the sales paying off debt narrative (I’m open to that being the case to an extent btw and it’s quite likely) but fail to comment on what I mentioned.
Taio beat me to it. The net spend is the significant figure if you are discussing owners putting their ‘money where their mouth is’ and it’s disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

Pace is a businessman. He has debt he has to pay back. He realises that reinvesting some money he receives from player sales increases the chances of returning to the premier league and making more money for himself?

You do realise his main aim is to make money though? You realise their is zero sentiment when it comes to the club?

We have to hope that he succeeds in making himself richer, because that’s the only way this whole deal benefits the club.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jakubclaret » Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:20 pm

Indecisive wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:06 pm
Taio beat me to it. The net spend is the significant figure if you are discussing owners putting their ‘money where their mouth is’ and it’s disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

Pace is a businessman. He has debt he has to pay back. He realises that reinvesting some money he receives from player sales increases the chances of returning to the premier league and making more money for himself?

You do realise his main aim is to make money though? You realise their is zero sentiment when it comes to the club?

We have to hope that he succeeds in making himself richer, because that’s the only way this whole deal benefits the club.
Assuming that's the long term plan & I'm not suggesting it is or isn't, a slightly different way of looking at things is to strip things bare insidiously keep things ticking over whilst this is happening with relatively modest spends & when the debts cleared which it will be at some point sell up & leave, he's made his money then & whatever after is outright profit, some people come in to make their money & then leave, it's whether it will be a carcass or what semblance of 1 that's the question. When they are done finished what's left when you've made your money that's mission accomplished.

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1009 times
Has Liked: 275 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Big Vinny K » Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:23 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:49 pm
What’s your comments on us being the top spending club in the league and likely soon to be one of the top spending clubs ever seen in the league?
So if Man United went down and sold £300m worth of players and then spent £40m on new players do you really think that there would be one United fan celebrating this as some kind of record to be proud of ?

It’s all about net spend. Without our sales we spend zero. In fact it’s become very clear that we needed to bring in a certain amount of sales before we would spend anything. Based on VK’s comments that the reports of what we have been paying for the new signings are much higher than the true figures our net spend is a pretty significant negative number.
This user liked this post: fatboy47

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by KRBFC » Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:32 pm

Ask a question about BFC and discuss BFC and it turns into ''Well what about Watford'' :lol:

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by KRBFC » Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:34 pm

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:54 pm
No I’m just curious, some people seem obsessed with the sales paying off debt narrative (I’m open to that being the case to an extent btw and it’s quite likely) but fail to comment on what I mentioned.
It's not a narrative, VK literally told us all.... it's a fact.
Where else did you think the money to pay off the debts was gonna come from?

boatshed bill
Posts: 15108
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3138 times
Has Liked: 6682 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by boatshed bill » Sun Aug 14, 2022 11:10 pm

Indecisive wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:06 pm
Taio beat me to it. The net spend is the significant figure if you are discussing owners putting their ‘money where their mouth is’ and it’s disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

Pace is a businessman. He has debt he has to pay back. He realises that reinvesting some money he receives from player sales increases the chances of returning to the premier league and making more money for himself?

You do realise his main aim is to make money though? You realise their is zero sentiment when it comes to the club?

We have to hope that he succeeds in making himself richer, because that’s the only way this whole deal benefits the club.
Fair enough, isn't it?
I just hope he succeeds.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by dsr » Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:51 am

Indecisive wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:44 pm
Maybe I’m being naive and putting too much faith in his previous working life… but I don’t currently see Pace as a complete chancer, a la Matt southall at Charlton or Laurence Bassini.
Time will tell. Though Southall and Bassini aren't really appropriate comparators because they both (with all their faults) put money into their clubs. their clubs owed money to the owners, which of course creates problems of its own.

But Burnley owe nothing to Pace. Quite the contrary, he owes well over £100m to Burnley, and unless we get promotion, we won't see any of it back.

What I fear is that he might use all these profits to declare a dividend payable to himself (or his nest of holding companies) and that way he wouldn't have to pay the club back even if he did sell it at a profit. That really would be the act of a chancer. I wish I could believe it was impossible.

RVclaret
Posts: 13836
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:30 am
Been Liked: 3707 times
Has Liked: 2499 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by RVclaret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 6:48 am

KRBFC wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 10:32 pm
Ask a question about BFC and discuss BFC and it turns into ''Well what about Watford'' :lol:
That’s quite ironic. You and the asset stripping brigade can’t wait to bring Watford into it when we’ve sold a player… ‘But why aren’t Watford or Norwich selling anyone??’ How many times has that been seen on here? Now I mention it and it’s irrelevant. :D
This user liked this post: GodIsADeeJay81

Indecisive
Posts: 529
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 8:21 pm
Been Liked: 394 times
Has Liked: 68 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Indecisive » Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:32 am

dsr wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:51 am
Time will tell. Though Southall and Bassini aren't really appropriate comparators because they both (with all their faults) put money into their clubs. their clubs owed money to the owners, which of course creates problems of its own.

But Burnley owe nothing to Pace. Quite the contrary, he owes well over £100m to Burnley, and unless we get promotion, we won't see any of it back.

What I fear is that he might use all these profits to declare a dividend payable to himself (or his nest of holding companies) and that way he wouldn't have to pay the club back even if he did sell it at a profit. That really would be the act of a chancer. I wish I could believe it was impossible.
[/quote/]

Neither southall or bassini were using their own money you know 😂

Southall went in and quickly rented top end London flats and leased range rovers for him and his mrs through the club. The absolute definition of a chancer.

Also unlike Pace, neither of these two ‘characters’ have had any real substantiated success in the business world.

I’m not saying Pace is going to work out for us, I’m a scepticle as the next man…. But he does appear to have some credibility in the business world.

elwaclaret
Posts: 8929
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
Been Liked: 1986 times
Has Liked: 2876 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by elwaclaret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:57 am

KRBFC wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 9:23 pm
As a moderator of this messageboard, this is a weird take, almost like you would rather posters swept the finance issue under the rug and not spoke about it on here.
Whether you are a moderator or not, even you must feel this subject has been done to death.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jakubclaret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 10:36 am

elwaclaret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 9:57 am
Whether you are a moderator or not, even you must feel this subject has been done to death.
For many people the finances need to be discussed more, far too many people seem to be hiding or pretending the debt doesn't exist.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:04 am

Jakubclaret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 10:36 am
For many people the finances need to be discussed more, far too many people seem to be hiding or pretending the debt doesn't exist.
The issue is people trying to shoehorn the finances into as many threads as they can, even when the thread title specifically states no financial discussion.

By all means chat away about it, but at least use pre-existing threads to save the rest of us from being bored by it.
These 2 users liked this post: RVclaret elwaclaret

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Colburn_Claret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:21 am

Jakubclaret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 10:36 am
For many people the finances need to be discussed more, far too many people seem to be hiding or pretending the debt doesn't exist.
I thought there was a separate thread for people to discuss finances, so why does every other thread get hijacked.

You, and everyone else, are entitled to their own opinion, but nobody needs to cram their opinion down anyone else's throat.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jakubclaret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:32 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:04 am
The issue is people trying to shoehorn the finances into as many threads as they can, even when the thread title specifically states no financial discussion.

By all means chat away about it, but at least use pre-existing threads to save the rest of us from being bored by it.
Lot's of subjects are encompassed by the debt there's no getting away from it such as this 1 the necessity to sell pope because of the debt, debt is the major reason why things are the way there are, the debt is controlling the club & influencing all actions within the club to isolate debt when it's being so disruptive & having so much influence is naive at best IMO.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10843
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5521 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by TheFamilyCat » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:35 am

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:04 am
The issue is people trying to shoehorn the finances into as many threads as they can, even when the thread title specifically states no financial discussion.

By all means chat away about it, but at least use pre-existing threads to save the rest of us from being bored by it.
The bigger problem is people (one person) who has very limited knowledge of the finances of the football club shouting "DEBT" at every opportunity.
These 2 users liked this post: RVclaret GodIsADeeJay81

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jakubclaret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:39 am

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:35 am
The bigger problem is people (one person) who has very limited knowledge of the finances of the football club shouting "DEBT" at every opportunity.
You don't need to be any kind of financial expert to know the ins & outs but what you do need to do is open your eyes & put your ears to the ground & pick the newspapers up & listen to the pundits & read what various posters are posting, my days done now on here & please don't call me Albert Einstein, cheerio!

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Colburn_Claret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:39 am

Jakubclaret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:32 am
Lot's of subjects are encompassed by the debt there's no getting away from it such as this 1 the necessity to sell pope because of the debt, debt is the major reason why things are the way there are, the debt is controlling the club & influencing all actions within the club to isolate debt when it's being so disruptive & having so much influence is naive at best IMO.
And you said so, there's no need to say it again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Do you not understand that.
This user liked this post: GodIsADeeJay81

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9434
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1180 times
Has Liked: 778 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jakubclaret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:43 am

Colburn_Claret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:39 am
And you said so, there's no need to say it again, and again, and again, and again, and again. Do you not understand that.
You are right we can pretend it doesn't exist that's easier & more comforting it might just go away then you never know.

MT03ALG
Posts: 2050
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:50 pm
Been Liked: 422 times
Has Liked: 4481 times
Location: COTTON TREE

Re: Nick Pope

Post by MT03ALG » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:47 am

RVclaret wrote:
Sun Aug 14, 2022 11:00 am
If Pope can significantly improve his passing / kicking in the next 2 months then maybe but I don’t foresee that. Otherwise it’s relying on the other two being absolutely terrible for their clubs.
Henderson may become Number 1. He can save penalties (v Germany?)

Colburn_Claret
Posts: 8069
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:30 pm
Been Liked: 3060 times
Has Liked: 5023 times
Location: Catterick N.Yorks

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Colburn_Claret » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:52 am

Jakubclaret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:43 am
You are right we can pretend it doesn't exist that's easier & more comforting it might just go away then you never know.
It isn't about ignoring it, it is what it is, and as fans we can do nothing about it. Many fans trust AP, I do, but that's just my gut feeling, I have no more knowledge than you, as to what the facts are, so putting 2 and 2 together is pointless.

Like the little boy who cried wolf, after so long people just stop listening to you. You've said your piece, let it go and give us some peace.

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1009 times
Has Liked: 275 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Big Vinny K » Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:57 am

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:35 am
The bigger problem is people (one person) who has very limited knowledge of the finances of the football club shouting "DEBT" at every opportunity.
I’ve worked in commercial finance for more than 30 years including the football club sector.
I also have quite a detailed understanding of our clubs finances and the structure of the takeover and a number of the loan and discounting transactions since the takeover.
Am I allowed to mention the word ‘DEBT’ ?

Whilst I agree that a number of the regular negative contributors on this board have little or no knowledge of finances and often jump to extreme and completely incorrect conclusions…..it’s also the case that there are a number of the positive ‘pro Pace’ contributors who have the same lack of understanding.

Which is why I do agree with your sentiment that so much of this debate is so pointless !!!

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:43 pm

Jakubclaret wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:32 am
Lot's of subjects are encompassed by the debt there's no getting away from it such as this 1 the necessity to sell pope because of the debt, debt is the major reason why things are the way there are, the debt is controlling the club & influencing all actions within the club to isolate debt when it's being so disruptive & having so much influence is naive at best IMO.
They're not though unless you're unable to separate it for discussions, which is what happens.

When we came down we had numerous people panicking and claiming the club couldn't do such a large squad rebuild and we wouldn't get a manager of note, because of the aforementioned debt.

Now that the club's just getting on with the squad rebuild with a promising young manager who's a giant in the game from his playing days, the same people shoehorn debts into versions conversations because they don't seem to like the fact that the club is just getting on with it, it isn't paying over the odds and is using the transfer and loan market in a better manner than the club has done for years/or ever.

They're determined to circle back to the debt at every opportunity and it's boring for the rest of us
I know about the debt, I try to keep abreast of the club's finances but I don't feel the need to lob it into a discussion about potential transfer targets....
These 3 users liked this post: RVclaret Enola Gay Colburn_Claret

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by dsr » Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:51 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:43 pm
They're not though unless you're unable to separate it for discussions, which is what happens.

When we came down we had numerous people panicking and claiming the club couldn't do such a large squad rebuild and we wouldn't get a manager of note, because of the aforementioned debt.

Now that the club's just getting on with the squad rebuild with a promising young manager who's a giant in the game from his playing days, the same people shoehorn debts into versions conversations because they don't seem to like the fact that the club is just getting on with it, it isn't paying over the odds and is using the transfer and loan market in a better manner than the club has done for years/or ever.

They're determined to circle back to the debt at every opportunity and it's boring for the rest of us
I know about the debt, I try to keep abreast of the club's finances but I don't feel the need to lob it into a discussion about potential transfer targets....
This isn't a discussion about potential transfer targets. ;)
This user liked this post: GodIsADeeJay81

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10843
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5521 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by TheFamilyCat » Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:11 pm

Big Vinny K wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 11:57 am
I’ve worked in commercial finance for more than 30 years including the football club sector.
I also have quite a detailed understanding of our clubs finances and the structure of the takeover and a number of the loan and discounting transactions since the takeover.
Am I allowed to mention the word ‘DEBT’ ?

Whilst I agree that a number of the regular negative contributors on this board have little or no knowledge of finances and often jump to extreme and completely incorrect conclusions…..it’s also the case that there are a number of the positive ‘pro Pace’ contributors who have the same lack of understanding.

Which is why I do agree with your sentiment that so much of this debate is so pointless !!!
I've no issue with anyone discussing the financial situation and debt, regardless of their knowledge.

Unfortunately there are those who seemingly try to crowbar it into every thread and it gets beyond tedious.

I could have actually left the reference to knowledge (or lack of) out of my post to be honest, but it is worth remembering that the emptiest vessels make the most noise.
This user liked this post: Big Vinny K

KRBFC
Posts: 18018
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3784 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by KRBFC » Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:48 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 12:43 pm


is using the transfer and loan market in a better manner than the club has done for years/or ever.
That's a very sus argument imo, whilst I like some of the signings, the swiftness and not sticking to just British based, you have to consider we're in a lower division than we have been for years which opens the pool up enormously, we've seen £70m in transfer fees come into the club.

NRC
Posts: 4288
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:58 pm
Been Liked: 908 times
Has Liked: 107 times
Location: Containment Area for Relocated Yankees, NC

Re: Nick Pope

Post by NRC » Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:50 pm

My 50 cents

Pope had to be sold. The fee we received was reasonable considering the position/length of his contract and his age. If it helps consider it to be a bird in the hand being better than two in a bush. It’s ludicrous to ever get ourselves into a Tarkowski situation ever again. It also fits with the model of monetizing younger athletes.

The picture with Pace and Co is what it is. We know the story and it is done to death, and bleating about it is not going to change it. But at the same time the new business and its model and servicing the debt are specifically hand in glove approaches. It is in fact the only way the debt can be serviced responsibly, and once it is Pace has a decision. Sell the club for personal profit or remain and continue to work the business model. It’s that straightforward.

I do not understand the net spend argument at all. The whole purpose of this business plan - monetizing young athletes - is that you always have a healthy negative net spend

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2429
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1009 times
Has Liked: 275 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Big Vinny K » Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:05 pm

NRC wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:50 pm
My 50 cents

Pope had to be sold. The fee we received was reasonable considering the position/length of his contract and his age. If it helps consider it to be a bird in the hand being better than two in a bush. It’s ludicrous to ever get ourselves into a Tarkowski situation ever again. It also fits with the model of monetizing younger athletes.

The picture with Pace and Co is what it is. We know the story and it is done to death, and bleating about it is not going to change it. But at the same time the new business and its model and servicing the debt are specifically hand in glove approaches. It is in fact the only way the debt can be serviced responsibly, and once it is Pace has a decision. Sell the club for personal profit or remain and continue to work the business model. It’s that straightforward.

I do not understand the net spend argument at all. The whole purpose of this business plan - monetizing young athletes - is that you always have a healthy negative net spend
The comments about net spend were from what I could see more about it is the “net’ spend that is relevant (which in our case will often as you say be negative especially with our current model).
The context was also that it is completely irrelevant to say that we have spent more money than anyone in the championship on transfers if you are not also referencing the amount we received inwards from selling players….ie it’s the net spend that matters as without any sales very unlikely we would have spent much / anything

Jimscho
Posts: 815
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:34 pm
Been Liked: 404 times
Has Liked: 182 times
Location: Rawtenstall

Re: Nick Pope

Post by Jimscho » Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:09 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Mon Aug 15, 2022 1:48 pm
That's a very sus argument imo, whilst I like some of the signings, the swiftness and not sticking to just British based, you have to consider we're in a lower division than we have been for years which opens the pool up enormously, we've seen £70m in transfer fees come into the club.
Could you break down the 70m for me please?

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: Nick Pope

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Mon Aug 15, 2022 2:10 pm

Nobody gave a toss when we went up with a negative net spend under Dyche the first time :lol:

Post Reply