The Transfer Pull of Dyche

[boatshed bill]

I think it would take a special kind of intransigence about Dyche to think that the summer we spent £1 million in transfer fees as a Premier League club was anything other than Garlick's fault.

Perhaps.
But i find it hard to believe that the chairman who was instrumental in the funding of the redevelopment at Gawthorpe arbitrarily changed into a total miser.

[daveisaclaret]

Perhaps.
But i find it hard to believe that the chairman who was instrumental in the funding of the redevelopment at Gawthorpe arbitrarily changed into a total miser.

Are you aware of how he sold the club?

[BillyIngham'sShorts]

I “liked” this post as I fully agree with the sentiment but, on a point of pedantry, I’d be very surprised if “at least half” of the population of Merseyside support Everton. I’d imagine the red “half” of Merseyside is slightly bigger, and that’s not even taking into account the fans of Tranmere etc, or the Merseysiders who don’t follow football at all.

That said, not all Everton fans come from Merseyside, so they probably have a fan base of more than 750k anyway, which makes my entire post a bit pointless, really

Fair point but having worked in Liverpool for many years I think Evertonians are in majority, maybe due to catholic connection and maybe as they were bigger club till 60s. Most north wales support I find is for Liverpool and further afield eg lancs and Cheshire

[boatshed bill]

Are you aware of how he sold the club?

His club?

[Chester Perry]

Are you aware of how he sold the club?

miser
[ˈmʌɪzə]
NOUN
a person who hoards wealth and spends as little money as possible:

If you look carefully into Garlick's time at the club, he is is still a board member and possibly the 6th largest shareholder in it, you will see that he not only invested a considerable portion of his own wealth (at the time into it) the majority on new shares (so money went into the club not the pockets of others (including the now elsewhere much lauded debt for equity swap tactic) the model that defined the Barry Kilby era which ended with the ALK takeover) and repeatedly invested the clubs monies in its development in a way that would still be regarded as sustainable now perhaps more so if you look at the ambitions of many who contributed to the fan led review and made their way to it's final recommendations.

Did Garlick's actions contribute to the takeover methodology?
clearly yes they did and as a result he has profited substantially from his 14 year tenure at the club in one form or another.

Would Garlick have liked to have managed recruitment in the way we are now seeing?
he seemed to be significantly more risk averse than Pace and co but was developing a model not that dissimilar just at a more organic rate and meeting some resistance from Dyche who had the power of veto, just like Pace. We now have a manager much more accepting of the approach, partly, I believe, because it meets his own needs.

It would be extremely difficult to successfully argue that Garlick came into the club with the intent to make himself considerably richer from it's sale down the line, there is no such difficulty doing so with Pace and co.

Garlick's lasting legacy will be the fiscal discipline exercised by the club - it was that, which was so hugely attractive to ALK and is something I believe they will continue, possibly even more stringently than we have seen previously seen just with a different model.

[daveisaclaret]

I haven't got an issue with how Garlick sold the club. Either he or Dyche had to go, and I was in the camp that felt it had to be Garlick.

The only viable bidder was ALK and they were only able to take over with an LBO. That meant having lots of money in the bank and that meant stopping committing to even slightly significant transfer fees.

It is therefore silly and wrong to think we stopped signing players because of Dyche (who had a superb transfer record here, and who if we believe rumours refused to sell Tarkowski because he didn't think he would have the funding to sign a replacement) and not because Garlick.

[Chester Perry]

I haven't got an issue with how Garlick sold the club. Either he or Dyche had to go, and I was in the camp that felt it had to be Garlick.

The only viable bidder was ALK and they were only able to take over with an LBO. That meant having lots of money in the bank and that meant stopping committing to even slightly significant transfer fees.

It is therefore silly and wrong to think we stopped signing players because of Dyche (who had a superb transfer record here, and who if we believe rumours refused to sell Tarkowski because he didn't think he would have the funding to sign a replacement) and not because Garlick.

On the Tarkowski point I find an interesting correlation of the summer 2021 transfer window closing followed by Dyche signing a new deal at the club that removed his right of veto

I agree that overall Dyche had a great transfer record, but also point to the era when I have long argued that stalled the club: partly because the players signed did not breakthrough to be regular starters, thereby facilitating more of those profitable sales of established players; partly because the cost of the players we had became so high in regards to revenues; and partly because we were still investing capital heavily in 'work environment, for the players and football staff (which Kompany is benefitting from) and not in revenue growth areas (which ALK have been keen to highlight as an opportunity for themselves).

We were moving forward as a club all the way just not necessarily at the speed required to keep everyone happy or to maintain parity/move ahead of our competitors in the Premier League, and that is more a reflection of the clubs place in the football firmament (as we will no doubt see again in the near future) not a criticism of anyone.

[No Ney Never]

So apart from never taking a penny in salary, ran a debt free self financing football club, built a great training facility, filled in two of the corners, improved the experience for those who have disabilities, sold the club to someone who could take it forward, what has Mike Garlic ever done for BFC?

[Chester Perry]

So apart from never taking a penny in salary, ran a debt free self financing football club, built a great training facility, filled in two of the corners, improved the experience for those who have disabilities, sold the club to someone who could take it forward, what has Mike Garlic ever done for BFC?

It is worth pointing out that:
- the disabled facilities were a legal requirement (and do not fulfil the true letter of that requirement however much they are like and allowed)
- the club only truly became debt free in 2019
- it was self financing from the summer of 2014 (that includes the factoring deal that ended in 2019)

A pairing of good husbandry (the fiscal discipline) and good fortune (the Dyche impact) saw that those latter two were achieved during the tenure of Garlick (please, he has earned the right to have his name spelt correctly).

When he took control, first shared with John Banaszkiewicz then on his own. the club had plenty of debt (record levels of it by 2012) though nothing like that we have recently experienced (of course the revenues and starting points were somewhat different too).

[No Ney Never]

It is worth pointing out that:
- the disabled facilities were a legal requirement (and do not fulfil the true letter of that requirement however much they are like and allowed)
- the club only truly became debt free in 2019
- it was self financing from the summer of 2014 (that includes the factoring deal that ended in 2019)

A pairing of good husbandry (the fiscal discipline) and good fortune (the Dyche impact) saw that those latter two were achieved during the tenure of Garlick (please, he has earned the right to have his name spelt correctly).

When he took control, first shared with John Banaszkiewicz then on his own. the club had plenty of debt (record levels of it by 2012) though nothing like that we have recently experienced (of course the revenues and starting points were somewhat different too).

Basically, as a Burnley fan who was lucky to also become chairman, he has done what he thought was in the best interest of BFC.
Not saying it was all perfect, nothing is when we look in hindsight, but he got more right than wrong. Many a high level business person will tell you, you won't get every decision right, as long as you hit around the 90% mark, you're doing OK.

[No Ney Never]

And as far as the disabled facilities are concerned, he achieved compliance through actions.