[quote author=Molbystwin link=topic=36048.msg950872#msg950872 date=1253912223]
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=36048.msg950863#msg950863 date=1253911456]
[quote author=Molbystwin link=topic=36048.msg950841#msg950841 date=1253909872]
As for impotent rage .... well thats as much the fault of SoS ineptitude as anybodies in particular, but to direct fire on the people who at least are trying to do something is a real shame IMO, i would take anyone of them super scouse "get on this la" whopper comrades over them two greedy liars any fucking day.... at least you'd know it means something too them. I don't see why any of us should be looking down our noses at Newcastle fans.... especially when we could easily end up like Leeds.
[/quote]
I'd take the crass lies of two capitalists over the vague diffuse idealism of naive idealists, any day, if that was the choice. One is predictable in it's amoral calculus, the other is personality driven.
Let's take your position though, you spit on the face of one of the owners, where do we go from here?
They are already well aware that they are hated, but lets say in some bizarre poetic way, this last act prompts them to sell, they will be selling debt as well, whoever buys that debt, if they have larger cash resources, actually has less motivation to pay it off, though perhaps would refinance it. Sure, someone could come in and do a Chelsea or Man City, but its unlikely, since the value of the asset is much higher in the first place, and has far less potential.
Perhaps a stadium would actually get built, but you are trusting these men that you hate, that you want out, to bring in replacements. If its self evident that they are profit motivated, why would their replacements not be built around H&G maximizing profit in a sale, why would these replacements neccesarily then represent an improvement?
You've got no assurance of that, because you don't own the club, they do.
Again, what's the end game here? SoS pursuade two capitalists who are weighing up longer term development vs shorter term gain, to sell at below their valuation, to an owner that checks a variety of boxes many of which are diametrically opposed to the way acquisitions are made? It's absurd.
None of that will happen, it just destabilizes the club, makes LFC look radicalized, generates horrible press, and damages commercial interests.
The football owners that SoS want simply don't exist in most places anymore. The profit motive runs football, with these or other owners, its a massive business, the ship has sailed. There's every reason not to like that, and there are particular reasons to feel that H&G have done a particularly poor job, but the job of an organization like SoS is to refine their anger at those points which are actionable, and specific, not generate some diffuse rage and demonize people.
[/quote]
Thats an excellent post farky, truly, but its not quite the whole picture. It's not absurd if own potential new owners have enough capital to invest to actually increase the value of the club, this i would suggest is possible if and only if they could buy the club without heavily leveraging it and then borrow the required capital for a new stadium. Any owner who could do that would still amke a profit for themselves when they sold and also not leave the club in the shit. I had a bizarre conversation with Squiggs the other day when he seemed to suggest that our current financial would be OK if we had a stadium....and then i pointed out we didnt and it all got a bit weird.
Basically we need a GnH who can actually walk the walk, i'd suggest that they are still out there.... or at least i hope they are cos otherwise we aint going anywhere fast.
It is certainly a gamble but then so is our current position is it not?
[/quote]
Yea, but the men you'd be willing to sacrifice your normal ethics for out of disgust, are the ones making the choice of who gets the club, assuming they were somehow forced out. They will be motivated by their best interest, not how the takeover is financed, and certainly not how they intend to pay for a new stadium. If you don't trust them now, when their financial success is tied to the development of the club, why would you trust them when forced out by actions detrimental to short term interests?
[quote author=Farkmaster link=topic=36048.msg950863#msg950863 date=1253911456]
[quote author=Molbystwin link=topic=36048.msg950841#msg950841 date=1253909872]
As for impotent rage .... well thats as much the fault of SoS ineptitude as anybodies in particular, but to direct fire on the people who at least are trying to do something is a real shame IMO, i would take anyone of them super scouse "get on this la" whopper comrades over them two greedy liars any fucking day.... at least you'd know it means something too them. I don't see why any of us should be looking down our noses at Newcastle fans.... especially when we could easily end up like Leeds.
[/quote]
I'd take the crass lies of two capitalists over the vague diffuse idealism of naive idealists, any day, if that was the choice. One is predictable in it's amoral calculus, the other is personality driven.
Let's take your position though, you spit on the face of one of the owners, where do we go from here?
They are already well aware that they are hated, but lets say in some bizarre poetic way, this last act prompts them to sell, they will be selling debt as well, whoever buys that debt, if they have larger cash resources, actually has less motivation to pay it off, though perhaps would refinance it. Sure, someone could come in and do a Chelsea or Man City, but its unlikely, since the value of the asset is much higher in the first place, and has far less potential.
Perhaps a stadium would actually get built, but you are trusting these men that you hate, that you want out, to bring in replacements. If its self evident that they are profit motivated, why would their replacements not be built around H&G maximizing profit in a sale, why would these replacements neccesarily then represent an improvement?
You've got no assurance of that, because you don't own the club, they do.
Again, what's the end game here? SoS pursuade two capitalists who are weighing up longer term development vs shorter term gain, to sell at below their valuation, to an owner that checks a variety of boxes many of which are diametrically opposed to the way acquisitions are made? It's absurd.
None of that will happen, it just destabilizes the club, makes LFC look radicalized, generates horrible press, and damages commercial interests.
The football owners that SoS want simply don't exist in most places anymore. The profit motive runs football, with these or other owners, its a massive business, the ship has sailed. There's every reason not to like that, and there are particular reasons to feel that H&G have done a particularly poor job, but the job of an organization like SoS is to refine their anger at those points which are actionable, and specific, not generate some diffuse rage and demonize people.
[/quote]
Thats an excellent post farky, truly, but its not quite the whole picture. It's not absurd if own potential new owners have enough capital to invest to actually increase the value of the club, this i would suggest is possible if and only if they could buy the club without heavily leveraging it and then borrow the required capital for a new stadium. Any owner who could do that would still amke a profit for themselves when they sold and also not leave the club in the shit. I had a bizarre conversation with Squiggs the other day when he seemed to suggest that our current financial would be OK if we had a stadium....and then i pointed out we didnt and it all got a bit weird.
Basically we need a GnH who can actually walk the walk, i'd suggest that they are still out there.... or at least i hope they are cos otherwise we aint going anywhere fast.
It is certainly a gamble but then so is our current position is it not?
[/quote]
Yea, but the men you'd be willing to sacrifice your normal ethics for out of disgust, are the ones making the choice of who gets the club, assuming they were somehow forced out. They will be motivated by their best interest, not how the takeover is financed, and certainly not how they intend to pay for a new stadium. If you don't trust them now, when their financial success is tied to the development of the club, why would you trust them when forced out by actions detrimental to short term interests?
