New York Yankees owners target Notts County
Looks like Notts county might be purchased by the New York Yankees, after Hayes would you take this deal for wycombe?
Poll not found
0
Looks like Notts county might be purchased by the New York Yankees, after Hayes would you take this deal for wycombe?
Comments
As a Nottingham boy originally and having seen County's travails over the past few years I would imagine it's a good deal for them. It's horses for courses really. Might be a good idea if the investment got us to the Premier League...if that's what people want.
Surprising that Dev hasn't commented on this yet!
Given County's travails over the past few years, why would you think it's a good deal for them?
They nearly went out of business and then had a bunch of loonies for a while...then neearly went out of business again. I would imagine they would welcome stability and investment from an established sporting business. Unless they want thm to groundshare with the Nottingham Robin Hoods or move Meadow Lane to Noo York of course...we cannot all be supporter owned fantastically run clubs thy knows.
Actually, we could all be supporter owned clubs. If everyone did it, it would be a much more sustainable model,
I think that would have serious consequences in terms of the quality of players that English football could attract, unless we are talking all clubs worldwide - which would seem to require action from FIFA that is so far from their current state that it might as well be inconceivable.
Something, something the German league. Fair enough, but I don't think you'd get the majority of English football fans to go with you.
Interesting to see how much longer we last as a 100% fan owned club. I'm not against the model but hard to sustain if we want to progress I think.
I'm not suggesting we ban investors Chris, or scale back the entire commercialisation of football. I just think they should not be allowed to take soul/sole ownership of a club.
As you say, if England was the only country to enforce this, we would end up with a pyramid probably worse than France's within a couple of decades.
Worth reading up on the Chesterfield AGM tonight. Chairman has resigned with immediate effect, no other Directors knew. The chairman owns the ground and has put several million into the club. Not sure where they go from here but if he wants repaying soon there is a fair chance they could be in administration by the time we go there for our FA Cup tie.
Notts County seem to have had a succession of apparently wealthy owners / consortiums involved with them in recent years. It doesn't seem to have done them a lot of good. It's probably a fair assumption that this'll be more of the same.
@fromtheside I see no reason why WWFC cannot become a Club which remains supporter owned. We may never reach the Championship but there are enough clubs around with rich "Investors" who also may never reach the Championship. We have remained in the Football despite some dreadful financial mismanagement following our 2001 adventure in the FA Cup. We have had some exciting and hair-raising experiences since we became a supporters club again in 2012. The Ibe funds will in the long term be beneficial as they will clear our major creditors. TV money is the major problem in the English game. It has made a clear distinction between the "big Clubs" and the little Clubs. I am happy to support my local club, albeit a "little club" , we will have good and bad times, but it will always be OUR CLUB.
Great post
I would love the club to continue to be supporter owned (genuinely) but I do have concerns when we continue to (apparently) have money troubles despite the sale of Ingram and the revenue from the Aston Villa games last year. What would have happened if we hadn't had these additional sources of income?
Hopefully the Ibe money has made / will make life a bit simpler - I guess we'll be finding out a bit more on that topic fairly soon.
The narrative of being poor suits lots of people at Wycombe Wanderers.
And it's almost certainly true.
It's all relative isn't it. I'm sure every club in our league is struggling for cash and those with private ownership are just going to the owners cheque book more than those who aren't. I'd say we are now making smaller losses than most clubs in our league.
Hopefully so - we need to be sustainable since we don't have an owner's resources to fall back on. But the amount of loss isn't really relevant if the point you're making is to question whether we have a relatively small budget.
Why don't you actually just read what I've posted rather than try to put your own spin on it? As a moderator I would expect better from you.
The amount of the loss is absolutely relevant. As soon as the owner leaves the club the club are saddled with it. It's happened to us and is a very real danger to Chesterfield at the moment.
Or playing budget leaves us living within our means. The debate on whether this is actually 'relatively small' has been done to death so for me warrants no more comment.
Ha I'm glad you have high expectations of me.
Who does the narrative of the club being poor suit at Wycombe Wanderers and why?
Think this subject has been done to death @Chris
Ainsworth is a better manager judged against a bottom of the league budget
Howard is a more effective leader if you assume he has no spare cash to do anything
For me just look at our 1-11 on Saturday and tell me that is a bottom of the league playing budget. I know we have a smaller squad and no youth team but I think this is how the budget becomes one of the smallest. We are more than competitive on the pitch luck on injuries depending. Hayes, Bayo, JJ and Thommo aren't low budget signings.
So your point was about the budget then? No worries, apology accepted.
And in general I agree with you. It's all speculation of course, but I'd have thought the wages of our first eleven were vaguely comparable with a mid-table side. Because we have a smaller squad our overall budget is lower than most other teams; and because of that we feel the impact of injuries and suspensions more than other teams who have more cover.
You bought up the budget @Chris . Please stop your spinning of my words.
I don't think you have any chance of an apology and I'd actually go as far as saying you are far from worthy of a position of administrator on this site. That's a shame.
You are of course welcome to your opinion.
You raised the issue of the budget with your comment The narrative of being poor suits lots of people at Wycombe Wanderers. even if you didn't say the word budget. This is clear from your answer above when I asked what you meant by that comment. If there is 'spin' here it's not from me.
Ok. Thanks for telling me what I meant with my posts. It wasn't what you said but I suppose if you read it through pre conceived ideas you'll never really progress the debate. Think we've proven that. Lucky the ignore option is available isn't it.
I asked you what you meant so I could be clear and your response was all about the budget. If you meant something different you've got a funny way of expressing it.
Game, set and match the Moderator.
We still don't know who Rigjty has in mind, though, when he says poverty "suits" them. All we know is that there are "lots of" them.
I'm guessing points scoring is more important than finding out though @micra .
You name an employee at Wycombe Wanderers and the current narrative helps them out in my opinion. But you're not really bothered so I'll stop lengthening a thread that is not really about anything other than pendantry.
Sorry, I'm not normally one for pendantry but I couldn't resist.