Surely Watkins would have no interest in joining Mansfield? If he's that good he will want to go up the leagues not just to another mid table League Two team?
Why is this madness Dev. If the extremely wealthy owner wants to spend his own money good luck to him. He did after all write off £1.2m owing to him last year to clear all the clubs debt so hardly a Sharkey.
It could be argued that he is making an investment in a reportedly very talented youngster.
Transfer fees of that level in Lg2 strike me as madness, although you are absolutely right that he is free to spend his money how he wants.
Shouldn't need repeating, but if the Mansfield owner wrote off substantial amounts owing to him by the club, he is indeed "doing a sharkey". Hayes wrote off all the debts due to him that were incurred during his period of ownership (something like £4m as I recall).
Ownership discussions can wait until the chairman of the trust calls his meeting (which following cup income may be able to wait a while, time will tell).
how has it gone up by 50k, now they didn't claim that prize money yesterday?
A team like Mansfield paying that is as ludicrous as that supposed fee we paid for Rendell!
Surely they'd be more subtle and go for higher priced wages for the better players in the league, maybe padding with a few "risks" and safe pairs of hands?
Dev get your facts right for once in your life. The Mansfield owner cleared ALL the clubs debts not just those accrued during his ownership. He has been a life long supporter of Mansfield saving them from administration, so nothing like chancer Hayes.
yep @rmjlondon , it's be great if a money man came in, perhaps told us not to worry about the money, and looked at securing our future by some sort of link up with another "big" sports club. Maybe with a move to a big stadium that'd we'd cough "definitely" fill one day in the future.
No downsides!
Steve Hayes did alot for this club, the players we had under Gorman were well above the level and that was down to 1 man, yes he left some debts but he also wrote off millions.
aaah...that sort of explains why a club insider like @rmjlondon always seems to be on a bit of a downer. Perhaps richie's been sidelined from the big decisions since the Trust took over? Having said that anyone who disagrees with me on this forum is a serious a***hole
Mooney, I am not an expert on Mansfield's owner - never really taken a lot of interest in that club - somehow one of the more forgettable clubs in the league for no obvious reason.
There does seem to be a misunderstanding amongst some (possibly including me) of Hayes tenure. My understanding is that
a) there were some debts in place at the start of his ownership - these remained post his exit
b) he funded significant cost excess over revenue during his tenure and always said don't worry about that spending, that was down to him - My understanding is that he was good to his word on that and that all these "debts" were written off on his exit
c) there were further debts incurred after his exit while contracts and structures left over from his tenure were amended (eg costs incurred with closing the youth academy) - he didn't fund those.
Could someone in the know confirm that understanding is correct
But he also attempted to move Wycombe to a 20,000 seater stadium and sell Adams Park which would likely have been a disaster for the club so those statements don't tell the whole picture.
@rmjlondon said:
Steve Hayes did alot for this club, the players we had under Gorman were well above the level and that was down to 1 man, yes he left some debts but he also wrote off millions.
I've held off judging you till now despite others always having a go.... But you're a complete muppet.
I see Mooney's post at 12.02 as misleading in that context therefore.
If I understand your first paragraph, Strongest, you are confirming that your understanding is Hayes left us with the same level of debt we had when he joined. He incurred in full the difference between cost and income during his ownership.
He got repaid from future sell -on clauses the debt that the club was in when he took over.
You are right, a judgement on whether that was fair or not is a judgement for all to make for themselves.
In that context, the Wasps profit or loss to WWFC during Hayes tenure was irrelevant, if there was a profit it reduced the amount Hayes himself incurred, if there was a loss it increased it. In that context he was right when he said "don't worry about it, its my money" it was!
Chris and you are right that no overall assessment of his reign can be on purely financial grounds.
Money lost on the stadium fiasco ultimately came out of his pocket, but you can argue whether there were longlasting intangible costs.
We did operate at level we couldn't afford now and it is arguable whether we would have survived as a league club without that cash. Having said that it is also arguable that we didn't get the level of success we should have given the cash investment.
The only way we could be "paying for it now" would be either a) that he should have incurred the loss arising from before his tenure and hence the club should have the benefit of the sell -on fees (mostly of players brought to the club during Hayes reign or b) that the club incurred costs after he left to transition to a more stable environment which is probably justified.
My view of Hayes is that I see his reign in shades of grey. I don't think the binary wholly negative view heard on these boards is justified. Nor do I see a wholly positive view as being justified. I believe my view is more in line with the Trust board and the supporters generally than the default view here (evidence the relatively warm reception given to him at trust meetings etc.)
Somehow we have got from talking about a obscenely large bid between two Lg2 clubs to a discussion about Steve hayes. I am going to drop this now.
I read your post as being the Mansfield chairman wrote off the money he spent while at the club, Hayes didn't. That would be misleading. If that was not your intention and I read it wrong, my apologies.
Comments
Surely Watkins would have no interest in joining Mansfield? If he's that good he will want to go up the leagues not just to another mid table League Two team?
Why is this madness Dev. If the extremely wealthy owner wants to spend his own money good luck to him. He did after all write off £1.2m owing to him last year to clear all the clubs debt so hardly a Sharkey.
It could be argued that he is making an investment in a reportedly very talented youngster.
Dev, aren't you in favour of a buyout of WWFC by a wealthy benefactor?
Transfer fees of that level in Lg2 strike me as madness, although you are absolutely right that he is free to spend his money how he wants.
Shouldn't need repeating, but if the Mansfield owner wrote off substantial amounts owing to him by the club, he is indeed "doing a sharkey". Hayes wrote off all the debts due to him that were incurred during his period of ownership (something like £4m as I recall).
Ownership discussions can wait until the chairman of the trust calls his meeting (which following cup income may be able to wait a while, time will tell).
Wasn't it 300k?
how has it gone up by 50k, now they didn't claim that prize money yesterday?
A team like Mansfield paying that is as ludicrous as that supposed fee we paid for Rendell!
Surely they'd be more subtle and go for higher priced wages for the better players in the league, maybe padding with a few "risks" and safe pairs of hands?
Dev get your facts right for once in your life. The Mansfield owner cleared ALL the clubs debts not just those accrued during his ownership. He has been a life long supporter of Mansfield saving them from administration, so nothing like chancer Hayes.
some serious arseholes on here, tbh we would love somebody like him at our club.
yep @rmjlondon , it's be great if a money man came in, perhaps told us not to worry about the money, and looked at securing our future by some sort of link up with another "big" sports club. Maybe with a move to a big stadium that'd we'd cough "definitely" fill one day in the future.
No downsides!
Steve Hayes did alot for this club, the players we had under Gorman were well above the level and that was down to 1 man, yes he left some debts but he also wrote off millions.
aaah...that sort of explains why a club insider like @rmjlondon always seems to be on a bit of a downer. Perhaps richie's been sidelined from the big decisions since the Trust took over? Having said that anyone who disagrees with me on this forum is a serious a***hole
Mooney, I am not an expert on Mansfield's owner - never really taken a lot of interest in that club - somehow one of the more forgettable clubs in the league for no obvious reason.
There does seem to be a misunderstanding amongst some (possibly including me) of Hayes tenure. My understanding is that
a) there were some debts in place at the start of his ownership - these remained post his exit
b) he funded significant cost excess over revenue during his tenure and always said don't worry about that spending, that was down to him - My understanding is that he was good to his word on that and that all these "debts" were written off on his exit
c) there were further debts incurred after his exit while contracts and structures left over from his tenure were amended (eg costs incurred with closing the youth academy) - he didn't fund those.
Could someone in the know confirm that understanding is correct
I also believe those statements to be true.
But he also attempted to move Wycombe to a 20,000 seater stadium and sell Adams Park which would likely have been a disaster for the club so those statements don't tell the whole picture.
I've held off judging you till now despite others always having a go.... But you're a complete muppet.
I see Mooney's post at 12.02 as misleading in that context therefore.
If I understand your first paragraph, Strongest, you are confirming that your understanding is Hayes left us with the same level of debt we had when he joined. He incurred in full the difference between cost and income during his ownership.
He got repaid from future sell -on clauses the debt that the club was in when he took over.
You are right, a judgement on whether that was fair or not is a judgement for all to make for themselves.
In that context, the Wasps profit or loss to WWFC during Hayes tenure was irrelevant, if there was a profit it reduced the amount Hayes himself incurred, if there was a loss it increased it. In that context he was right when he said "don't worry about it, its my money" it was!
Chris and you are right that no overall assessment of his reign can be on purely financial grounds.
Money lost on the stadium fiasco ultimately came out of his pocket, but you can argue whether there were longlasting intangible costs.
We did operate at level we couldn't afford now and it is arguable whether we would have survived as a league club without that cash. Having said that it is also arguable that we didn't get the level of success we should have given the cash investment.
The only way we could be "paying for it now" would be either a) that he should have incurred the loss arising from before his tenure and hence the club should have the benefit of the sell -on fees (mostly of players brought to the club during Hayes reign or b) that the club incurred costs after he left to transition to a more stable environment which is probably justified.
My view of Hayes is that I see his reign in shades of grey. I don't think the binary wholly negative view heard on these boards is justified. Nor do I see a wholly positive view as being justified. I believe my view is more in line with the Trust board and the supporters generally than the default view here (evidence the relatively warm reception given to him at trust meetings etc.)
Somehow we have got from talking about a obscenely large bid between two Lg2 clubs to a discussion about Steve hayes. I am going to drop this now.
Why was my 12.02 post misleading Dev?
I read your post as being the Mansfield chairman wrote off the money he spent while at the club, Hayes didn't. That would be misleading. If that was not your intention and I read it wrong, my apologies.
"He left some debts".
Biggest under statement ever about Hayes!