I don't think it's hugely controversial to say that they are not fans in the same way that we are fans is it?
Had the vote not gone their way would they ever have come to another game? I doubt it. We will all be supporters for the rest of our lives. So it is different.
I think they've done great things since they've got involved and I think they are a genuinely likeable family and long may their initial success continue. I'm excited to see what going to Wycombe games looks and feels like once they have out their vision in place, but when anyone with even the hint of a dissenting voice gets shut down so quickly it begins to look a bit cultlike
It's the cult-like aspect I'm particularly worried about as well. This year we're going to be getting, what, £6m in solidarity payments and £3m in broadcast revenue? Something crazy like that, any way. The Couhigs have already said that they'll be saving money to prepare for next season, they want to invest off field as well as on and that we're likely to be a yo-yo club (ie prepare for relegation).
Nothing wrong with any of that per se but if the vast majority of the money we get this season doesn't make it into the playing budget I want to know that the two Trust directors on the club board will be keeping an eagle eye on where it goes and how it's spent. I do not want to see any being paid as dividends to the Couhig family, though I would assume there's nothing to stop them doing that in principle. Fortunately one of the new Trust directors on the Club board has a background in banking, so I'm hopeful he'll know his way round a balance sheet.
It's not a case of not trusting the Couhigs, it's just a case of ensuring all necessary checks and balances are in place and working as they should be. Anyone who believes in good governance should want the same.
@aloysius - you are absolutely right about the need for not only the Trust but all fans to be vigilant about what happens to our club, after all in their own words the Couhigs are only the current custodians. However, let's not be naive about the fact that over time Rob Couhig has every right to expect a return on his investment, hence his constant emphasis on sustainability and financial probity. These drivers do not prevent the club investing in its infrastructure (thats why Pete C is always talking about cost benefit analysis) or more importantly investing in the playing side to deliver success on the field; though the latter is likely to be measured and sensible as there will not be the sort of budgets we see from some of the "bigger" Championship sides, no matter what the solidarity payments or commercial income are.
I think I’d be more worried if the vast majority of the money did go towards the playing budget, when it should be used ensuring the long-term future of the club.
I don't actually have a clue. I wonder if it is something as simple as ice not being the best surface to hand a trophy to someone if they are not already on skates. I don't know for sure, but it certainly makes the end of the hockey playoffs more satisfying!
I thought @Tom point was that he did not think the people running the club and the sponsors should have had such a prominent position on the tv coverage. I thought it was a bit churlish not sure that makes me a member of a cult dedicated to the Couhigs or poor governance of the club.
@micra I don't think there's a cult. But there's plenty of forelock tugging going on - your suggestion that it was "disrespectful" for Tom to express some mild resentment at Pete Couhig's prominence on TV and in celebrations being a prime example.
@aloysius Interesting stuff. On the question of a dividend, were that to happen, the Trust would also get a quarter of the total dividend, wouldn't it? That would presumably give it some of the wherewithal to fund further share purchase in proportion to its 25% share, when we start to make losses again and need to generate more cash. (Indeed, this might apply not just to dividends, but to any profit made while the Trust is a shareholder.)
Of course, that's very important because the Couhigs changed the terms of the deal put to Trust members prior to the sale of the 75%, so that they are not now counting their AP rent holiday towards the Trust contribution.
@micra beware of asking questions. I did not think the posts in support for the job they've done so far reached universal cultish praise others seem to think myself but I'm not sure what the benchmarks are.
A case of mistaken identity, I’m afraid @our_frank ! I didn’t say anything about being disrespectful. My only comment was the sardonic suggestion that his “I don’t mind Pete Couhig” remark was gracious and accommodating.
I’m afraid I’m too simple a soul to get my head round your second and third paragraphs. It’s a bit early for me.
@our_frank I think the contribution to the Trust from any dividend issued will be an important deciding factor in any Board deliberation. It would be tempting, I'm sure, if the Couhigs were to say (and this is purely a hypothetical) let's award £1m in dividends, shared £750k / £250k between us. On one hand it would guarantee the Trust retained its shareholding in the Club for another year. On the other, it would take at least £750k out of the fund for improving the Club either on or off the pitch (assuming the Trust's £250k was then reinvested in the Club). You could make an argument either way. I just hope if a scenario similar to this arises those arguments are made transparently.
If only the taciturn Darren MacAnthony was our owner he would never have had the bad taste to be at the "front and centre" of his club"s promotion celebrations!
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Thanks to @chairboyscentral for using my quote on his Twitter feed. Just wondering why you choose that medium to criticise rather than debate on here?
Useful bit of clickbait to grow the brand I guess.
Honestly think this is all a bit daft and perhaps the result of boredom brought about by a (concerning?) lack of action in the transfer rumour thread. Those less versed/passionate about all things Wycombe (including TV director and commentators) know three narratives - Bayo is large, Ainsworth wears cowboy boots and skint club got investment before being promoted. They cover all three. One of investors is shown entertaining sponsors. Uproar in the gasroom ensues. Hopefully news of someone being spotted in the vicinity of Cressex will allow us to move on soon
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Thanks to @chairboyscentral for using my quote on his Twitter feed. Just wondering why you choose that medium to criticise rather than debate on here?
Useful bit of clickbait to grow the brand I guess.
It's interesting that Righty, who spends quite a lot of posts niggling at CC, actually follows him on twitter!
Even more strange when previously he's moaned at a certain other poster constantly sniping at his posts, to a point where he said he would block said user, yet does the exact same sniping thing to CC.
@53cheese said:
Honestly think this is all a bit daft and perhaps the result of boredom brought about by a (concerning?) lack of action in the transfer rumour thread. Those less versed/passionate about all things Wycombe (including TV director and commentators) know three narratives - Bayo is large, Ainsworth wears cowboy boots and skint club got investment before being promoted. They cover all three. One of investors is shown entertaining sponsors. Uproar in the gasroom ensues. Hopefully news of someone being spotted in the vicinity of Cressex will allow us to move on soon
It's interesting what new angles fans will pick up to snipe about.
I thought there might be some comment made about the commentator on Sunday saying out budget was massively cut versus the previous season. Hence our promotion being even more amazing.
Truth of course is that the budget was cut but then instantly beefed up upon the Couhigs coming in.
Still a great achievement mind.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Thanks to @chairboyscentral for using my quote on his Twitter feed. Just wondering why you choose that medium to criticise rather than debate on here?
Useful bit of clickbait to grow the brand I guess.
It's interesting that Righty, who spends quite a lot of posts niggling at CC, actually follows him on twitter!
Even more strange when previously he's moaned at a certain other poster constantly sniping at his posts, to a point where he said he would block said user, yet does the exact same sniping thing to CC.
I'm not quite as deferential to @chairboyscentral as other on here but I certainly don't have any problem with him. Blocking @eric_plant has had a major boost on my mental health but I follow @chairboyscentral with a keen interest.
His statistical analysis and prolific posting record on hear and Twitter is worthy of note but I do sometimes question his conclusions when going from the stats to the actual pitch. I don't get his 'Bloomfield out' narrative, his love for Rolando Aarons or this McCarthy in to midfield theory and I question these as I assume they are stats based.
He does seem a bit sensitive on questions though. I think its a generational thing. I have never watched football and thought of stats (not like I do NFL) and my lack of acceptance of how modern football has outlawed tackling and added 20 new formations causes more questions.
I don't want to cause him any offence and I am sorry as it appears he has withdrawn from debate and moved to another platform to criticise. Hopefully, based on the above he can take my questions and comments on face value rather than part of a non existent agenda.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
Thanks to @chairboyscentral for using my quote on his Twitter feed. Just wondering why you choose that medium to criticise rather than debate on here?
Useful bit of clickbait to grow the brand I guess.
It's interesting that Righty, who spends quite a lot of posts niggling at CC, actually follows him on twitter!
Even more strange when previously he's moaned at a certain other poster constantly sniping at his posts, to a point where he said he would block said user, yet does the exact same sniping thing to CC.
I'm not quite as deferential to @chairboyscentral as other on here but I certainly don't have any problem with him. Blocking @eric_plant has had a major boost on my mental health but I follow @chairboyscentral with a keen interest.
His statistical analysis and prolific posting record on hear and Twitter is worthy of note but I do sometimes question his conclusions when going from the stats to the actual pitch. I don't get his 'Bloomfield out' narrative, his love for Rolando Aarons or this McCarthy in to midfield theory and I question these as I assume they are stats based.
He does seem a bit sensitive on questions though. I think its a generational thing. I have never watched football and thought of stats (not like I do NFL) and my lack of acceptance of how modern football has outlawed tackling and added 20 new formations causes more questions.
I don't want to cause him any offence and I am sorry as it appears he has withdrawn from debate and moved to another platform to criticise. Hopefully, based on the above he can take my questions and comments on face value rather than part of a non existent agenda.
Lets see what happens.
Fair play on that response. Sounds a reasonable angle and perhaps i overread into your comments to him at times.
Well it seems like I started a bit of debate – which isnt a bad thing I suppose. To clarify my original point, I find it grating that Pete and Co, who’s interest in the club spans just 1 year is ‘front and centre’ of celebrations as well as club media. Perhaps it’s just me, but the kit ‘reveal’ was again about him being ‘front and centre’ of things (knowing that Sky would, at some point, cut to him in the stands). Like everyone, I am frustrated at not being able to attend games, and perhaps its jealously coming through – but one of the only people to witness some of our greatest games is a bloke that joined the club a year ago as a result of his rich uncle gets to watch them. That doesn’t seem particularly ‘fair’ (for want of a better word) to me, and I think he could tone things down a bit and appear less fame hungry. Its not about him.
I don’t doubt the benefits they have brought to the club, but the idea they are beyond reproach is silly. I am sure once again my argument will get picked apart, and perhaps its could have been worded better, or written in a more eloquent way - but it is what it is.
I have come in for quite a bit of criticism here for this, and even got a mention on the @chairboyscentral tweet (fame at long last!), however I hope most people can have a reasonable debate about things. If everyone had the same opinion, it would be very boring.
And no – I am not the drummer
Comments
@Shev Out of interest, why is it different in ice hockey?
I don't think it's hugely controversial to say that they are not fans in the same way that we are fans is it?
Had the vote not gone their way would they ever have come to another game? I doubt it. We will all be supporters for the rest of our lives. So it is different.
I think they've done great things since they've got involved and I think they are a genuinely likeable family and long may their initial success continue. I'm excited to see what going to Wycombe games looks and feels like once they have out their vision in place, but when anyone with even the hint of a dissenting voice gets shut down so quickly it begins to look a bit cultlike
It's the cult-like aspect I'm particularly worried about as well. This year we're going to be getting, what, £6m in solidarity payments and £3m in broadcast revenue? Something crazy like that, any way. The Couhigs have already said that they'll be saving money to prepare for next season, they want to invest off field as well as on and that we're likely to be a yo-yo club (ie prepare for relegation).
Nothing wrong with any of that per se but if the vast majority of the money we get this season doesn't make it into the playing budget I want to know that the two Trust directors on the club board will be keeping an eagle eye on where it goes and how it's spent. I do not want to see any being paid as dividends to the Couhig family, though I would assume there's nothing to stop them doing that in principle. Fortunately one of the new Trust directors on the Club board has a background in banking, so I'm hopeful he'll know his way round a balance sheet.
It's not a case of not trusting the Couhigs, it's just a case of ensuring all necessary checks and balances are in place and working as they should be. Anyone who believes in good governance should want the same.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/sep/07/green-bay-packers-fan-owned-nfl-football
Found this interesting
@aloysius - you are absolutely right about the need for not only the Trust but all fans to be vigilant about what happens to our club, after all in their own words the Couhigs are only the current custodians. However, let's not be naive about the fact that over time Rob Couhig has every right to expect a return on his investment, hence his constant emphasis on sustainability and financial probity. These drivers do not prevent the club investing in its infrastructure (thats why Pete C is always talking about cost benefit analysis) or more importantly investing in the playing side to deliver success on the field; though the latter is likely to be measured and sensible as there will not be the sort of budgets we see from some of the "bigger" Championship sides, no matter what the solidarity payments or commercial income are.
Is the Gasroom a cult now? This Is all so fast moving.
I think I’d be more worried if the vast majority of the money did go towards the playing budget, when it should be used ensuring the long-term future of the club.
I don't actually have a clue. I wonder if it is something as simple as ice not being the best surface to hand a trophy to someone if they are not already on skates. I don't know for sure, but it certainly makes the end of the hockey playoffs more satisfying!
There's definitely been one or two cults commenting on here over the years.
So having a polite disagreement with someone moaning about Pete Couhig getting some TV time makes you part of a cult?
Thanks for clearing that one up.
Thanks to @chairboyscentral for using my quote on his Twitter feed. Just wondering why you choose that medium to criticise rather than debate on here?
I thought @Tom point was that he did not think the people running the club and the sponsors should have had such a prominent position on the tv coverage. I thought it was a bit churlish not sure that makes me a member of a cult dedicated to the Couhigs or poor governance of the club.
Surely the cult aspect was the preponderance of Couhig worship rather than criticism.
Think I may have missed the ‘or’ in your last sentence @Wendoverman. Perhaps someone else could explain the nature of the implied cult.
@micra I don't think there's a cult. But there's plenty of forelock tugging going on - your suggestion that it was "disrespectful" for Tom to express some mild resentment at Pete Couhig's prominence on TV and in celebrations being a prime example.
@aloysius Interesting stuff. On the question of a dividend, were that to happen, the Trust would also get a quarter of the total dividend, wouldn't it? That would presumably give it some of the wherewithal to fund further share purchase in proportion to its 25% share, when we start to make losses again and need to generate more cash. (Indeed, this might apply not just to dividends, but to any profit made while the Trust is a shareholder.)
Of course, that's very important because the Couhigs changed the terms of the deal put to Trust members prior to the sale of the 75%, so that they are not now counting their AP rent holiday towards the Trust contribution.
@micra beware of asking questions. I did not think the posts in support for the job they've done so far reached universal cultish praise others seem to think myself but I'm not sure what the benchmarks are.
A case of mistaken identity, I’m afraid @our_frank ! I didn’t say anything about being disrespectful. My only comment was the sardonic suggestion that his “I don’t mind Pete Couhig” remark was gracious and accommodating.
I’m afraid I’m too simple a soul to get my head round your second and third paragraphs. It’s a bit early for me.
@our_frank I think the contribution to the Trust from any dividend issued will be an important deciding factor in any Board deliberation. It would be tempting, I'm sure, if the Couhigs were to say (and this is purely a hypothetical) let's award £1m in dividends, shared £750k / £250k between us. On one hand it would guarantee the Trust retained its shareholding in the Club for another year. On the other, it would take at least £750k out of the fund for improving the Club either on or off the pitch (assuming the Trust's £250k was then reinvested in the Club). You could make an argument either way. I just hope if a scenario similar to this arises those arguments are made transparently.
If only the taciturn Darren MacAnthony was our owner he would never have had the bad taste to be at the "front and centre" of his club"s promotion celebrations!
Where has all this talk of the Couhigs taking huge dividends out of the club come from?
I think i preferred the moans about Pete having the cheek of looking pleased at the team he has put his life on hold to support doing well.
Beware of forelock tugging...too much of it and you have to wear glasses.
Useful bit of clickbait to grow the brand I guess.
Honestly think this is all a bit daft and perhaps the result of boredom brought about by a (concerning?) lack of action in the transfer rumour thread. Those less versed/passionate about all things Wycombe (including TV director and commentators) know three narratives - Bayo is large, Ainsworth wears cowboy boots and skint club got investment before being promoted. They cover all three. One of investors is shown entertaining sponsors. Uproar in the gasroom ensues. Hopefully news of someone being spotted in the vicinity of Cressex will allow us to move on soon
It's interesting that Righty, who spends quite a lot of posts niggling at CC, actually follows him on twitter!
Even more strange when previously he's moaned at a certain other poster constantly sniping at his posts, to a point where he said he would block said user, yet does the exact same sniping thing to CC.
It's interesting what new angles fans will pick up to snipe about.
I thought there might be some comment made about the commentator on Sunday saying out budget was massively cut versus the previous season. Hence our promotion being even more amazing.
Truth of course is that the budget was cut but then instantly beefed up upon the Couhigs coming in.
Still a great achievement mind.
Some of us haven't a forelock to tug!
Actually @53cheese , Ainsworth wore a Chelsea boot on Sunday, please keep up!!??
I'm not quite as deferential to @chairboyscentral as other on here but I certainly don't have any problem with him. Blocking @eric_plant has had a major boost on my mental health but I follow @chairboyscentral with a keen interest.
His statistical analysis and prolific posting record on hear and Twitter is worthy of note but I do sometimes question his conclusions when going from the stats to the actual pitch. I don't get his 'Bloomfield out' narrative, his love for Rolando Aarons or this McCarthy in to midfield theory and I question these as I assume they are stats based.
He does seem a bit sensitive on questions though. I think its a generational thing. I have never watched football and thought of stats (not like I do NFL) and my lack of acceptance of how modern football has outlawed tackling and added 20 new formations causes more questions.
I don't want to cause him any offence and I am sorry as it appears he has withdrawn from debate and moved to another platform to criticise. Hopefully, based on the above he can take my questions and comments on face value rather than part of a non existent agenda.
Lets see what happens.
Fair play on that response. Sounds a reasonable angle and perhaps i overread into your comments to him at times.
As we all were then!
Well it seems like I started a bit of debate – which isnt a bad thing I suppose. To clarify my original point, I find it grating that Pete and Co, who’s interest in the club spans just 1 year is ‘front and centre’ of celebrations as well as club media. Perhaps it’s just me, but the kit ‘reveal’ was again about him being ‘front and centre’ of things (knowing that Sky would, at some point, cut to him in the stands). Like everyone, I am frustrated at not being able to attend games, and perhaps its jealously coming through – but one of the only people to witness some of our greatest games is a bloke that joined the club a year ago as a result of his rich uncle gets to watch them. That doesn’t seem particularly ‘fair’ (for want of a better word) to me, and I think he could tone things down a bit and appear less fame hungry. Its not about him.
I don’t doubt the benefits they have brought to the club, but the idea they are beyond reproach is silly. I am sure once again my argument will get picked apart, and perhaps its could have been worded better, or written in a more eloquent way - but it is what it is.
I have come in for quite a bit of criticism here for this, and even got a mention on the @chairboyscentral tweet (fame at long last!), however I hope most people can have a reasonable debate about things. If everyone had the same opinion, it would be very boring.
And no – I am not the drummer