Except the previous landlords went bankrupt so it's not the same thing is it? I'm not in anyway in favour of Mike Ashley or his business tactics but just because something doesn't HAVE to be done doesn't mean it can't be.
And, to use your analogy, if you bought a failed business out of bankruptcy I bet there would be all sorts of things you'd seek to renegotiate from cost of materials, through service contracts via staffing and wage structure to selling pricing of goods/services and many others.
You can chose to honour, renew, enter discussions, make some proposals, or wade in with take it or leave it and eviction notices on day one, fully within rights to do the last but you have to expect people might think you're an arse. Can't imagine he gives a toss.
Can't imagine existing terms were that generous either tbh given the history of litigation but possible of course.
I think the playoff semifinal matches took a lot out of the dongs. Having half a dozen players, including the ‘keeper, on loan doesn’t help with continuity and team spirit either.
I have said this before, but the disappointment of losing that flat final is somewhat mitigated by being the team who burst the plastic balloon and condemned them to a season in the nether regions of L1 instead of the Champo.
Things seem to be going very wrong up there more than just results they’ve seen a collapse in attendances and the owners rumoured to be looking for an out.
Crikey! A collapse in attendances at MKD? How is that possible with all the committed, passionate, long-standing fans they built a massive stadium for? 🤔🤔🙄🙄🤣🤣😉😉
Thinking about that colossal waste of space that the massive MK stadium represents and, in line with my comment a few minutes ago on the Ainsworth/QPR thread, it occurs to me that Bournemouth have spent many years in the Championship and Premier League at a stadium with a capacity only a thousand or so larger than ours. It shouldn’t need too much of a tweak to our stadium and access to it to enable us to follow a similar route.
Bournemouth just got bought by the billionaire who owns the Vegas hockey franchise. Vegas are well run on the ice, but absolutely ruthless (players find out they have been traded on their wedding day, or when their keycard to the building no longer works, etc.).
It would clearly need one helluva tweak to the finances ! I’d forgotten about the original ( ? Russian property developer) who pumped millions into AFC Bournemouth. Thanks for all the clarifying comments, folks.
They're already in talks with a League One Club about players:
"We are in negotiations with a League One team in exclusivity and with a first division team in Belgium that would give us that little triangle that we could move players back and forth."
I think owners are not allowed to own a percentage in more than football club in the same country or league structure. So, I believe Foley couldn't be on the board of both Bournemouth and Wycombe, I assume this also means he cannot invest in Wycombe or any other club in our pyramid.
I assume this wouldn't stop them having an agreement on players moving between the clubs or perhaps first refusal both ways on player sales and releases.
Would need someone better informed than me to confirm.
As far as I can ascertain under the FA Premier League rules (similar rules are in place in the EFL), an owner of a football club or a director of a football club must adhere to the ‘fit and proper test’ and must sign a declaration that they comply with this test. The fit and proper test applies to all directors and individuals holding more than a 30% shareholding. Anyone who owns more than this shareholding in a FA Premier League football club would fall outside the remit of the fit and proper test and would be unable to own another club.
Therefore, in the example above Foley could take a 30% stake in a league One club with an agreement regarding player development etc.
EFL rules seem to forbid it without special permission, @Erroll_Sims . Rules 105 and 106 on associations between clubs and interests in more than one club.
I think clubs have started out in this direction before but it smells a bit if exclusivity and presumably payment are involved, also probably not ideal for the big clubs to limit themselves rather than find the best home for specific talents each time. I'm sure some have several prospects in the same position for example.
Comments
Burnham Grammar boy, isn’t he? Anyone here know him growing up?
Except the previous landlords went bankrupt so it's not the same thing is it? I'm not in anyway in favour of Mike Ashley or his business tactics but just because something doesn't HAVE to be done doesn't mean it can't be.
And, to use your analogy, if you bought a failed business out of bankruptcy I bet there would be all sorts of things you'd seek to renegotiate from cost of materials, through service contracts via staffing and wage structure to selling pricing of goods/services and many others.
You can chose to honour, renew, enter discussions, make some proposals, or wade in with take it or leave it and eviction notices on day one, fully within rights to do the last but you have to expect people might think you're an arse. Can't imagine he gives a toss.
Can't imagine existing terms were that generous either tbh given the history of litigation but possible of course.
I didn't say Ashley wasn't an arse. He's seen a situation develop and sized his opportunity to take advantage.
You're right that he won't give a flying fig what anyone thinks.
Franchise have sacked Liam Manning. Great to see them in turmoil.
Can see Manning doing well elsewhere.
Big turnover of players and over reliance on preferred style but it's almost inconceivable that they have done so badly in the last 6 months.
I think the playoff semifinal matches took a lot out of the dongs. Having half a dozen players, including the ‘keeper, on loan doesn’t help with continuity and team spirit either.
I have said this before, but the disappointment of losing that flat final is somewhat mitigated by being the team who burst the plastic balloon and condemned them to a season in the nether regions of L1 instead of the Champo.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/63361291
Manning sacked by the franchise.
Things seem to be going very wrong up there more than just results they’ve seen a collapse in attendances and the owners rumoured to be looking for an out.
Crikey! A collapse in attendances at MKD? How is that possible with all the committed, passionate, long-standing fans they built a massive stadium for? 🤔🤔🙄🙄🤣🤣😉😉
So if they can't find a new owner and go under, does this make them single use plastic?
Less of a liquidation, more taking the trash out.
Was last season Winklemans last roll of the dice.
Thinking about that colossal waste of space that the massive MK stadium represents and, in line with my comment a few minutes ago on the Ainsworth/QPR thread, it occurs to me that Bournemouth have spent many years in the Championship and Premier League at a stadium with a capacity only a thousand or so larger than ours. It shouldn’t need too much of a tweak to our stadium and access to it to enable us to follow a similar route.
Or is that the impossible dream? 🤔
Bournemouth have had substantial backers over the years. Thankfully we don't. Sustainability is our best hope amigo!!
And Bournemouth/Poole has a population of over 500,000 @micra.
It's the access/egress issue at Adams Park that is a core problem @micra. Hopefully one that can be solved or ameliorated.
Bournemouth just got bought by the billionaire who owns the Vegas hockey franchise. Vegas are well run on the ice, but absolutely ruthless (players find out they have been traded on their wedding day, or when their keycard to the building no longer works, etc.).
😮
It would clearly need one helluva tweak to the finances ! I’d forgotten about the original ( ? Russian property developer) who pumped millions into AFC Bournemouth. Thanks for all the clarifying comments, folks.
True, but can only squeeze 10,000 into the current stadium.
Suspect the new American billionaire owner will be looking to build a new stadium as well as splashing the cash on new players next month.
Bournemouth takeover: New owner Bill Foley 'a dictator' and 'needs to be captain of the ship' - BBC Sport
They're already in talks with a League One Club about players:
"We are in negotiations with a League One team in exclusivity and with a first division team in Belgium that would give us that little triangle that we could move players back and forth."
Rumour mill....could this be us.
Is that legal?
Foley has already been in touch with the Couhigs but it was just about the best place to get fireworks in the UK.
I think owners are not allowed to own a percentage in more than football club in the same country or league structure. So, I believe Foley couldn't be on the board of both Bournemouth and Wycombe, I assume this also means he cannot invest in Wycombe or any other club in our pyramid.
I assume this wouldn't stop them having an agreement on players moving between the clubs or perhaps first refusal both ways on player sales and releases.
Would need someone better informed than me to confirm.
As far as I can ascertain under the FA Premier League rules (similar rules are in place in the EFL), an owner of a football club or a director of a football club must adhere to the ‘fit and proper test’ and must sign a declaration that they comply with this test. The fit and proper test applies to all directors and individuals holding more than a 30% shareholding. Anyone who owns more than this shareholding in a FA Premier League football club would fall outside the remit of the fit and proper test and would be unable to own another club.
Therefore, in the example above Foley could take a 30% stake in a league One club with an agreement regarding player development etc.
EFL rules seem to forbid it without special permission, @Erroll_Sims . Rules 105 and 106 on associations between clubs and interests in more than one club.
I think clubs have started out in this direction before but it smells a bit if exclusivity and presumably payment are involved, also probably not ideal for the big clubs to limit themselves rather than find the best home for specific talents each time. I'm sure some have several prospects in the same position for example.
Paul Smyth with another goal today