Rich
Paul Adey
Go hard or go home
Posts: 6,691
|
Post by Rich on Sept 23, 2009 11:33:09 GMT
In the past few months i've discussed the situation (as being from Nottm you get questioned about it) with fans of, amongst others, Stoke, Liverpool, Altrincham, Bolton, Man Utd, Blackburn and Port Vale. The overriding comments are either 'it's all a bit of a joke' or 'it's destined to end in tears'. Obviously lots of other comments about Eriksson and his past activities as well! But yes my feeling is that a lot of other fans do feel it's a bit of a joke. Certainly there will be some jealousy, but then for my part, as a fan of Forest, why would I be jealous of Notts, we have the resources to spend what we need to on the players we need (the fact we are not scoring goals and are losing games is not down to a lack of resources - not sure what it's down to tbh!), we have a bright future and that would, for me anyway, not be impinged upon by what Notts do, if anything it would enhance it if we could have genuine derbies against them. What I will say is that clubs, especially those in the lower reaches, should have long term plans to be viable based on their own income generating ability. I have no issue if Munto are in it to invest and create the platform on which that self supporting structure can be achieved but no club should be run on the basis that it's funded by rich owners. That includes clubs like Man City. It's asking for trouble - the primary objective of any business should be to generate profit. Funnily enough it's that aspect which causes issues at many EIHL clubs, where they are hobbies for moderately rich owners, rather than businesses being run to maximise profit and then spend based on that profit. Manchester being a good example - not content with living within their means, because it meant they couldn't spend with the big boys at Panthers and Steelers, they went down to the EPL so that their owner could continue his dream of having a successful club. I'm afraid sport isn't just sport any more and these clubs need to be run as self sufficient businesses first, and once successful in that regard they can use that success to fund and support on ice/field success. Why is it a joke though? I dont understand that terminology. "Destined to end in tears"? Have those people actually looked into the situation? Do they know about the bankers banked investment guarentee in place? Do they know about the money being pumped into the academy? The amount of money being pumped in really isnt that much at this stage on players. £800k ish initial investment for Kasper and inflated wages on Sol. Its hardly the dream team some people are making out. Wigan and Fulham did it, are they jokes too? They spent more money on player fees. Its not comparable to Man City IMO as the motivation and plans are totally different
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Sept 23, 2009 11:59:43 GMT
Panthers may well share a venue with Forest. Don't be surprised if the new stadium goes down this route: www.stadiarena.com/As for Notts - has Sol seen through the hype? Rumour is 'promises weren't kept'. Lord only knows what is going on but I fear lifelong Notts fans are going to one day hate Munto and all those connected to them.
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Sept 23, 2009 12:22:28 GMT
The goings on at Meadow Lane reminded me of a scene from Slapshot: "Who Owns The Magpies? ?"
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Sept 23, 2009 13:53:29 GMT
In the past few months i've discussed the situation (as being from Nottm you get questioned about it) with fans of, amongst others, Stoke, Liverpool, Altrincham, Bolton, Man Utd, Blackburn and Port Vale. The overriding comments are either 'it's all a bit of a joke' or 'it's destined to end in tears'. Obviously lots of other comments about Eriksson and his past activities as well! But yes my feeling is that a lot of other fans do feel it's a bit of a joke. Certainly there will be some jealousy, but then for my part, as a fan of Forest, why would I be jealous of Notts, we have the resources to spend what we need to on the players we need (the fact we are not scoring goals and are losing games is not down to a lack of resources - not sure what it's down to tbh!), we have a bright future and that would, for me anyway, not be impinged upon by what Notts do, if anything it would enhance it if we could have genuine derbies against them. What I will say is that clubs, especially those in the lower reaches, should have long term plans to be viable based on their own income generating ability. I have no issue if Munto are in it to invest and create the platform on which that self supporting structure can be achieved but no club should be run on the basis that it's funded by rich owners. That includes clubs like Man City. It's asking for trouble - the primary objective of any business should be to generate profit. Funnily enough it's that aspect which causes issues at many EIHL clubs, where they are hobbies for moderately rich owners, rather than businesses being run to maximise profit and then spend based on that profit. Manchester being a good example - not content with living within their means, because it meant they couldn't spend with the big boys at Panthers and Steelers, they went down to the EPL so that their owner could continue his dream of having a successful club. I'm afraid sport isn't just sport any more and these clubs need to be run as self sufficient businesses first, and once successful in that regard they can use that success to fund and support on ice/field success. Why is it a joke though? I dont understand that terminology. "Destined to end in tears"? Have those people actually looked into the situation? Do they know about the bankers banked investment guarentee in place? Do they know about the money being pumped into the academy? I've heard of it. What is the guarantee?
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Sept 23, 2009 14:06:36 GMT
Why is it a joke though? I dont understand that terminology. "Destined to end in tears"? Have those people actually looked into the situation? Do they know about the bankers banked investment guarentee in place? Do they know about the money being pumped into the academy? I've heard of it. What is the guarantee? From the Telegraph: "The Trust asked its membership to vote on the takeover proposal and some 93 per cent approved, persuaded in part by a seven-figure bank guarantee from merchant bank First London, which brokered the UK end of the sale. 'We received an offer that we had never anticipated and what they presented was something fantastic for the club,' said Trust chairman Glenn Rollins. 'We saw a bank guarantee, which is as sound a commitment as any football club can have.'"
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Sept 23, 2009 14:28:09 GMT
A seven figure bank guarantee is anything up to £9,999,999.99. The fact that they put Campbell on a £10 million deal after already giving deals to Sven and Schmeichel should raise a few questions.
As for "First London" does anyone know who they actually are? There was plenty of debate when this first came out in the press.
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Sept 23, 2009 14:34:46 GMT
|
|
sunbeam
David Clarke
The Panthers don't do league titles. Not even Carlsberg can manage that!
Posts: 3,862
|
Post by sunbeam on Sept 23, 2009 15:40:55 GMT
A seven figure bank guarantee is anything up to £9,999,999.99. The fact that they put Campbell on a £10 million deal after already giving deals to Sven and Schmeichel should raise a few questions. A seven figure sum could be as little as £1,000,000. Kasper will eat that up on his own. As I understood it, Notts had a guarantee from Munto lasting 5 years. What I don't know are the details.
|
|
|
Post by pantherinmanc on Sept 23, 2009 20:03:23 GMT
My main question, which i'd really like to know the answer to: We know he's taken 4 weeks wages at 40k a week.... what was his signing on fee? Very good business by the lad, 1 game, even ad a modest S/O fee of 500k (which i'd doubt if it's anything below that) he's made 650k for ONE game of footy.
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Sept 23, 2009 21:56:26 GMT
My main question, which i'd really like to know the answer to: We know he's taken 4 weeks wages at 40k a week.... what was his signing on fee? Very good business by the lad, 1 game, even ad a modest S/O fee of 500k (which i'd doubt if it's anything below that) he's made 650k for ONE game of footy. There is no way on earth that he would have been allowed to keep his signing on fee. That would have been discussed whilst negotiating his release from his contract. The big question is, where does he go to now? It appears he cannot sign for a premiership team until January and will probably price himself out of a Championship side.
|
|
Dan
Forum Admin
Boss
Posts: 5,891
|
Post by Dan on Sept 24, 2009 1:22:32 GMT
How a tie-in with the most famous and well-supported professional sporting club in the city would somehow cheapen the Panthers. I'm not a Forest fan and neither I suspect are many other Panthers fans. In fact I know of quite a few Panthers fans who (gulp) come from Derby. They support Panthers because they see them as the East Midlands hockey team (much as some Brummies support Cov, Yorkshiremen support Shuff etc). By allying themselves with Forest not only would they cheapen the 'brand' (tieing in with a team from an unconnected sport is hardly the action of a team trying to show they want to be taken seriously in their ow right) but they'd also possibly lose some non-Forest fans of Panthers purely by association. Plus I'm predominatly a hockey fan, wtf has soccer got to do with it? You may have noticed that we have a fair few empty seats every week and obviously it'd be nice to fill them. There are far more Forest fans who go down to the hockey regularly than you'll give credit for (i, and my family are such) and i think you're putting too much thought into it. Where's the problem having a ticket tie-in on a double-header Saturday? Believe it or not but not all football fans are shaven-headed hooligans....
|
|
Dan
Forum Admin
Boss
Posts: 5,891
|
Post by Dan on Sept 24, 2009 1:24:15 GMT
I'm not denying there are many Panthers fans who are also Forest fans (my wife being one) but what has that got to do with anything? Ice hockey is not scoccer and as I've already said, any attempt by Panthers to tie-in with Forest would not only undermine all the work over the years the Panthers and their fans have done to get respect in their own right but it'd also no doubt be unpopular with those who have little interest in a scoccer team that had a bit of a run in the late 70`s and early 80`s or who have no real interest in scoccer at all. At the end of the day, who cares? The deal would clearly not be aimed at them whatsoever. It's the same as offering a cheap beer with a game ticket, not all of us drink but it'd still help. Leave the subtle bitterness and anti-Forest feeling at the door here. Would it help if we talked about a football tie-in rather than Forest in particular? I wouldn't care one bit if we tried to get in fans from County or Derby too. It's all about the future of the hockey club.
|
|
|
Post by pantherinmanc on Sept 24, 2009 10:04:38 GMT
Couple of excellent posts Giroux.
My personal favourite Saturdays are those where it's an afternoon at the CG followed by a 7pm face off at the NIC. There are a good number of Forest fans who then go on to Panthers - you see loads of Panthers shirts at the CG on 'double header' days. I actually think a tie in, with any club, would be a great idea. Especially if you offer 'packages' to certain games. Forest, County and Panthers all have a fair few spare seats to play with, why not use them. Especially for lesser games.
As you say, and it's the most important point in all of this, it's the future of the hockey club that matters, I would gladly have tie in's with Direby if it got more spectators in our building. Just as long as there is a clause in my season ticket agreement so they can't sit next to me ;-)
|
|