Whiskyman wrote:A simple question really which I'm prompted to ask by some of the threads and comments I've seen here. So just for a bit of fun.
I gone for option one. They might have their faults but I'm sure we would find plenty to moan about with the other options.
You can never be 100% sure, but with these you feel you are part of the club and they are not just taking the club forward but us along with it. It might be their business first, but you feel they care.
Any other option would make the club feel like just a business with Directors serving false platitudes. They really wouldn't give a toss about the club where it matters. Just so long as it was making money. A bit like Disney land, built for entertainment but solely to make bucks. The unapproachables
As perfect as it isn't, I much prefer to remain as we are. At least we haven't drifted too far from who we were as a club. More fulfilled the potential that was there.
"How many" Man Citys/Chelseas can there be with absolutely souless plans except to simply "throw money at everything"!!
And as I will totally admit to not knowing "the internal workings" of how football clubs are run I simply like to see owners run it " on a balancing the books" mentality.
Fully aware that every "business" needs to speculate to accumulate but for me ALWAYS having a back up plan is paramount (and that was BEFORE the Icelanders nearly sent us into oblivion)!!!
OF COURSE we will never unearth the talents of bygone eras with the Rios,Coles and Lampards but thats the way the games gone sadly!!
I would like to at least hold onto "something".....and for me running the club in a sustainable manner is priority.
Think Leicester proved last year that it can be done.
I don't want our current owners to stay. I don't believe they intend to either. I think they're trying to create a brand that will appeal to some foreign investor when they can sell (in four or five years?) without having to give a percentage of the profits to our landlords.
They're not pulling the wool over my eyes with their "We've invested because we are fans" comments. They've invested because they saw a large potential profit.
Stage one of the brand was to LEND the club enough money to be solvent and officially have their books in the black. I won't mention the very generous interest payments they're currently receiving on their loans to West Ham.
Stage two was the badge. If you want the world to be aware of you logistically, what better way than to add the word LONDON to the badge.
Stage three is the Olympic Stadium. They did a marvellous piece of business getting the use of this iconic athletics stadium for 99 years, for what is considered peanuts. Not to mention the money made on the sale of the Boleyn Ground to the highest bidding Property developer.
Stage four will be to sell Club West Ham London for a vast profit to a Consortium of sickeningly rich people - whether they're Arab, Russian, Chinese or whoever - who want to own a Premier League club as a play thing.
I understand that David Gold lived over the road from the ground as a boy and even turned out for the youth team - he's told us enough times, for fuck sake - but I don't believe for a single second that they're doing all this because they love the club.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and this is mine and for what it's worth, I would love mine to be completely wrong. I just don't think it will be though.
If they care enough to sort out the issues surrounding the new stadium.Then option one.But if they sit on there hands and watch the carnage unfold,then God only nows where we're heading!I am still hoping Slaven gets it back to where it was last season on the pitch.Billionaires are nice but is not always the answer to making a happy club.
DanDruff wrote:I don't want our current owners to stay. I don't believe they intend to either. I think they're trying to create a brand that will appeal to some foreign investor when they can sell (in four or five years?) without having to give a percentage of the profits to our landlords.
They're not pulling the wool over my eyes with their "We've invested because we are fans" comments. They've invested because they saw a large potential profit.
Stage one of the brand was to LEND the club enough money to be solvent and officially have their books in the black. I won't mention the very generous interest payments they're currently receiving on their loans to West Ham.
Stage two was the badge. If you want the world to be aware of you logistically, what better way than to add the word LONDON to the badge.
Stage three is the Olympic Stadium. They did a marvellous piece of business getting the use of this iconic athletics stadium for 99 years, for what is considered peanuts. Not to mention the money made on the sale of the Boleyn Ground to the highest bidding Property developer.
Stage four will be to sell Club West Ham London for a vast profit to a Consortium of sickeningly rich people - whether they're Arab, Russian, Chinese or whoever - who want to own a Premier League club as a play thing.
I understand that David Gold lived over the road from the ground as a boy and even turned out for the youth team - he's told us enough times, for fuck sake - but I don't believe for a single second that they're doing all this because they love the club.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and this is mine and for what it's worth, I would love mine to be completely wrong. I just don't think it will be though.
That's probably the best assessment of where we are as a club today.
The Evening Standard are running a full page advertisement for the Accrington game. The board are keeping true to their promise of affordable family football reads the statement.
whereas the truth might be, we have reduced the price because the London stadium experience has lost it's novelty and people realise it's crap and we have shed loads of empty seats to fill...
Seen you before, I know your sort,
You think the world awaits your every breath
You'll be my friend, or so you say
You'll help me out when the time comes
And all the time we're getting rich,
You hang around to help me out
But when we're skint, Oh God Forbid!
You drop us like hot shit !
Artistic Freedom. Do what you want.
But just make sure that the money ain't gone
I'll tell you what, I got you sussed
You'll waste my time, when my time comes.
DanDruff wrote:I don't want our current owners to stay. I don't believe they intend to either. I think they're trying to create a brand that will appeal to some foreign investor when they can sell (in four or five years?) without having to give a percentage of the profits to our landlords.
They're not pulling the wool over my eyes with their "We've invested because we are fans" comments. They've invested because they saw a large potential profit.
Stage one of the brand was to LEND the club enough money to be solvent and officially have their books in the black. I won't mention the very generous interest payments they're currently receiving on their loans to West Ham.
Stage two was the badge. If you want the world to be aware of you logistically, what better way than to add the word LONDON to the badge.
Stage three is the Olympic Stadium. They did a marvellous piece of business getting the use of this iconic athletics stadium for 99 years, for what is considered peanuts. Not to mention the money made on the sale of the Boleyn Ground to the highest bidding Property developer.
Stage four will be to sell Club West Ham London for a vast profit to a Consortium of sickeningly rich people - whether they're Arab, Russian, Chinese or whoever - who want to own a Premier League club as a play thing.
I understand that David Gold lived over the road from the ground as a boy and even turned out for the youth team - he's told us enough times, for fuck sake - but I don't believe for a single second that they're doing all this because they love the club.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and this is mine and for what it's worth, I would love mine to be completely wrong. I just don't think it will be though.
That's probably the best assessment of where we are as a club today.
The Evening Standard are running a full page advertisement for the Accrington game. The board are keeping true to their promise of affordable family football reads the statement.
whereas the truth might be, we have reduced the price because the London stadium experience has lost it's novelty and people realise it's crap and we have shed loads of empty seats to fill...
They've already killed the goose that laid the golden egg.
Don't want option 1. Pleased with what they've done but now we're in the big league they couldn't run a whelk stall.
Option 2. Not for me. If that football mad billionaire gets bored who knows what would happen.
Option 4. Would I suppose be a genuine Hammers fan that's got more money than the Chuckles and wouldn't be afraid to spend it.
I don't know of any which is why I'm the one who went for option 3. Sadly.
DanDruff wrote:I don't want our current owners to stay. I don't believe they intend to either. I think they're trying to create a brand that will appeal to some foreign investor when they can sell (in four or five years?) without having to give a percentage of the profits to our landlords.
They're not pulling the wool over my eyes with their "We've invested because we are fans" comments. They've invested because they saw a large potential profit.
Stage one of the brand was to LEND the club enough money to be solvent and officially have their books in the black. I won't mention the very generous interest payments they're currently receiving on their loans to West Ham.
Stage two was the badge. If you want the world to be aware of you logistically, what better way than to add the word LONDON to the badge.
Stage three is the Olympic Stadium. They did a marvellous piece of business getting the use of this iconic athletics stadium for 99 years, for what is considered peanuts. Not to mention the money made on the sale of the Boleyn Ground to the highest bidding Property developer.
Stage four will be to sell Club West Ham London for a vast profit to a Consortium of sickeningly rich people - whether they're Arab, Russian, Chinese or whoever - who want to own a Premier League club as a play thing.
I understand that David Gold lived over the road from the ground as a boy and even turned out for the youth team - he's told us enough times, for fuck sake - but I don't believe for a single second that they're doing all this because they love the club.
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and this is mine and for what it's worth, I would love mine to be completely wrong. I just don't think it will be though.
But don't you think that the value of the club has already peaked? I would suggest that it's worth less now than it was two months ago.
We now have unhappy fans, about to witness a half-empty for the first time, issues with the people who own the stadium and the surrounding shopping center and also about to enter a period of significant travel disruption.
I'd argue that if they were going to sell at the highest possible price they've missed the boat.
Good question this. Can't help but feel heart & soul been ripped out already with Brady doing the rebranding of club.
If we are ever to win anything, can't help but feel the current owners won't ever back financially with enough money the way the premier league is heading with amount of money in the game.
