|
Post by back4more on May 23, 2019 11:35:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by martfergie on May 25, 2019 5:23:50 GMT
A great article and an interesting insight, however it’s all guess work and now real hard evidence or proof. It could be true but could also just be reporters twisting everything. As supporters of Eastleigh we all know he’s got unfinished business here. One day I believe he’ll return to us so we’ll see.
Also did the report mention the money used to buy the club was largely from parachute payments?? 😂 I think it’s in there about 87 times!!!
|
|
|
Post by tenacres on May 25, 2019 21:17:40 GMT
Sounds like some decent business from Stewart Donald (assuming the article is broadly true).
I suspect tomorrows playoff result may determine his popularity or otherwise amongst a number of the Sunderland support.
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 26, 2019 9:53:32 GMT
A great article and an interesting insight, however it’s all guess work and now real hard evidence or proof. It could be true but could also just be reporters twisting everything. As supporters of Eastleigh we all know he’s got unfinished business here. One day I believe he’ll return to us so we’ll see. Also did the report mention the money used to buy the club was largely from parachute payments?? 😂 I think it’s in there about 87 times!!! I'm not sure why you think that the article is "all guesswork" martfergie. It is even mentioned in the piece how the information it contains has come from regular legitimate source material. I believe also that the article will have been vetted legally before publication. The way in which parachute payments were dealt with was, I thought, the main point of the article and those payments are referred to in the context of the amounts of money involved, how that money was used and the many and various implications. I don't think anyone can write a piece about a controversial subject without mentioning that subject as often as you need to to explain and comment on those contexts. Can I ask if your belief in his second coming is guesswork or do you have any theories on that? I'm just interested in what other people think and as you have put it out there I thought I would ask.
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 26, 2019 9:58:37 GMT
Sounds like some decent business from Stewart Donald (assuming the article is broadly true). I suspect tomorrows playoff result may determine his popularity or otherwise amongst a number of the Sunderland support. Decent business for whom though Rendel? It seems to me like one of those equations where you have to work out the value of 'x' where 'x' is the amount someone actually paid for a football club.
|
|
|
Post by hantslondoner on May 26, 2019 10:15:34 GMT
So what if they did? As the article says, no rules/laws were broken. With the right managerial staff there was a fair chance that Sunderland were going to do well in League 1 this season as long as there was stability at the top. I think I predicted playoffs somewhere earlier on the forum, although they managed it more easily than I expected. Today's final.... 50-50. More recently I've heard SD say that if Sunderland went up he'd have to sell the club as he couldn't afford the cost of competing in the Championship.
If he does leave then I'd guess he'd be looking in the direction of Oxford. Unless the big time has whetted his appetite....
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 26, 2019 11:47:10 GMT
So what if they did? As the article says, no rules/laws were broken.
I think the point of the article Paul is its implication that the takeover was financed differently from the way people probably imagined from the publicity surrounding the takeover at the time. I would guess if asked "so what?" the author of the piece might point out that he had given Sunderland fans (and the rest of the football world) more visibility of where the money, which was used to take the club over, actually came from. I would think that's something people would want to know and think about, irrespective of its legality.
|
|
|
Post by hantslondoner on May 26, 2019 13:38:49 GMT
Agree with what you say, John - some 'clever' use of the parachute payments, definitely. And some definite spin on the way it was presented to the fans (although legal and checked by the EPL).
They seem to me to have been gambling on the club becoming worth more than they started with, which, as I say, I think was a fair bet given that that they were expected to do well in League 1. However, this afternoon's events may be even more crucial than we think. A win and a lot will be forgiven, a lot will be forgotten. And if either things do go badly, or they do cash in and make a profit, they will have to steer clear of the North East in the future.
I had to smile a bit about the need for new owners to 'bring the fans back on board' - SD was a specialist in that sort of thing here. However, the fact that even now some fans are still sceptical on that score indicates the level things had fallen to. What is happening to their excellent Academy isn't good (echoes of Eastleigh). Plus it's two rich Southerners trying to do it ;-)
|
|
|
Post by hantslondoner on May 27, 2019 8:14:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 27, 2019 12:58:53 GMT
That's an interesting spin from the SUNDERLAND Echo on the SUNDERLAND AFC takeover finances.
The Sunderland Echo article states "Sunderland were a basket case of a club, in nine figures of debt when Donald stepped in. It was a relief that someone was willing to take that on".
It seems to ignore the revelation in the Mail that Ellis Short, the previous owner, wrote off most of that debt and much of the rest was paid off with the help of the last parachute payment. The Mail piece had quoted Stewart Donald's statement to Sportsmail which included the comment ‘So together Ellis and I ensured that the club would be debt free. Ellis by writing off his own debt of £80m and then, with the assistance of that last parachute payment, paying off the £70m of bank debt the club had accrued........' SD's statement to Sportsmail does include more information, especially about his own actual investment, and that can be read still in the link within my original post at the top of this thread. I have just quoted that particular part of the statement as it is something the Sunderland Echo seems to have wanted to gloss over.
And anyone would have to admit that to say, as the Sunderland Echo does, that at least SD hasn't done what the the Glazers did at Man U, is plumbing the depths a bit. I think if I were the Sunderland Chairman I would hope for better accreditation than that from my local friendly journo.
|
|
|
Post by michaelefc on May 27, 2019 13:13:52 GMT
I don't think you have to be an Einstein to work out there has to be a bit more to this story than is meeting the eye. Sunderland is a massive club, a world wide name, with a fantastic support base. It has obviously got a Premiership future, its just a case of when, not if, and yet SD, who as far as I know has never until now, had any link with the club can buy so much of the club, for so little. Am I the only one wondering what's happened to the other jigsaw pieces?
|
|
|
Post by back4more on May 28, 2019 9:27:14 GMT
That is a good question michaelefc :-) BTW, did anyone else notice the Eastleigh Chairman sitting in the Royal Box at Wembley with Stewart and his family members? Yes I know Kenny is a Sunderland supporter but still, worth a mention in case anyone didn't notice.
|
|
|
Post by thelake on May 29, 2019 21:20:23 GMT
Wonder what will happen first Stewart gets fed up of Sunderland or Sunderland gets fed up of stewart
|
|
|
Post by hantslondoner on May 30, 2019 8:11:08 GMT
Oxford United?
|
|
|
Post by michaelefc on May 30, 2019 8:42:33 GMT
Solihull? Colden Common? Glasgow Celtic? With Stewart you just never know.
|
|