Caldwell out?

[Super Ronnie Jepson]

Different game now, far bigger gap between the haves and the have nots.

Far more have nots too I'd suggest.

 

[Colesman Ballz]

It's FCAT that financially we've never been so healthy but I really can't to argue the toss about it.

Do you mean that you can't be ar$ed, or rather argue with an ar$e, about it ?

 

[fred binneys head]

Far more have nots too I'd suggest.

Nope, wouldn’t say so. Far more haves

 

[andrew p long]

Quite a few 'have yachts'

 

[logman]

Could you recommend me one of these manuals you've read so I can have a peruse? Much obliged.

I leant mine to Gary Caldwell, bugger won't return them.

 

[BigBanker]

I kind of explained that (as I see it) in the post you responded to.

Fair enough. I think it's a generous assessment, but we'll never know.

One thing we can know is that there are very few clubs who'd have afforded him his job throughout that run. So I guess it's our patient Trust Ownership model which kept your man in place whilst he (slowly) the basis for some decent results. Not all bad, this Trust thing, is it?

 

[Fareham Grecian]

But similarity, all VAT-able costs are 20% less than the advertised amount. So if we buy a player for £1.2m, it's cost us £1m.

As we're a business that makes very little profit over time, it pretty much nets off.

Much ado about nothing.

It does net off. But I think all transfer fees are quoted ex-VAT. So if we sold SSN for £1m, they paid £1.2m

 

[fred binneys head]

But similarity, all VAT-able costs are 20% less than the advertised amount. So if we buy a player for £1.2m, it's cost us £1m.

As we're a business that makes very little profit over time, it pretty much nets off.

Much ado about nothing.

Not really, our income is pretty much all vatable, our biggest cost is salaries.

 

[BigBanker]

Not really, our income is pretty much all vatable, our biggest cost is salaries.

Ah very good point.

 

[tavyred]

Fair enough. I think it's a generous assessment, but we'll never know.

One thing we can know is that there are very few clubs who'd have afforded him his job throughout that run. So I guess it's our patient Trust Ownership model which kept your man in place whilst he (slowly) the basis for some decent results. Not all bad, this Trust thing, is it?

How we deal with a manager presiding over a really poor run of results is transcended IMO by the conversation as to whether our current ownership model can change us from being a traditional 4th tier club to operating further up the pyramid.