Gold and Sullivan ???

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, sicknote, -DL-, Rio, Gnome, chalks, the pink palermo

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Thu Apr 20, 2017 9:23 pm

The so called perks were just a small part of the point I was making...

It more raises the question why other clubs owners can do it and ours won't.

I remember way back when I was a junior hammer... I'm sure I remember getting free tickets to games and have a brief memory of a Christmas party that players attended... that I'm sure was free... does that still happen?

See as a kid that stuck in my mind, think they used to send birthday cards too... it was more the impression of being involved with the club than considering it a free perk.

It's about the long term gain of doing things, unfortunately the current lot only seem to think about short term cash flow and raising funds.

They are also the only owners shouting from the rooftops that they are "fans" every five minutes...

Actions speak louder than words
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Kialos on Thu Apr 20, 2017 10:21 pm

Gold, Sullivan and Brady can run their business any way they see fit.

However they reap what they sow.
Kialos
 
Posts: 6298
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2006 7:11 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby HighWycombeHammer on Fri Apr 21, 2017 7:55 am

This summer will be a very interesting time. Will they pull themselves closer to the fans or invest in more so so players...

:crest:
HighWycombeHammer
 
Posts: 94
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2011 4:37 pm
Location: High Wycombe

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby RichieRiv on Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:11 am

Ozza wrote:As season ticket holder I had a free scarf once can't remember why


SBOBET paid for them.
User avatar
RichieRiv
 
Posts: 14111
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 3:35 pm
Location: http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Fri Apr 21, 2017 8:53 am

In fairnesss we did get t-shirt and light up thing on the last game at the Boleyn but it was a special occasion

Oh yeah and the first game at the OS... I remember seeing something laid out on all the seats... looked like another t-shirt, thought that was good... got to my seat and discovered it was a free plastic carrier bag to hold up :lol:
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Marky on Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:37 am

Was speaking to Tony Cottee at Lingfield races yesterday and to be fair he isn't a fan of the owners but a huge one of the manager. He was surprised at the level of investment like mist on here after the bravado by Mr Sullivan.

Allardyce was on great form yesterday at the races too and was very complimentary about the 4 years he had here.
User avatar
Marky
 
Posts: 10648
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 4:27 pm
Location: www.wearesafe.com

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Ozza on Fri Apr 21, 2017 9:43 am

ahhh yes that's it cheers Ritchie
User avatar
Ozza
 
Posts: 12359
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:41 pm
Location: Stringfellows

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby hxhammer on Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:04 am

Marky wrote:Allardyce was on great form yesterday at the races too and was very complimentary about the 4 years he had here.


So he should be, the money he earnt, shame he was "complimenatry" towards the end of his time here, the arrogant bast*rd
User avatar
hxhammer
 
Posts: 229
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 11:33 am
Location: the chequers

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Marky on Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:27 am

He got us up and kept us there left at the right time. No axes with me.

The owners are the problem.
User avatar
Marky
 
Posts: 10648
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 4:27 pm
Location: www.wearesafe.com

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Sun Apr 23, 2017 7:57 pm

Lots of talk on other threads about how little old Palace shouldn't be ahead of us in the league...

Why not? They have spent more....

So how over the last 2 transfer windows have Palace with a capacity of just 25k been able to out spend us?
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby James P on Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:42 pm

MD_HM wrote:So how over the last 2 transfer windows have Palace with a capacity of just 25k been able to out spend us?


Because massive TV money has lessened the separation effect of match day revenue.
User avatar
James P
 
Posts: 13755
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:55 pm
Location: Romford

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby mushy on Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:49 pm

MD_HM wrote:So how over the last 2 transfer windows have Palace with a capacity of just 25k been able to out spend us?

New American investment on their side, no real investment by our owners.
mushy
 
Posts: 11201
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 4:17 pm
Location: Kumb Poster of the year 2009

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:56 pm

I would have thought that we would have earned a fair bit more than Palace on sponsorship, corporate and ticket sales... is that not the case?

So we should be at least still out spending them by that figure...

Both Sullivan and Gold have gone on record saying that a bigger capacity would bring greater success

Both have gone on record saying we can look to compete with Spurs and Arsenal in the future

How does that work out if we can't compete with Palace?
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Thekorean on Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:57 pm

MD_HM wrote:I would have thought that we would have earned a fair bit more than Palace on sponsorship, corporate and ticket sales... is that not the case?

So we should be at least still out spending them by that figure...

Both Sullivan and Gold have gone on record saying that a bigger capacity would bring greater success

Both have gone on record saying we can look to compete with Spurs and Arsenal in the future

How does that work out if we can't compete with Palace?


Only been one year in the new place to be fair.

I doubt they will invest more but can't really judge after a season.
Thekorean
 
Posts: 243
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2016 10:36 am
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby GaryP on Sun Apr 23, 2017 9:58 pm

MD_HM wrote:I would have thought that we would have earned a fair bit more than Palace on sponsorship, corporate and ticket sales... is that not the case?

So we should be at least still out spending them by that figure...

Both Sullivan and Gold have gone on record saying that a bigger capacity would bring greater success

Both have gone on record saying we can look to compete with Spurs and Arsenal in the future

How does that work out if we can't compete with Palace?


There is a huge difference between can't and won't .
User avatar
GaryP
 
Posts: 9190
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 4:14 pm
Location: Broken Britain

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Sun Apr 23, 2017 10:45 pm

Thekorean wrote:Only been one year in the new place to be fair.

I doubt they will invest more but can't really judge after a season.


I would have been disappointed to be out spent by Palace if we had still been at the Boleyn...

Ok so moving doesn't bring instant success or funds.... but surely it shouldn't put us behind Palace in terms of financial clout?

How or why have Palace been able to spend more over the last two windows?

This should be answered move or not...
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Crouchend_Hammer on Sun Apr 23, 2017 10:53 pm

They did sell bolasie for 30m tbf
Crouchend_Hammer
 
Posts: 7350
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:31 am
Location: Forest Gate

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Sun Apr 23, 2017 10:57 pm

Crouchend_Hammer wrote:They did sell bolasie for 30m tbf


In the same time we sold Payet for 25m and Tomkins for 9m
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby MD_HM on Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:03 pm

Summer and January windows

West Ham spent 72m

Sold 36m

Net 36m

Palace spent 85m

Sold 42.5m

Net 42.5m

So they spent more and had a higher net spend
User avatar
MD_HM
 
Posts: 5844
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:00 pm
Location: London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Postby Crouchend_Hammer on Sun Apr 23, 2017 11:09 pm

Tbf is a whole hostof reasons palace spent more than us in the past year. They spent more than Spurs as well, and Arsenal.

A) they needed a striker even more than we did and decided to go big with Benteke
B) Pardew was less satisfied with his squad than Bilic last summer (we had just come 7th)
C) they got a new manager who wanted to change the squad
D) they were in the relegation zone in january so spunked a load of cash on average players like schlupp to help survival
E) there was rumours of an American cash injection at Palace. No idea if true though

Do I care if Palace spend more than us? No. Do I care if they make better, more targeted signings than us? Yes

Would I liked us to have spent £30m on benteke? Yes probably, but I can see why people wouldn't (and most people on here didn't want us to as they prefer Carroll)
Crouchend_Hammer
 
Posts: 7350
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 10:31 am
Location: Forest Gate

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], CarlisleWHU, Centre Half, essexgirl53, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], hammer1975, KSW, likemydreams, mumbles87, Portswood, Rocketron, steveherts66, StevePottsGoalsReel, teamwork, Ted Fenton, Yahoo [Bot] and 99 guests