Late David Gold, Sullivan and Brady

The Forum for all football-related discussion, including West Ham United FC. Our busiest Forum and the place to begin if you're new to KUMB.

Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Post Reply
goa127
Posts: 4310
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:38 pm
Has liked: 440 likes
Total likes: 290 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by goa127 »

Ozza wrote:He's never managed to even when he's had the chance to. Let's never forget he's in this for one reason and it isn't to turn us into a top 6 team regardless of all the guff that comes out of his mouth.

Hoping that he'll change is folly, they've got a set model they have run for years, why change it?


Oh I think he'd love to turn us into a top six club, then he could preen himself and tell eveyone how well he'd done. Unfortunately he hasn't got the vision or the willingness to risk money that's needed. That's why he's in uncharted waters, summer spending looks like paying dividends, goes against his business model. Will he back the manager in the next 3 windows? It'd be a first for him
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 28203
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 945 likes
Total likes: 2367 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ozza »

Naaaa he's never stumped up two windows in a row, or even three windows in a row
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
Posts: 40715
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 4:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado
Has liked: 1905 likes
Total likes: 1614 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Cuenca 'ammer »

Ozza wrote:Naaaa he's never stumped up two windows in a row, or even three windows in a row
I was surprised when he stumped up for ONE in a row...

:D
User avatar
Samba
Posts: 21811
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:36 pm
Location: David Sullivan's least favourite fluffer.
Has liked: 2484 likes
Total likes: 895 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Samba »

goa127 wrote:He is a dyed-in-the-wool cancer.
It has been said..
User avatar
Moxy
Posts: 2251
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 2:45 pm
Location: Romford

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Moxy »

Pair of c****
User avatar
warp
Posts: 14014
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:13 am
Location: I am everything about this site which is wrong... i don't give a toss about WHUFC.

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by warp »

hope they do it extreme
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 28203
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 945 likes
Total likes: 2367 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ozza »

Filthy leeching scumbag c****
User avatar
hammer1975
Posts: 16641
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:16 pm
Has liked: 934 likes
Total likes: 1088 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by hammer1975 »

A quick glance at twitter seems to confirm that a lot of fans are quite happy with a strategy to hold back appropriate money over a number of windows and spend it in one splurge whilst giving it the razzle dazzle about £100m* (when in reality we are pretty much mid table for both spend and wages over the last three years)

Note: still not sure we actually spent £100m but if everyone keeps repeating it then it must be true

The summer window of 2019 is the big test for me - we should be capable of the same level of investment based on the club’s actual numbers, however i’m expecting the party line to be that we spent most of our funds in 2018...
User avatar
bubbles1966
Posts: 66972
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm
Location: I'm holding onto nothing, and trying to forget the rest
Has liked: 2437 likes
Total likes: 4293 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by bubbles1966 »

If we're sitting top 6 (or thereabouts) on New Years Day then they need to give Pellegrini what he needs to cement it.
User avatar
aaronhammer
Posts: 10052
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Milton Keynes
Has liked: 168 likes
Total likes: 38 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by aaronhammer »

It was in the accounts that we had a net spend of £89.5m on transfers in the summer (including agent fees, and I presume signing on fees). So with Kouyate, Burke, and Quina being sold our gross spend (including fees) was probably £100m. However our net spend (including fees) the previous year was £3.1m so we have spent 2 seasons money in one.

My biggest concern, as raised in the accounts thread, is how G&S have withdrawn accrued interest (which I’m fairly sure isn’t compounded) to the tune of £17m over the past couple of years, instead of paying back the capital (which would reduce what they’re paid in interest in the future). That’s before you even get into the question of why do they feel the need to charge us interest when other owners don’t.
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32136
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1788 likes
Total likes: 2073 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

aaronhammer wrote:........................................

why do they feel the need to charge us interest when other owners don’t.
Because that's their business model. We put money in a building society or whatever and get 0.0001% interest. They put money into their own business and decide to pay themselves between four and seven percent interest. It doesn't even matter if the business doesn't actually need the loan, that's how they get the money out. Dividends are more awkward to pay (they can only be paid out of declared profits after tax, you can't borrow to pay them are just a couple of relevant impediments) but loan interest serves to reduce profit and hence tax. It's basically an easy and efficient method of helping themselves to a chunk of TV money.

Don't be under the illusion they bought the club out of a love for West Ham*. They saw the Olympic Stadium, took a chance they'd get it and their long term plan was to reduce capital outgoings to a minimum (someone else pays for the ground, pitch, even the posts and flags), do just enough to remain in the Premier League as that has the biggest pot of money they can access and let the money roll in.

*They tried to do the same with Cardiff and the Millennium Stadium before they bought West Ham but the council wouldn't play their game.
codger
Posts: 448
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 10:56 am
Location: Braintree Essex
Has liked: 7 likes
Total likes: 23 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by codger »

Johnny Byrne's boots wrote.--
Don't be under the illusion they bought the club out of a love for West Ham*. They saw the Olympic Stadium, took a chance they'd get it and their long term plan was to reduce capital outgoings to a minimum (someone else pays for the ground, pitch, even the posts and flags), do just enough to remain in the Premier League as that has the biggest pot of money they can access and let the money roll in.

So how would that apply if their original offer to buy the stadium had been accepted
Last edited by codger on Sat Dec 22, 2018 11:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
hammer1975
Posts: 16641
Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 10:16 pm
Has liked: 934 likes
Total likes: 1088 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by hammer1975 »

bubbles1966 wrote:If we're sitting top 6 (or thereabouts) on New Years Day then they need to give Pellegrini what he needs to cement it.
Can’t see it Bubbs
They didn’t look to cement it when we were 4th two seasons running. It will take more than one summer spend for me to be convinced they have changed their spots.
User avatar
Penfold711
Posts: 912
Joined: Mon May 03, 2010 1:02 pm
Location: Worthing
Has liked: 2003 likes
Total likes: 92 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Penfold711 »

bubbles1966 wrote:If we're sitting top 6 (or thereabouts) on New Years Day then they need to give Pellegrini what he needs to cement it.
I suspect they will consider the squad 'good enough' and decide to save themselves some money.
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
Posts: 32136
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: Care home dodger
Has liked: 1788 likes
Total likes: 2073 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Johnny Byrne's Boots »

codger wrote:
So how would that apply if their original offer to buy the stadium had been accepted

They may have made even more money. They'd still be lending to it at advantageous rates but would also have had the possibility of selling the club at a large profit.
User avatar
Lil Joe 17
Posts: 1410
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 9:44 am
Has liked: 8 likes
Total likes: 13 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Lil Joe 17 »

I'm going to play devils advocate here cause I know the general consensus of the board on this forum and I know they're not amazing owners but....


... Why do we feel so entitled to their money for free?
User avatar
stu1
Posts: 12525
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 4:57 pm
Has liked: 658 likes
Total likes: 1024 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by stu1 »

Lil Joe 17 wrote:I'm going to play devils advocate here cause I know the general consensus of the board on this forum and I know they're not amazing owners but....


... Why do we feel so entitled to their money for free?
If the owners are going to charge interest they should drop the narrative that they are investing their own money as some sort of favour to us fans. Especially when they were charging interest at 7% despite the BoE rate being 0.5% for the majority of that time.

That's without mentioning the likely hundreds of millions they will benefit from when they sell the club. Other owners genuinely invest their own money in to the clubs they own and you don't hear them spouting off how they are a fan of club first and owner second.
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 28203
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 945 likes
Total likes: 2367 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ozza »

Lil Joe 17 wrote:I'm going to play devils advocate here cause I know the general consensus of the board on this forum and I know they're not amazing owners but....


... Why do we feel so entitled to their money for free?
Has anyone said that they expected to give it to the club gratis? However extortionate interest rates, poor transfer windows (with the clubs cash) paying Brady 430k consultancy fees...making out they saved us...telling people they were dropping the interest rates

Total, lying, thieving scum bags
hammerman11
Posts: 15811
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:01 pm
Has liked: 25 likes
Total likes: 744 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by hammerman11 »

will only be good news when the leeches leave. will never forgive them for selling the Boleyn and moving us to the dust bowl.

They spent nothing for ages then have one decent spend . They need to spend some in January and the summer if they want west ham to move forward.

They need to sign rice up to a deecent long term contract
buy a CB, LB, RB, DM X2 CF X2


THEN BUY THE BOWL OR PREFERABLY SELL THE CLUB TO SOMEONE WHO CAN
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 28203
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 945 likes
Total likes: 2367 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ozza »

Mate why would they buy it? If they ever do buy it, it will only be to benefit them and their bank balances.

I detest them
Post Reply