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
User avatar
woodford
Posts: 5847
Joined: Tue Sep 09, 2003 8:35 am
Location: proper biscuits like custard creams or ginger nuts
Has liked: 412 likes
Total likes: 302 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by woodford »

yes Tizzwoz

but in order to be 6th and play exciting games we would need a better squad.

In order to have a better squad we would have to buy players that improve our team

( you see where i'm going with this )

Had Sullivan actually achieved this ( seems like everyone else manages ) then maybe this situation would've been avoided. The fact that he hasn't and has bullshitted his way through has just made it worse
User avatar
matthewbd
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:22 pm
Location: Sandhurst, Berkshire
Has liked: 70 likes
Total likes: 11 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by matthewbd »

tizzwoz wrote:I dont expect to get an honest or serious answer on here to this question, but i'll ask anyway...

IF we was in 6th place right now, having had a decent season so far, won some exciting games, bought in some quality players and looking likely to qualify for the Europa, would you still be protesting about the board or would you consider that "the next level"?

Part of me thinks that better results = better atmosphere at games = happier fans. But then the other part of me thinks that regardless of whether we are a good team or not, fans wont be happy because we are not at UP.
For me, yes.

It's not because we moved from UP. I was always pro-move BUT to a fit for purpose stadium. The board would still be taking the piss, telling their lies, fleecing the club. That will never change.
User avatar
Albie Beck
Posts: 9648
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:42 am
Has liked: 617 likes
Total likes: 639 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Albie Beck »

Centre Half wrote: A QPR fan I was speaking with a couple of weeks ago said that yes Fernandes has had his fingers burnt, and has learnt a few football ownership lessons the hard way, he has actually been a very good owner for the last couple of years. He undoubtedly has good intentions and they are happy with the way he is currently running the club

Can you say the same for Sully?
My view fwiw was always that Fernandes' heart/intentions were in the right place, but he was very poorly advised. They tried to do too much too quickly too, and overreached.

Clearly he's been learning &/or getting better advice more recently.
User avatar
iLoveLasagne
Posts: 3796
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 10:17 am
Has liked: 204 likes
Total likes: 216 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by iLoveLasagne »

Denbighammer wrote:As much as I'd like them gone, I think we have to be careful what we wish for.

To truly take west ham to the next level we need a billionaire who will happily write off huge chunks of cash while we get to that point. There are numerous examples of people who have bought premier league clubs and then got cold feet when they've reaAlised the level of investment that is really required to regularly challenge for champions league football. Randy learner bring the best example. Villa came 5th or 6th and he suddenly realised he had to spend 1/4 billion quid just to go up and couple of places in the table!

What gold and sullivan need to do is improve what they are doing in every area of running the club. Whether they are capable of doing so is up for debate. However, they are preferable to me than another Icelandic biscuit maker or some faceless 'investment group' whose only loyalty is to their shareholders and making a profit.
The greed of Sullivan et al to serve their own desires or the greed of a corporation to satisfy shareholders? Neither is attractive but the latter might be a necessary evil. At least there would be a chance of professional people acting professionally. Just imagine if Jack Sullivan was to be in charge one day.
User avatar
EastBrisHammer
Posts: 732
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 1:24 pm
Total likes: 5 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by EastBrisHammer »

Modern wrote:If Sully turns up at Spurs in 2000 and Levy pops up at West Ham instead it's a whole other world.
Not really a whole different world...we would still have hardly won anything and nor would have you. :lol:
Modern
Posts: 1360
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 10:46 pm
Location: in the away end...
Has liked: 10 likes
Total likes: 66 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Modern »

Samba wrote: So sorry to see you missed out, Mod.
Just think, you might have been playing at the next level now...


Bet you were well pleased with last night!
Higuain took that 2nd penalty like an Englishman..
Thank goodness Sully didn’t respond, all sounds slightly bizarre/amusing doesn’t it, he probably just didn’t hear him.

Yep still buzzing at how well we did, mind you the minute Spurs start receiving praise is usually the point it all starts to go tits up, I'm desperately trying to keep a lid on it.

Your Talking Heads thing is amazing by the way, genuinely had me laughing out loud.
User avatar
stevieboy
Posts: 371
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 8:20 pm
Location: Not in bed yet
Has liked: 4 likes
Total likes: 2 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by stevieboy »

I keep wondering the effect of the Payet season had on all this.

Last season at the Boleyn, it was one of the best in recent memory to be a West Ham supporter and the so called 'next level' really seemed to be in touching distance. Was that season and the promises made by the board giving some faith to most of us that yes, fortunes really are about to stop hiding. The shambles since with everything to do with the athletics bowl has been a massively different to what most of us where hoping. I think that Payet season gave the board a huge slice of goodwill which is now shattered with the reality.
I do wonder if the last season at the Boleyn had been a typical West Ham season, flirting with the foot of the table, whether we'd be feeling the board's time was up sooner or later than the year and a half they seem to have gotten away with it.
User avatar
TommyHammer
Posts: 3780
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:32 pm
Location: London
Has liked: 98 likes
Total likes: 571 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by TommyHammer »

To this day I honestly believe that transfer window after the 15/16 season could have been the one that cemented West Ham as the 7th club of the country competing with the top 6. Qualified for Europa league (just) and moving to a big ground that was suppose to be the object that pushed us to the next level. A head start on building what the three crooks had promised us with the next level.

Does anyone see any chance of them selling up and us becoming massive in the next 10 or 20 years? Even with SuGo or otherwise.
User avatar
Coops
Posts: 8340
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Rayleigh, Essex
Has liked: 442 likes
Total likes: 573 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Coops »

They don't want to compete for the European places, it is expensive. Spending as little a possible and barely surviving in the big money league is the business model that works for them.
tizzwoz
Posts: 365
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 2:29 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by tizzwoz »

Tommy Hammer - Im not sure I care about "next level". I think that phrase is being banded around almost pointlessly. Every new owner coming into a club is going to talk about moving the club forward... especially if they are going to attempt a stadium migration. For me, using the owners "next level" promise is not a promise at all... Lets be honest, when it comes to sport, there are no promises to be made on the pitch, only those off it. You only have to look at some clubs who fulfilled their promise to splash the cash, it doesn't always work and can often be more detrimental.... QPR being the most high-profile example.

I dont care that we're battling relegation, with some very average players, in a very average league. I care that we appear to have lost all identity. We are effectively homeless. The real issue is with the stadium itself. Moving from Upton Park doesnt really bother me that much. Nor the walk from Stratford, or pointless rebranding of the club badge. Yes, more street vendors on the walk to the stadium might make things feel more homely, but the elephant in the room is the stadium. The race track. The glaringly obvious gap between pitch and fans.

For me, the planned March is about 1 thing and 1 thing only. Fixing that problem. I dont know how. I dont know when, but thats for the owners to work out. It was their plan, they didn't deliver what they promised, so now they must fix it.
1. Buy the stadium and do a complete overhaul of the seating. It would cost hundreds of millions. Thats their problem.
2. Buy a plot of land nearby and build a new, purpose built stadium. Id happily spend 5 years in LS whilst this was built.
3. Sell-up to somebody who will do one of the previous 2.

For me, it really is as simple (or not-so-simple) as that. Everything else, stadium WIFI, beer shelves, club badge etc is just window dressing. Fix the biggest problem and the other issues will cease to be issues at all.
3.
User avatar
TommyHammer
Posts: 3780
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:32 pm
Location: London
Has liked: 98 likes
Total likes: 571 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by TommyHammer »

tizzwoz wrote: For me, the planned March is about 1 thing and 1 thing only. Fixing that problem. I dont know how. I dont know when, but thats for the owners to work out. It was their plan, they didn't deliver what they promised, so now they must fix it.
1. Buy the stadium and do a complete overhaul of the seating. It would cost hundreds of millions. Thats their problem.
2. Buy a plot of land nearby and build a new, purpose built stadium. Id happily spend 5 years in LS whilst this was built.
3. Sell-up to somebody who will do one of the previous 2.

For me, it really is as simple (or not-so-simple) as that. Everything else, stadium WIFI, beer shelves, club badge etc is just window dressing. Fix the biggest problem and the other issues will cease to be issues at all.
3.
To be fair I think with a major restructuring the OS could become a decent ground. But yeah you're right, they wouldn't dream of spending that much money.
User avatar
Denbighammer
Posts: 12871
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:53 pm
Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.
Has liked: 697 likes
Total likes: 431 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Denbighammer »

iLoveLasagne wrote: The greed of Sullivan et al to serve their own desires or the greed of a corporation to satisfy shareholders? Neither is attractive but the latter might be a necessary evil. At least there would be a chance of professional people acting professionally. Just imagine if Jack Sullivan was to be in charge one day.
Given the choice I'd take sullivan over a faceless board of investors. At least Sully can be pinned down and taken to task by our fans. If things really went belly-up at least we could go to his office or house to protest. We'd be far more likely to get action than if we were owned by some investors with an office in grand cayman or wherever. It may not be pretty but at least he has a human faces which gives as a focal point for our pressure.

Let me be clear; our board are totally unprofessional for large portions of the time and some of the stuff Sully, Sully jnr and Brady come out with are teeth-itchingly embarrassing.
User avatar
Denbighammer
Posts: 12871
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:53 pm
Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.
Has liked: 697 likes
Total likes: 431 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Denbighammer »

ashbanki wrote:With due respect Denbigh ~ That's complete twaddle,imo.We could afford a top notch DOF and recruitment staff on no more money than Lady Brady takes out of the business each year.Just look at Southampton - team getting stripped of "quality players"and managers,virtually, every year, but they have still finished above us five of the six seasons since we both came back up!
They have got a much lower salary levels, much lower ST holders,much less to spend on players and not many injuries and "oaps" stinking the place out - They have a plan, they are run as a business and they shut the **** up and get on with it.
Ask Southampton fans what they think of their board. A faceless, foreign-owned corporate entity that has systematically asset stripped their playing squad over a number of years.

The only thing that's kept them afloat over the past decade has been their incredibly good academy and their judicious selection of coaches. This year could be finally they year all their greed comes home to roost. .
Ifebbubbles
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 7:05 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ifebbubbles »

Give me Southamptons board over ours any day of the week. You can do very little to stop big clubs cherry picking your best players. Gettimg 75 million for Van Dijk was superb business. 3 Dimitri Payets!
In comparison we sell our record signings back to our relegation rivals.
User avatar
Denbighammer
Posts: 12871
Joined: Fri Dec 28, 2007 6:53 pm
Location: Dodging, Dipping, Diving, Ducking and Dodging.
Has liked: 697 likes
Total likes: 431 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Denbighammer »

James P wrote: I don't see how that is worse. At the moment we have embarrassing in your face chairman whose only loyalty is to the shareholders (themselves) and making a profit.

I don't think we're ever going to reach "the next level". We're going to be a midtable at best team for a long, long time. However if I had to choose to be that under the stewardship of the liars who sold many people a false dream in order to take us from our home for their own gain, or be that under any other person, I'd choose to lose the liars.
I agree they are a total embarrassment especially their many and various media blunders. Sadly, your also probably right that we'll never get to the next level.

They did lie about the stadium and what it would do for us and that is unforgiveable. However, a lot of people could see that their proposal was utter bull**** and are utterly unsurprised at the situation we currently find ourselves in. My worry is that they sell in a hurry to someone totally unsuitable (see what they did at Birmingham) or to someone who lacks the financiial clout and long-term commitment to make us what we should be, preferably in a fit-for-purpose football ground.
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
Posts: 70930
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
Has liked: 748 likes
Total likes: 3445 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Up the Junction »

tizzwoz wrote:I dont expect to get an honest or serious answer on here to this question, but i'll ask anyway...
Your loaded question suggests you've already decided that those who answer a certain way aren't being honest, so I'll refrain on that basis.
hammer españa
Posts: 131
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 10:33 am
Total likes: 7 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by hammer españa »

If they did sell up surely they would prefer to sell to someone unsuitable. Maybe out of spite or because it would make people in the future look back and think they were not as bad as we thought.
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
Posts: 70930
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
Has liked: 748 likes
Total likes: 3445 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Up the Junction »

Yet another example of the Board undermining their own staff:

http://www.kumb.com/story.php?id=132199
Online
Crouchend_Hammer
Posts: 26348
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 9:31 am
Location: Forest Gate
Has liked: 137 likes
Total likes: 2356 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Crouchend_Hammer »

Denbighammer wrote: Ask Southampton fans what they think of their board. A faceless, foreign-owned corporate entity that has systematically asset stripped their playing squad over a number of years.

The only thing that's kept them afloat over the past decade has been their incredibly good academy and their judicious selection of coaches. This year could be finally they year all their greed comes home to roost. .
Like any club of their/ our size, there is very little you can do when the bigger clubs come calling for your players. Could the Southampton board prevented those players from leaving? Probably not in reality. The important part is how much you get for them, and then what you do with the money you receive - which in their case is spend it on a very good academy, a decent scouting network, and new players (like Van Dijk and Wanyama) which they have then sold on for profit
User avatar
Mega Ron
Posts: 12447
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:35 pm
Location: -.-- --- ..- / -.-. ..- -. - ...
Has liked: 170 likes
Total likes: 175 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Mega Ron »

Up the Junction wrote:Yet another example of the Board undermining their own staff:

http://www.kumb.com/story.php?id=132199
I'd like Gold and Sullivan to retire after costing West Ham an awful lot of money, not mention plenty of other things, in their time with us.
Post Reply