Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:49 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

As much as I want to make sure the right person is in charge, I can also happily admit that this Pettit bloke and his company are probably better qualified to know who can run the business properly than I am.

Rod's sentiment is a good one, but I don't think he necessarily thinks before he tweets.

I'm certain rod thinks before he tweets. Its just that all his thinking revolves around his fan ownership model. Quoting barcelona fc is fan owned is a red herring as they have massive income from commercial side and a much bigger fanbase, Where in a situation where we need a massive cash injection immediately with much smaller commercail opportunities and a much smaller fan base not many of whom can afford to put any money in above their season ticket/merchandise spend. His idea is a total non starter IMO.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 12:50 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

As much as I want to make sure the right person is in charge, I can also happily admit that this Pettit bloke and his company are probably better qualified to know who can run the business properly than I am.

Rod's sentiment is a good one, but I don't think he necessarily thinks before he tweets.

I disagree. He thinks too much.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:12 pm  

Anyone listening to what Rod Studd has to say needs to give their head a shake. He's rugby league's equivalent of Katie Hopkins - saying anything it takes just to get bites.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:15 pm  

HamsterChops wrote:

As much as I want to make sure the right person is in charge, I can also happily admit that this Pettit bloke and his company are probably better qualified to know who can run the business properly than I am.

Rod's sentiment is a good one, but I don't think he necessarily thinks before he tweets.

Thinking requires a brain...

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:23 pm  

mat wrote:

I'm certain rod thinks before he tweets. Its just that all his thinking revolves around his fan ownership model. Quoting barcelona fc is fan owned is a red herring as they have massive income from commercial side and a much bigger fanbase, Where in a situation where we need a massive cash injection immediately with much smaller commercail opportunities and a much smaller fan base not many of whom can afford to put any money in above their season ticket/merchandise spend. His idea is a total non starter IMO.

Also, I believe that both Barca and Real Madrid received HUGH sums of money from the Spanish government too, which is the main reason they're the two biggest clubs in Spain.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:43 pm  

Bull Mania wrote:

Pretty sure if we looked at the rules in 2012 there would have been nowhere that "said a club will be fined 50% of sky money and shared amongst other clubs"

Can somebody please clarify exactly what went on here? I hear this 50% sky money "fine" being banded about all the time as though some injustice has occurred...

But my understanding at the time was that it was OK himself that came up with this idea. We were in danger of being voted out of super league by the other clubs, and so Ok offered this as a sweetener to persuade them and the RFL to let us remain in super league.
Therefore in my opinion there has been no injustice, we offered those terms, they were not forced upon us.

Was that not the case?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:46 pm  

Bullmans Parade wrote:

Can somebody please clarify exactly what went on here? I hear this 50% sky money "fine" being banded about all the time as though some injustice has occurred...

But my understanding at the time was that it was OK himself that came up with this idea. We were in danger of being voted out of super league by the other clubs, and so Ok offered this as a sweetener to persuade them and the RFL to let us remain in super league.
Therefore in my opinion there has been no injustice, we offered those terms, they were not forced upon us.

Was that not the case?

Correct that OK offered to forfeit 50% of the money.

I think the injustice part was what the clubs then voted to do with that money. Rather than "give it to Bradford, they're struggling anyway" (which admittedly is wishful thinking), or the more likely "pump it into youth development" or something community related, they decided to share it amongst themselves like the fat kid woofing down the leftovers rather than giving to the homeless bloke sat outside.

The other clubs getting that money meant they had an extra leg up on the steps down that forfeiting the money had already cost us.

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:49 pm  

For Rod’s information, the behemoth that is Barcelona FC, apart from paying a huge number of seven-figure and six-figure salaries to the legion of people who run it, are sponsored by
Nike
Qatar Airways
Beko
Gillette
Konami
Estrella Damm
Audi
Gatorade
Stanley Black & Decker
Allianz
Toshiba
Movistar
Coca Cola
...among others.

What with that, and a paltry average attendance of a mere 70,000 plus, I have no idea where they get their money from. I am sure however that this is exactly the model we could put in place at Odsal, and it is just a mystery to me why we can’t immediately go with Rod’s advice, indeed why doesn’t everybody do it?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 1:51 pm  

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:

For Rod’s information, the behemoth that is Barcelona FC, apart from paying a huge number of seven-figure and six-figure salaries to the legion of people who run it, are sponsored by
Nike
Qatar Airways
Beko
Gillette
Konami
Estrella Damm
Audi
Gatorade
Stanley Black & Decker
Allianz
Toshiba
Movistar
Coca Cola
...among others.

What with that, and a paltry average attendance of a mere 70,000 plus, I have no idea where they get their money from. I am sure however that this is exactly the model we could put in place at Odsal, and it is just a mystery to me why we can’t immediately go with Rod’s advice, indeed why doesn’t everybody do it?

Pfft. What have Qatar Airways got that Beds R Us haven't?

Re: Administration 3 - now in technicolour : Wed Nov 23, 2016 2:00 pm  

Bullmans Parade wrote:

Can somebody please clarify exactly what went on here? I hear this 50% sky money "fine" being banded about all the time as though some injustice has occurred...

But my understanding at the time was that it was OK himself that came up with this idea. We were in danger of being voted out of super league by the other clubs, and so Ok offered this as a sweetener to persuade them and the RFL to let us remain in super league.
Therefore in my opinion there has been no injustice, we offered those terms, they were not forced upon us.

Was that not the case?

No it bloody wasn't. He was on the point of signing, and after 5pm that condition was sprung on him. Had he said no, and walked, as anyone except someone desperately and genuinely intent on saving the club would have done, we would have had no club. It was late in the evening and there was nobody else, no second chance, take it or leave it.

To have people years later madly claiming it was his idea is typical of the shoite which passes for comment on social media. The deal had all but been done, and then that curveball came in.

I have been asking rhetorically ever since we went tits again if the new buyer is going to get the same half money penalty for 2 years, but I suspect it was just a personal dig at Omar. They knew it was bollox and grossly unfair, they knew (or must have known) that it made keeping the club going at any normal level pretty much impossible - yet they did it anyway.

And of course the other SL clubs in their disgusting greed decided to help themselves to the money, adding insult to injury by actually stealing additional money, by using a bogus method of calculation, and everyone pretending not to notice.