Originally Posted by
UlleyMiller
They have no obligations at all. People can (and often will) decide if they should, if it's correct, but they have no obligations. Customers will rationalise going/not going, spending/not spending based on results, who the manager is, who is playing regularly, what division we're in, and even (apparently) if payment methods are restricted to cash. There is no way to run any football club which leaves all fans happy, and most decisions will irk at least a good number, no matter what they do. For reasons like these, it's barely worth the effort to communicate knowing it leads to further criticism whatever is said. There is also a good amount they need to keep in-house. If we're utterly broke, that's leverage for others to buy our players cheaply, and if we broadcast that we've strengthened our finances, we're suddenly paying more for players. We'd be playing a zero sum game alone.
The brand is largely meaningless too. I don't think of TS as being part of the brand, nor anything other than the current name on the deeds. Many owners (ergo, would-be buyers) think they are the brand or at least control it, but the brand is a 148 year old club in a mid-sized northern town, supported by largely blue collar fans local to the area - aside from the age, that will remain the same irrespective of who owns it in 98% of cases.
Don't get me wrong, many of us want honesty or (maybe more likely) transparency, but it comes with risks to the club and although we may feel a little better about the flow of information, it's just more to pick fault at and there are no real benefits.
Hall Of Fame
Reply With Quote