+ Visit Notts. County FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37

Thread: Derby County...

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    6,265
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoppie View Post
    It certainly puts our ‘I hate this league’ and ‘are we too soft’ discussions in context. I wouldn’t swap this league or our leaky defence for Derby’s or the other lots position. I’m inclined to agree with those that say we are very lucky to have our current owners and manger and players (even if it’s not quite perfect). COYP!
    Agreed. I might not like this league much but as Elite says, a win and a goal is celebrated the same in this league as any other and as Hoppie says it's nice not worrying about the manager or owners for once. I don't think we're in a bad position really especially for the future. It's match day, the sun is shining, what could be better, all we need now is a win!

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoppie View Post
    It certainly puts our ‘I hate this league’ and ‘are we too soft’ discussions in context. I wouldn’t swap this league or our leaky defence for Derby’s or the other lots position. I’m inclined to agree with those that say we are very lucky to have our current owners and manger and players (even if it’s not quite perfect). COYP!
    Thing is, and I’m not suggesting it is the case. But how do we know we’re in a much better position? Financially at least.

    There’s always an element of trust required.

    I certainly do have a fair amount of trust in the Reedtz, mostly based on how they have gone about their business thus far.

    But with football and owners you just never know.

    If we have another year in this league, things may change.

    Does anyone seriously think we are balancing the books at present?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    17,370
    Quote Originally Posted by sidders View Post
    Excuse me, UTM, I thought we had exclusive rights on the curse story. Are you saying it might be slightly untrue?
    Possibly.
    Derby did evict a group of gypsies before building the Baseball Ground and word went round that they'd put a curse on the club to never win the FA Cup.
    In 1946, after they won a semi-final, it is said that a group of fans tracked down survivors of the eviction and begged them to lift the curse and Derby won 4-1, but I remember seeing it mentioned a few times on local news or "On the ball" whenever Derby were struggling. Birmingham have a curse on St Andrews as well. So it might be with Notts that it was just somebody making an assumption that we must be suffering a similar curse, other people repeated it and then it's been taken to be true. I can't say I was ever aware of it pre-internet and have only seen it mentioned once or twice.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    7,894
    These curses are pretty potent, next-generation high-tech stuff, determining outcomes in the FA Cup and football fortunes in general - wow.
    Kudos to the travelling community, if true, for pioneering this kind of thought-control technology..
    How would it work exactly? A group of people send brain waves, through the air (or by using dolls and pins) and these waves reach a transmitter/converter that then beams them down to everybody at say Derby County Football Club or whoever comes out of the bag in the FA Cup draw and either boosts and reduces performance...

    Anyway, will read up on stuff like this below and I'd recommend Football Radar to get on to this stuff immediately, it might be able to give IB the edge he needs

    https://www.newscientist.com/article...udible-speech/

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    11,288
    Of course we aren't balancing the books not even close. But importantly nor are we paying (reported) transfer fees of £150K and £250K, nor do I believe we are paying wages far greater than our standing. Dare I even say that our squad is looking relatively slimline and not bloated.

    All whilst retaining a fantastic average home attendance.

    I agree there is always a large element of the unknown and mystery with any ownership as we can't see their bank accounts and financial records nor read their minds.

    All in all a far healthier position than before.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Don_ORiordan View Post
    Thing is, and I’m not suggesting it is the case. But how do we know we’re in a much better position? Financially at least.

    There’s always an element of trust required.

    I certainly do have a fair amount of trust in the Reedtz, mostly based on how they have gone about their business thus far.

    But with football and owners you just never know.

    If we have another year in this league, things may change.

    Does anyone seriously think we are balancing the books at present?
    It’s a fair question and one I’ve considered myself. I’d like to know how much better (or worse) it is compared to the reported £1.6m loss hardy inherited. I’d like to think costs are down, crowds are stronger and non-footballing revenues are improved (dislike him as we may, I do think hardy did some good work in this area). Might be one for the the upcoming fans forum? Would they give a straight answer or dodge it?

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    7,908
    In terms of being a business, nearly every football club in the country is mismanaged. Any business where the model is for the owners to endlessly prop up a business which makes a loss is mismanaged in one sense.

    Just about every club is in a perilous situation. If our owners got fed up of funding Notts and walked away, we'd be in a desperate situation with a hefty wage bill. Administration would be perfectly likely. I don't think we can take much from not paying transfer fees - the reality is that £150k is probably what we are paying some of our players a year anyway. We're probably less exposed than a couple of clubs in our division, but much more exposed than others.

    Too many clubs are run by crooks/shady men (eyes up that lot over the river) and we're very fortunate to not be in that situation. Our owners appear to be sensible, ethical people who care about the club and supporters. I'm really happy about that. But the reality is that rich owners willing to fund a club ad infinitum is what we'd probably all describe as 'good' owners. That leaves clubs' fundamental existence resting at the mercy of an owner.

    The reality is we have no idea how much in debt we are, or what the wage bill is, or how long our owners are happy to fund our club. Optimism combined with healthy scepticism is probably sensible.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    7,908
    Quote Originally Posted by Hoppie View Post
    It’s a fair question and one I’ve considered myself. I’d like to know how much better (or worse) it is compared to the reported £1.6m loss hardy inherited. I’d like to think costs are down, crowds are stronger and non-footballing revenues are improved (dislike him as we may, I do think hardy did some good work in this area). Might be one for the the upcoming fans forum? Would they give a straight answer or dodge it?
    There's been minimal income match day and commercial income for so long thanks to covid that I don't suppose were in a great position at the moment. Now crowds are back, advertising and C &B income will be up, hopefully that'll rapidly change.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    11,288
    That was a reported £400K plus anticipated high wages for both players, that's a huge saving right there and shouldn't be downplayed.

    The rest all makes sense to me. If the owners walked away some point soon, would a new owner come out of the woodwork to buy the club? History tells us yes. I certainly don't want that to happen any time soon.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    7,908
    Quote Originally Posted by laddo View Post
    That was a reported £400K plus anticipated high wages for both players, that's a huge saving right there and shouldn't be downplayed.

    The rest all makes sense to me. If the owners walked away some point soon, would a new owner come out of the woodwork to buy the club? History tells us yes. I certainly don't want that to happen any time soon.
    What was a huge saving? If you're talking about transfer fees, that wasn't a 'saving', that's money we never spent in the first place so there's not really anything to downplay. We did pay transfer fees for Taylor and Mitchell iirc.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •