You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Who’s at fault - Hodgson or the board?
November 24 2024 2.30pm

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Who’s at fault - Hodgson or the board?

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 50 of 72 < 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 >

  

Den1923 Flag 29 Dec 18 6.40pm Send a Private Message to Den1923 Add Den1923 as a friend

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

It’s the revenue and the competitiveness it brings that you should want because the current tin shed puts us at a disadvantage.

Surely, it is being in the PL that brings in the revenue, first you need a team that can secure that position and the revenue, then the shed should follow and not the other way round?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 29 Dec 18 6.57pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by Den1923

Surely, it is being in the PL that brings in the revenue, first you need a team that can secure that position and the revenue, then the shed should follow and not the other way round?

If it were the case that just being in the Prem brought in revenue then we wouldn’t have West Ham gazumping us on players.

If we were waiting for a team to make a new stand worthwhile then it may never happen. Every club redevelops with a plan in place with the team to follow. It’s how you do it and how you grow any business. You don’t wait for sales or success first because it doesn’t land for you like that.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Eaglecoops Flag CR3 29 Dec 18 8.50pm Send a Private Message to Eaglecoops Add Eaglecoops as a friend

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

If it were the case that just being in the Prem brought in revenue then we wouldn’t have West Ham gazumping us on players.

If we were waiting for a team to make a new stand worthwhile then it may never happen. Every club redevelops with a plan in place with the team to follow. It’s how you do it and how you grow any business. You don’t wait for sales or success first because it doesn’t land for you like that.

We are gazumped by Wet Spam because they were handed a new ground on a plate and they don’t have to worry about ground improvements any more.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 29 Dec 18 9.13pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

We are gazumped by Wet Spam because they were handed a new ground on a plate and they don’t have to worry about ground improvements any more.

They had more money than us at Upton Park too. So does every club with bigger attendances.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Rachid Rachid Rachid Flag 29 Dec 18 9.35pm Send a Private Message to Rachid Rachid Rachid Add Rachid Rachid Rachid as a friend

Think there's a few Arsenal and Everton fans out there tonight who'd be over the moon with Roy and a solid, well organised set up that keeps the ball and doesn't give away a lot of goals.

Arsenal were a wishy washy shower of sh!t. Dick Emery could do better.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards grumpymort Flag US/Thailand/UK 29 Dec 18 11.36pm Send a Private Message to grumpymort Add grumpymort as a friend

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

We are gazumped by Wet Spam because they were handed a new ground on a plate and they don’t have to worry about ground improvements any more.


They wasn't handed anything it was good business move from the owners planning out the future.


Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

They had more money than us at Upton Park too. So does every club with bigger attendances.


True they did have more funds because of the owners who are much better business men then ours and willing to pump funds into the club.

attendances have nothing to do with it that is just a little extra on the side in the grand scheme of things.

Edited by grumpymort (29 Dec 2018 11.38pm)

 


(VPN) - [Link]
(Alt VPN) - [Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 29 Dec 18 11.44pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by grumpymort


True they did have more funds because of the owners who are much better business men then ours and willing to pump funds into the club.

attendances have nothing to do with it that is just a little extra on the side in the grand scheme of things.

Edited by grumpymort (29 Dec 2018 11.38pm)

Attendance revenue, merchandising and sponsorship can have everything to do with it. It can be a £20 million edge in our half of the table. Why do you think Spurs want a 60,000 stadium if ‘it has nothing to do with it and it’s just a little bit extra?’ Quite amusing.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards grumpymort Flag US/Thailand/UK 30 Dec 18 1.49am Send a Private Message to grumpymort Add grumpymort as a friend

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Attendance revenue, merchandising and sponsorship can have everything to do with it. It can be a £20 million edge in our half of the table. Why do you think Spurs want a 60,000 stadium if ‘it has nothing to do with it and it’s just a little bit extra?’ Quite amusing.


I said attendances nothing about those others you tried to add in their together.

Why did spurs want a 60 thousand ground it's not to do with just football go look at the figures attendances regarding football really do not matter much at all.

They wanted 60 for other reason which would be like holding other events remember they signed deal with American football.

[Link]

tv and sponsorship is the big money stuff.

 


(VPN) - [Link]
(Alt VPN) - [Link]

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
Vaibow Flag vancouver/croydon 30 Dec 18 4.22am Send a Private Message to Vaibow Add Vaibow as a friend

It boils down to this, if in May we are relegated, for whatever reason, would we have anything to show for it?

After 6 years of TV money do we have a better:

Youth Academy?

Training Ground?

Scouting network?

Stadium (wether it be bars, lounge, corporate etc)

This is why Cardiff only spent 30 mil and why Huddersfield spent around 50 mil each year. Because if they went down, it's not the end of the world and parachute payments are a huge incentive and wouldn't be wasted on fees.

So let's look at 2013 to now..

30 mil, 30 mil, 25 mil, 90 mil, 44 mil, 10 mil.

It's obvious at the 4th season, we didn't or hadn't invested properly and went against our sensible 'budget' and back tracked. But what is the real reason for this? Well, after 3 years and 4 managers you are bound to have an uneven squad, managers come in and want to slowly build their squad over 3 windows. Sam Alardyce needed to put out the fire and did what he felt was necessary, we've been paying for it since.
It wouldn't have been too bad if we had sold someone last summer, but we didn't and couldn't - long contracts, players that other prem clubs aren't really interested in and players that if we sold, we would have to replace and spend probably more.

Imagine the scenario that Holloway was a good fix and we survived, he gets another 50 mil to invest, we survive and and get another 50, that's a sensible and realistic way. But when you panic, splash out that's when the money goes.

 


This was once a quality forum....

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
ARGILE OLD GEEZER Flag PORTIMAO 30 Dec 18 7.39am Send a Private Message to ARGILE OLD GEEZER Add ARGILE OLD GEEZER as a friend

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Please explain.

I'm with you there, makes no sense to me Holloway said himself that he left because of pressure and not being up to the job

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
ARGILE OLD GEEZER Flag PORTIMAO 30 Dec 18 7.47am Send a Private Message to ARGILE OLD GEEZER Add ARGILE OLD GEEZER as a friend

Originally posted by Painter

Parish is first and foremost a businessman and profit is the main inspiration, this is the same for any other Premier owner.
It cant be denied that he has overseen the most sustained successful period in Palaces history. He has had some luck on the way and made some mistakes, but the positives far outweigh the negatives.
Smug fans who think they know how a club should be run, think its easy. If a constant spend on players isn't forth coming they demand he sells up. Why would he do that? He knows the club is unable to progress any further without a bigger income stream ( enhanced stadium ) and thriving academy, which Jordan abandoned after the Bostock saga. Building up an academy takes time, so does improving the Stadium, but some think it should be done in an instant.
Reality is difficult for some to grasp.

He is also a Palace fan, has been for years before he bought the club, seems to me its an advantage to have an Owner Fan,

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
ARGILE OLD GEEZER Flag PORTIMAO 30 Dec 18 7.54am Send a Private Message to ARGILE OLD GEEZER Add ARGILE OLD GEEZER as a friend

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

Does that include paying £8m for a centre forward that the selling club had bought just a few months earlier for £400,000 plus a Polish central defender that most think is lower division class plus the infamous Erdal Rakip who we had on loan and who never once set foot on the hallowed turf of Selhurst Park.

No it doesn't, but it does include just about eevery other 1st team player and most of the bench, players we could only dream about a few years ago.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

  

Page 50 of 72 < 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > Who’s at fault - Hodgson or the board?