He doesn't sl@g everything Palace off. Eze is a future Ballon d'Or winner according to Lanzo.

But the big sticking point is that we have a chairman who is reluctant to give up his high profile job and his control despite his previous claim to be a reluctant owner

This raises the issue of what kind of ownership model does Parish want? It seems to me that Textor is the model? Someone who is prepared to invest in Palace but without being the overall owner? The advantage of this model is that Parish knows Palace through and through, and will preserve the culture of the club? But it probably also means that mega rich billionaires who will through hundreds of millions of players won't be interested unless they can have total control of the club?

Personally I prefer the Parish approach.....

Obviously we dont know how many (if any) mega rich billionaires have knocked on the door looking to invest as much as it takes upon proviso that they get total control -

For example in 2010 they could have got the club & total control for relative peanuts -

Today they would have to persuade H & B & Textor & SP to sell their shares - the ground requires significant investment / upgrade & the balancing / improving the squad will be pretty much continuous as with any PL club -

Also - with world events it probably means that any mega rich billionaire either from Russia or who made his money on the back of Russian exploits would not be considered -

Being a South London boy I have never understood the attraction of North London clubs, but for sure those clubs seem to attract serious money easier than we do -

Spot on ! Can’t believe the stick parish gets ! We are very lucky to have him

“This is a crisis, a large crisis.... in fact if you have a moment, it’s a 12 storey crisis, magnificent entrance hall, carpeting throughout, 24 hour portage , and an enormous sign on the roof saying “This , is a large crisis” - Edmund Blackadder

The problem with the single ownership e.g. Simon Jordan is what happens if that person goes bust or loses interest etc.

The benefits of a co-owners is that you spread the risk assuming of course that they can agree on strategy and spending. Right now we have 2 American billionaires who are disinterested and so will only put in the minimum they can get away with.

Textor is not as rich but seems more prepared to gamble but with whose money? His or will he put the club in more debt.

Our minority owner cares about the club and is risk adverse so for now in Parish I trust.

One more point