Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]

    Search       Member List      Official United Site     ArabZone      ArabTRUST       BBC Sport     Twitter
Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum.

New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join The Arab League!


If you're already a member please log in:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6
Thompson confirms exits; Most of the midfield to leave
Topic Started: Mar 9 2011, 10:51 PM (4,510 Views)
The Eggman
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
whatsthatonyourback
Mar 11 2011, 03:32 PM
ETA: Even if he isn't happy being the owner and wants out, I don't really see a conflict between that and his current role. It will be easier for him to exit, with as high a purchase price as possible, if he runs the club well.

Even so, if he's doing a good job, why should you concern yourself with his motivation? Once you start bringing that into it, it becomes a murky world. He could be in it for money, or for his father's memory, or for a feeling of self-worth, or a deep love of United, or a hatred of Dundee, or to impress chicks, or he's got nothing better to do, or he wouldn't have been able to run a company of this size any other way. So what? Plenty of people have run the club they love and made a complete arse of it.
If his true aim is to be able to sell the club with as small a loss as possible, then he may not be thinking about what the team will be like in 2015, but just cutting the costs and the debt so that it appears a more attractive proposition to any buyer.

I don't think he is doing a goob job. the blatant desperation of "come and get my players, please, we're ready to sell them", and then weirdly changing his mind like with the fiasco of the Conway non-sale, gives me the impression that he doesn't know what he's doing.

Yes, many people have f*cked up clubs they love. Just because that happens, that doesn't mean it shouldn't matter about what the owner feels towards the club. Would you not rather have an owner who loves the club, and wants to make it as successful as possible?

ETA: Eddie Thompson made some mistakes during his chairmanship, and it wasn't all plain sailing. The PR side was a car crash much of the time, and Brewster's tenure was a horror (although the decision to appoint him was considered good at the time). But you knew he loved the club, and was putting his heart and soul into it, so that does matter. Whereas if United go to pot like in the Brewster time (3 wins in 30 games), then I can't see the same depth of feeling towards ST. Indeed, it will be the opposite. He will be castigated because the inferrence many fans have taken, that he doesn't have his heart and soul in the club. End ETA.

So, to reiterate, I don't think he's doing a good job. Eddie Thompson, with Craig Levein in big part, built a fine squad for very little money. Craig Conway, Prince Buaben, Morgaro Gomis, Danny Swanson, Scott Robertson - all excellent players. Plus there's David Goodwillie, and Garry Kenneth who came through the youth ranks. Now it looks like three of those players will f*ck off for free in the summer, and David Goodwillie will go for - if United are lucky, because ST has been quite vocal in how skint United are, which allows other clubs to bid lower than what the players are worth, as if it's a fire sale - not even close to what he should. And how long before Danny Swanson doesn't get a new contract, or Scott Robertson buggers off for nothing, or next to nothing?

And who's he brought through instead - Scott Severin.

The legacy that his dad built up is being squandered, and before long, United will be back to 2000 and 2001 form.
Edited by The Eggman, Mar 11 2011, 05:09 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
whatsthatonyourback
Member Avatar
Waldo Jeffers
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Eggman
 
If his true aim is to be able to sell the club with as small a loss as possible, then he may not be thinking about what the team will be like in 2015, but just cutting the costs and the debt so that it appears a more attractive proposition to any buyer.


Having a club with a weak squad that needs an expensive overhaul is not the sort of proposition likely to increase the bids ST is likely to receive.


Eggman
 
I don't think he is doing a goob job. the blatant desperation of "come and get my players, please, we're ready to sell them", and then weirdly changing his mind like with the fiasco of the Conway non-sale, gives me the impression that he doesn't know what he's doing.


By the club's account, there was not a lot of money on the table for Conway, especially when a large proportion of the supposed £600k offer was on the condition of clauses that were unlikely to be met in the future. And we had to give 20% of whatever we did get to Ayr. My impression at the time was that Conway's value to the team in the last year of his contract was probably more than what we were likely to receive from 'Boro, so ST declined their offer. Seemed reasonable to me, although in hindsight, Conway missing half the season through injury meant we would have probably been better taking the money.

Eggman
 
So, to reiterate, I don't think he's doing a good job. Eddie Thompson, with Craig Levein in big part, built a fine squad for very little money. Craig Conway, Prince Buaben, Morgaro Gomis, Danny Swanson, Scott Robertson - all excellent players. Plus there's David Goodwillie, and Garry Kenneth who came through the youth ranks. Now it looks like three of those players will f*ck off for free in the summer, and David Goodwillie will go for - if United are lucky, because ST has been quite vocal in how skint United are, which allows other clubs to bid lower than what the players are worth, as if it's a fire sale - not even close to what he should. And how long before Danny Swanson doesn't get a new contract, or Scott Robertson buggers off for nothing, or next to nothing?


I must say I thought Levein was much more important to the later success of United in ET's reign than the owner & chairman. He made a series of car-crash decisions. Remember the pay-cuts under McCall and paying our best players to leave? The way ET ran the club, it was just as well he had a few million spare to write off his mistakes. His love for the club may have been detrimental to his ability to run it well. Remember the Crawford panic-buy? Paul Ritchie?

Eggman
 
Eddie Thompson made some mistakes during his chairmanship, and it wasn't all plain sailing. The PR side was a car crash much of the time, and Brewster's tenure was a horror (although the decision to appoint him was considered good at the time). But you knew he loved the club, and was putting his heart and soul into it, so that does matter. Whereas if United go to pot like in the Brewster time (3 wins in 30 games), then I can't see the same depth of feeling towards ST. Indeed, it will be the opposite. He will be castigated because the inferrence many fans have taken, that he doesn't have his heart and soul in the club.


Would you rather a chief-exec is judged by the fans for his love for the club or for his performance as chief-exec? If ET hadn't been pumping his own money in, we'd have been screaming for his head.

Eggman
 
Yes, many people have f*cked up clubs they love. Just because that happens, that doesn't mean it shouldn't matter about what the owner feels towards the club. Would you not rather have an owner who loves the club, and wants to make it as successful as possible?
I can take or leave someone's affiliations to the club. What 's most important is how well they run it. Nailing your allegiance to the mast often seems like a way of hiding poor management of the club. I'd much rather judge someone's performance on their actions and achievements rather than their promises and dreams.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Homer
Member Avatar
Ian McCall
[ *  *  *  * ]
Here's what I don't get (and forgive me if this was already covered in the six pages of time-of-the-month handbag swinging) - how come we are letting these players go for nothing instead of extending their contracts, when, at one point at least, they were considered highly saleable assets...?

If the damage is an extra 3-400k per season to get three players signed on to longer term deals, surely we could take that hit and hope that, with another two years of contract to run, someone might stump up a sum for them. Granted, we missed the boat by overvaluing players last summer, but if we take the hit now and still sell them for pennies (lets say Gomis, Buaben and Conway all go for a total of 1 million) wouldn't we turn a profit?

Oh and Stephen Thompson is a dour git.

Anybody see the Christmas video on Arabzone where he's sat in his office with no decorations, empty shelves and a bare minimum of desk items. Looked like he couldn't wait to get out of there....

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
gordonthearab
Craig Brewster
[ *  *  * ]
When i saw the title of the thread i just saw Stephen Thomson confirms exit i thought oh good he's leaving and someone else is going to take over . Then i read on and it's about the players.

I agree with much of what Homer and Eggman said. At least his dad put money into the club though he did waste alot. Steven Thompson drives down the value of players every time he opens his mouth. Is Stephen Thompson going to take a pay cut next season then.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Naebody
Member Avatar
Twat
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Homer
Mar 11 2011, 06:38 PM
Here's what I don't get (and forgive me if this was already covered in the six pages of time-of-the-month handbag swinging) - how come we are letting these players go for nothing instead of extending their contracts, when, at one point at least, they were considered highly saleable assets...?

If the damage is an extra 3-400k per season to get three players signed on to longer term deals, surely we could take that hit and hope that, with another two years of contract to run, someone might stump up a sum for them. Granted, we missed the boat by overvaluing players last summer, but if we take the hit now and still sell them for pennies (lets say Gomis, Buaben and Conway all go for a total of 1 million) wouldn't we turn a profit?
We are not re-signing them because their agents have told their clients that they can earn more money elsewhere (though it's curious lack of pre-contract agreements, though perhaps they're just not publicised any more). I guess we'll have to wait and see if the agents have given their clients good or bad advice.

As for Thompson, it's not a character issue for me. It's a strategy one.

The answer to WT's earlier question is quite simple. It would be ideal to have a Chairman who said: "the target is to be a regular contender for the European group stages by 2016 and here's how we intend to do it. We'll focus investment in players aged 16 to 23 and will only put people on extended deals beyond that if they agree to transfer fee paydown clauses, which would incentivise the player to move for a fee rather than simply running their contract down. Meanwhile, to ease the working capital crisis we'll pursue a 25-year sale and leaseback of Tannadice that should effectively halve interest payments. The extra cash that frees up will be invested in the youth policy put in place by Levein. These changes in strategy mean 2012 should be seen as a transition season, so to reflect that we will be reducing 2012 season ticket prices by 25% for all purchases before June 1. And finally, Dundee United will make plans to dissolve the SPL in 2016 if by that date a system of equal distribution of media money is not yet in place."

Instead, the chairman's saying: "we're in check-mate. You want success and entertainment? Well, you've had it."

I find that hard to defend.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Homer
Member Avatar
Ian McCall
[ *  *  *  * ]
Naebody
Mar 11 2011, 09:30 PM
"the target is to be a regular contender for the European group stages by 2016 and here's how we intend to do it. We'll focus investment in players aged 16 to 23 and will only put people on extended deals beyond that if they agree to transfer fee paydown clauses, which would incentivise the player to move for a fee rather than simply running their contract down. Meanwhile, to ease the working capital crisis we'll pursue a 25-year sale and leaseback of Tannadice that should effectively halve interest payments. The extra cash that frees up will be invested in the youth policy put in place by Levein. These changes in strategy mean 2012 should be seen as a transition season, so to reflect that we will be reducing 2012 season ticket prices by 25% for all purchases before June 1. And finally, Dundee United will make plans to dissolve the SPL in 2016 if by that date a system of equal distribution of media money is not yet in place."
:banjmp: Naebody for chairman!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Art Vandelay
Member Avatar
the king of carrot flowers
[ *  *  * ]
Naebody
Mar 11 2011, 09:30 PM
It would be ideal to have a Chairman who said: "the target is to be a regular contender for the European group stages by 2016 and here's how we intend to do it. We'll focus investment in players aged 16 to 23 and will only put people on extended deals beyond that if they agree to transfer fee paydown clauses, which would incentivise the player to move for a fee rather than simply running their contract down. Meanwhile, to ease the working capital crisis we'll pursue a 25-year sale and leaseback of Tannadice that should effectively halve interest payments. The extra cash that frees up will be invested in the youth policy put in place by Levein. These changes in strategy mean 2012 should be seen as a transition season, so to reflect that we will be reducing 2012 season ticket prices by 25% for all purchases before June 1. And finally, Dundee United will make plans to dissolve the SPL in 2016 if by that date a system of equal distribution of media money is not yet in place."

Instead, the chairman's saying: "we're in check-mate. You want success and entertainment? Well, you've had it."

I find that hard to defend.

Hmm. Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Skeletor
Member Avatar
Most likely to be Ann Widdecombe
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Which is precisely the problem. Naebody doesn't have millions of pounds to invest in United, and Stephen Thompson is the unlucky businessman who probably miserably accepted to take over as United's chairman, as a promise to his father. This thread lost its way a little when folk started to suggest "Wouldn't you prefer Maurice Malpas won the lottery and signed it all over to United, rather than that dour faced prick?"

Yes. We all would. But there are not a wealth of multi-millionaires eagerly proposing to take United over. Thompson is what we have, and we'll have to live with it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
whatsthatonyourback
Member Avatar
Waldo Jeffers
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Naebody
Mar 11 2011, 09:30 PM
Homer
Mar 11 2011, 06:38 PM
Here's what I don't get (and forgive me if this was already covered in the six pages of time-of-the-month handbag swinging) - how come we are letting these players go for nothing instead of extending their contracts, when, at one point at least, they were considered highly saleable assets...?

If the damage is an extra 3-400k per season to get three players signed on to longer term deals, surely we could take that hit and hope that, with another two years of contract to run, someone might stump up a sum for them. Granted, we missed the boat by overvaluing players last summer, but if we take the hit now and still sell them for pennies (lets say Gomis, Buaben and Conway all go for a total of 1 million) wouldn't we turn a profit?
We are not re-signing them because their agents have told their clients that they can earn more money elsewhere (though it's curious lack of pre-contract agreements, though perhaps they're just not publicised any more). I guess we'll have to wait and see if the agents have given their clients good or bad advice.

As for Thompson, it's not a character issue for me. It's a strategy one.

The answer to WT's earlier question is quite simple. It would be ideal to have a Chairman who said: "the target is to be a regular contender for the European group stages by 2016 and here's how we intend to do it.
We'll focus investment in players aged 16 to 23 and will only put people on extended deals beyond that if they agree to transfer fee paydown clauses, which would incentivise the player to move for a fee rather than simply running their contract down.
Meanwhile, to ease the working capital crisis we'll pursue a 25-year sale and leaseback of Tannadice that should effectively halve interest payments. The extra cash that frees up will be invested in the youth policy put in place by Levein.
These changes in strategy mean 2012 should be seen as a transition season, so to reflect that we will be reducing 2012 season ticket prices by 25% for all purchases before June 1.
And finally, Dundee United will make plans to dissolve the SPL in 2016 if by that date a system of equal distribution of media money is not yet in place."

Instead, the chairman's saying: "we're in check-mate. You want success and entertainment? Well, you've had it."

I find that hard to defend.

Interesting proposal, Naebody. None of those proposals seem to cost money up front, which is good. And thank f*ck somebody else isn't personalising the issue regarding Thompson.

I'd want to see numbers for the ground sale, but despite the very concept of it making me twitchy, I can see the financial sense to it. Not too sure what you mean by the transfer fee paydown clause, although I'm fully behind the rationale behind it - which addresses a key problem with current transfer activity where we are a selling club that isn't getting any money for the players who leave.

The last suggestion is the maddest, and the one I agree with the most. I'm suprised you've suggested it after your previous commitment to clubs owning their own TV rights, but that is the most fundamental change that could increase income to the Scottish game in the long term without pouring all increases into the OF.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Eggman
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
whatsthatonyourback
Mar 11 2011, 05:33 PM
Having a club with a weak squad that needs an expensive overhaul is not the sort of proposition likely to increase the bids ST is likely to receive.
Well he's creating a club with a weak squad, that's for sure. I guess he doesn't want to sell, then.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Eggman
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
whatsthatonyourback
Mar 11 2011, 05:33 PM
I must say I thought Levein was much more important to the later success of United in ET's reign than the owner & chairman. He made a series of car-crash decisions. Remember the pay-cuts under McCall and paying our best players to leave? The way ET ran the club, it was just as well he had a few million spare to write off his mistakes. His love for the club may have been detrimental to his ability to run it well. Remember the Crawford panic-buy? Paul Ritchie?
Who was it that brought in Levein?

And when Levein left, who was it who made a total balls-up (although luckily so) of the attempted appointment of Pat Fenlon? And who brought in Scott Severin? And who has made such bad decisions that players we should be getting good sell-on fees for are leaving for free?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Eggman
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
whatsthatonyourback
Mar 11 2011, 05:33 PM
Would you rather a chief-exec is judged by the fans for his love for the club or for his performance as chief-exec? If ET hadn't been pumping his own money in, we'd have been screaming for his head.

Eggman
 
Yes, many people have f*cked up clubs they love. Just because that happens, that doesn't mean it shouldn't matter about what the owner feels towards the club. Would you not rather have an owner who loves the club, and wants to make it as successful as possible?
I can take or leave someone's affiliations to the club. What 's most important is how well they run it. Nailing your allegiance to the mast often seems like a way of hiding poor management of the club. I'd much rather judge someone's performance on their actions and achievements rather than their promises and dreams.
Obviously I'd rather a chief exec judged by fans for his performance.

When ET made mistakes, he put in more of his cash to rectify those mistakes.

When ST has made mistakes, he's made it clear he's not willing to put in his dad's money.

So, I'd rather ET running the club badly instead of ST running the club badly, because that's what it seems to have come down to. And when ET ran the club badly, we resulted - finally, yes - in Craig Levein in charge and a very good squad. I doubt we'll see something like that happen after ST's running of the club.

And you can say it doesn't matter to you, but it does matter - at least to many of the fans - when a chairman goes on tv repeatedly to reiterate how much the club is a millstone round his neck.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
whatsthatonyourback
Member Avatar
Waldo Jeffers
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The Eggman
Mar 12 2011, 09:58 AM
whatsthatonyourback
Mar 11 2011, 05:33 PM
Would you rather a chief-exec is judged by the fans for his love for the club or for his performance as chief-exec? If ET hadn't been pumping his own money in, we'd have been screaming for his head.

Eggman
 
Yes, many people have f*cked up clubs they love. Just because that happens, that doesn't mean it shouldn't matter about what the owner feels towards the club. Would you not rather have an owner who loves the club, and wants to make it as successful as possible?
I can take or leave someone's affiliations to the club. What 's most important is how well they run it. Nailing your allegiance to the mast often seems like a way of hiding poor management of the club. I'd much rather judge someone's performance on their actions and achievements rather than their promises and dreams.
Obviously I'd rather a chief exec judged by fans for his performance.

When ET made mistakes, he put in more of his cash to rectify those mistakes.

When ST has made mistakes, he's made it clear he's not willing to put in his dad's money.

So, I'd rather ET running the club badly instead of ST running the club badly, because that's what it seems to have come down to. And when ET ran the club badly, we resulted - finally, yes - in Craig Levein in charge and a very good squad. I doubt we'll see something like that happen after ST's running of the club.

And you can say it doesn't matter to you, but it does matter - at least to many of the fans - when a chairman goes on tv repeatedly to reiterate how much the club is a millstone round his neck.
Unsurprisingly, I don't agree with your assessment of ST's mistakes. Severin - jury still out, but it seemed to be PH who demanded that one. Fenlon - bit of a PR disaster, but things didn't turn out too badly with PH in charge, did they?

Regarding ET's appointment of SCL - well, that one really just fell into his lap. Everyone realised Levein was an opportunity we must not let pass. I can't give him too much credit for that one, and it certainly doesn't excuse some of the dreadful decisions he made.

You seem to wish for ST to make the same cliched statements that footballers make all the time about loyalty and undying love for whoever they're playing for at the moment, which give fans a nice warm fuzzy feeling. The gullible f*ckwits. Yet he's already said he supports United, and he was there with his dad for many a match at Tanny. Do you not believe him? Or do you just want him to wrap himself in the club scarf like a plethora of scoundrels have done at many a club they were destroying, no matter what their intentions were.

Anyway, I again implore you to say what you would do differently, rather than just make mostly insubstantiated character assasinations.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Eggman
Member Avatar
Tommy McLean
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
whatsthatonyourback
Mar 12 2011, 10:20 AM
You seem to wish for ST to make the same cliched statements that footballers make all the time about loyalty and undying love for whoever they're playing for at the moment, which give fans a nice warm fuzzy feeling.
No, I seem to think it inappropriate for ST to continually bitch and moan about the burden of running the club. Big difference between that and what I 'seem to wish for', as I'm sure you're aware.

I think we've reached an impasse, and I'm not going to rehash things I've already said.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Naebody
Member Avatar
Twat
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Addressing WT only, as I've not read anyone else's comments yet (sorry, but I'm busy):

A maths of a property sale and leaseback are quite simple really. It's effectively just remortgaging, where the new lender takes a ~5% annualised return secured against the asset. The benefit is that you won't get ~5% from a bank for the same debt, no matter the implied "worth" of the property. And it's standard to agree that, in 25 years, the asset defaults back to its original owner. It limits future flexibility so is not an ideal transaction, obviously, but the circumstances we're in are not ideal either.

By "paydown" I mean the deal on the table for any player 23 years old and above says "if you leave during your contract you're getting 33% of a transfer fee." Ideally, this would be tied to a two-year rolling contract rather than a fixed-length deal. That would effectively make football agents, the single most problematic factor in managing the labour, work to the club's advantage rather than just their own.

As for TV rights, my ideal is indeed for a two-tier system where conventional rights are equally distributed while a"home games" pay-per-view system exists independently for each club. That, however, is the ideal rather than an objective. One step at a time.



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 6

Find this theme on Forum2Forum.net & ZNR exclusively.