Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
We're not a hedge fund indeed, but peoples' areas of expertise can provide an insight into motivation for owning a club, of course. I struggled to believe a hedge fund had desires to own a sporting empire, struggle to believe the same about property developers either.
And on the wider sense, and worth pointing out again, the problem with these kinds of debates is sayiong 'ah, but our current owners are shit' is where it falls down.
Thankfully (at last!) just about everybody accepts that our current owners are shit. But when they took over, so keen were people to get rid of the unholy Robinson effort (let's not forget in terms of damage to the club, that era was probably worse than now - at least the current lot have nothing left to flog after they finished with it!) that SISU were embraced, welcomed... because the previous owners were shit, and bad for the club.
So concerns about future owners doesn't deny the present owners are shit and bad for the club, but nor should that be a retort to quell concerns about future owners. If we don't get it right, do we really want to have to go through this all over again in 5 years, having all taken all the books out about Land Law possible?
I completely agree that any new owner needs to be scrutinised thoroughly however it's not realistic for anyone to expect an owner to be happy with throwing millions away on a loss making football club. The whole point I was aiming at in this thread was that an owner with the kudos and acumen to get the club 100% in charge of the stadium will in the process go a huge way to making CCFC a financially sustainable and self supporting business. If that owner has experience in property development or any other relevant business then we can maximise the money made from a successful Ricoh to build a more successful CCFC.
The club concentrates on itself while the owner concentrates on both.