Ranson (8 Viewers)

cloughie · Dec 28, 2011

To say ranson and sisu are one and the same is to simplistic and people seem to forget that ranson was persuaded by hoffman not to quit when sisu decided to sell dann and fox.
There lies the difference and the seperation of the original vision, not to say that ranson never made mistakes
.
If ranson is involved in the takeover bid are people saying we should reject it and stay with sisu?

@richh87 · Dec 28, 2011

Jack Griffin said:
I thought much the same, Coleman & Boothroyd did not seem like bad choices at the time.

The real problem was that Ransons strategy needed continued money over several years, but everytime he made progress with team building SISU got nervous about the losses and they sold players to cover them. I guess for his vision to work some seriously rich investors are needed, I think SISU have now realised this game is not for them, but they should never have got involved in the first place.

Exactly. SISU did not stick to the agreed strategy. This is not Ranson's fault.

Colonel Mustard · Dec 28, 2011

thorn in my side said:
Ranson appointed Coleman - SISU backed him. Ranson appointed Boothroyd - SISU backed him.

No doubt about Coleman, but there were whispers at the time suggesting AB was not RR's choice (he wanted Robbins).

thorn in my side · Dec 28, 2011

@richh87 said:
Exactly. SISU did not stick to the agreed strategy. This is not Ranson's fault.

And you know this because....Ranson / Hoffman say so?

ICHAN · Dec 28, 2011

Sorry Cloughie I can not see where anyone has said if ranson comes I want sisu to stay? but maybe I missed that post?

I have said I would prefer non of them here as they all have a portion of blame along the way and non of them are whiter than white, and we can all say thing's that push the blame else where so we look blameless in any walk of life.
To think that ranson hoffman or whoever has no blame to take in the fing mess that has happened under sisu would I feel be very naive.
However this does not mean that I want sisu to stay and do not welcome Hoffman and if so be it Ranson, I will not however go into their takeover bid without being sceptical of them.
As far as I am aware and I say it again Hoffman is only bringing people to the table faceless people ok at this stage that is fine but could we end up with another sisu scenario? we will not know until the time comes.
Why hoffman if infact he is is agreeing to let keys to keep tweeting is also beyond me.
OK as some like to know what's going on thats fine but only so many days ago we were told in 10 days their will be news and sisu had better look out.
Then their are other tweets about stick with us we are getting their but these things take time.
We know that, but how does this help with any takeover proposal, all it does is highlight things and helps nothing.
It does not help the protest as he is not saying cov fans are protesting at the southampton game against the owners sisu.
I think he has been told to shut up a bit as KD should have been told to shut up.
If keys tweeting jeopordised any takeover proposal how would the people who are backing keys to keep them informed feel about him then?
I just wish he said nothing and let the takeover process take it's route.
Sorry got side tracked and went on a ramble about a differant subject.
Back to RR if he comes fine at least we are taken over and sisu are gone but I will not absolve him from any blame for the mess we are in just on his say so.
If people want to believe Ranson fine but please do not call those who oppose his involvment as non city fans and that they are happy that sisu are here, because I assure you I for 1 am not happy they are still here.
Also as a couple have said maybe he was just over seeing hoff and they decided to go to a match and all this is totally irrelevant.

thorn in my side · Dec 28, 2011

cloughie said:
To say ranson and sisu are one and the same is to simplistic and people seem to forget that ranson was persuaded by hoffman not to quit when sisu decided to sell dann and fox.
There lies the difference and the seperation of the original vision, not to say that ranson never made mistakes
.
If ranson is involved in the takeover bid are people saying we should reject it and stay with sisu?

It depends upon the detail of the take-over: who are the investors, the nature of the investment (equity/loans - interest?), the personnel, the business plan, local / overseas ownership etc etc.

If the "takeover" is not forthcoming in the next week or so or if the terms and nature of the "takeover" are not right, then I would prefer to stick it out with SISU for the remainder of the season - as we all have a vested interest in retaining Championship football and we do not need to constant undermining and under-current of a "will they / won't they" take over pantomine. SISU need to retain Championship status to preserve the value of their investment. We as fans want to retain Championship status for our club. There is a meeting of minds in this respect and a vested interest for the remainder of the season - IF Hoffman does not move in the next week or so.

We cannot compare the supposed Hoffman/Keys interest with SISU until we know the detail. You may want SISU out but not at any cost. Keys / Hoffman are all about showmanship and brinkmanship at the moment, preying on our emotions and desire for change. We get excited by "tweets" and the hope of massive investment by a billionaire, but in truth we know nothing - and therein lies the problem.

Astute · Dec 28, 2011

thorn in my side said:
I see - and the same applies to SISU with the time travel as well then?

Ranson appointed Coleman - SISU backed him

Ranson appointed Boothroyd - SISU backed him.

Following your logic - well done SISU for backing Ranson.

You see Ranson and SISU are one and the same if we are to apply those standards - yet one is the Messiah and the other the Devil.

Messiah? So who said that and where? You seem to be wording things to your advantage again as usual.

RR and SISU were not and never will be the same. One made out as though they wanted to take our club forwards with funds, and the other said he could take us forward with funds made available. Which part failed? The one who took the money promise away or the one who had players sold whilst putting a decent squad together without making big money signings?

I could be missing the point here. Is anyone saying RR wasted the money that SISU said they had?

I have never said either that I back these so called takeover talks. I am not against them either. I want SISU out. Our club has been ruined under their ownership. They need to go.I see them at fault for what has happened, even if the problem was not having a clue what they were doing. How can we back a takeover we know nothing about? We don't even know if there is a takeover plan.

Delboycov · Dec 28, 2011

Astute said:
Messiah? So who said that and where? You seem to be wording things to your advantage again as usual.

I might be wrong but he used to do the same when he called himself Godiva...unless there are 2 posters with exactly the same writing style and totally pro SISU views. One disappears, one comes on the scene. You don't see them in the same room at the same time do you?

thorn in my side · Dec 28, 2011

Delboycov said:
Astute said:

Messiah? So who said that and where? You seem to be wording things to your advantage again as usual.

I might be wrong but he used to do the same when he called himself Godiva...unless there are 2 posters with exactly the same writing style and totally pro SISU views. One disappears, one comes on the scene. You don't see them in the same room at the same time do you?

Click to expand...

That must be it - just one big conspiracy on my part.

As for totally pro-SISU views, I would suggest you perhaps actually read what I am saying as you will see the error in your comment. I have lost track how many times I have said I am undecided.

There are 2 common themes to threads - (1) Anti Sisu (2) Pro Hoffman. If you are not anti SISU AND pro-Hoffman then you are (1) a mole (2) a Villa fan (3) an idiot (4) a moron (5) part of some conspiracy etc etc.

Is it possible to be Anti-Sisu and undecided about Hoffman and in being undecided posting an opinion one way or the other?

That said, it is a sad indictment that if a view is posted that does not conform with the consensus that such view is unworthy of this forum

Jack Griffin · Dec 28, 2011

I can agree with most people, SISU have to go, they are not suitable owners for a Football club.

I can't give unconditional support to the Hoffman consortium, but they do look like the only game in town, I just hope they have a realistic plan to stabilise the club and get them back to the premiership one day, I don't want them to load the club with more debt, fail and then walk, they have to have sufficient backing & determination to achieve the goal.

If we are going to go down, I'd rather it was with SISU, then hopefully new owners can come in & get us back up.

Chipfat · Dec 28, 2011

Name me 1 chairman/onwer or board member of championship or prem club today that is in it solely for the love of the club......They are all in it for money, networking or money laundering...remember nothing in life is free...

bulkingtonskyblues · Dec 28, 2011

Skyblue4u said:
I'd welcome ranson back. He didn't stand a chance under sisu as we all know now

he brought them to the club

lordsummerisle · Dec 28, 2011

Astute said:
Messiah? So who said that and where? You seem to be wording things to your advantage again as usual.

RR and SISU were not and never will be the same. One made out as though they wanted to take our club forwards with funds, and the other said he could take us forward with funds made available. Which part failed? The one who took the money promise away or the one who had players sold whilst putting a decent squad together without making big money signings?

I could be missing the point here. Is anyone saying RR wasted the money that SISU said they had?

I have never said either that I back these so called takeover talks. I am not against them either. I want SISU out. Our club has been ruined under their ownership. They need to go.I see them at fault for what has happened, even if the problem was not having a clue what they were doing. How can we back a takeover we know nothing about? We don't even know if there is a takeover plan.

What people tended to like about Ranson was the "straight talking", and the fact he was a "football man" and "highly successful businessman".

Now, I always thought that he was lying when he was saying we were "debt-free", and that it was a cover for not having much money that he wasn't offering our better players decent,long-term contracts, and lack of funds were the reasons that Dann and Fox were sold.

He, however kept asserting the opposite, and all his fans agreed with his public pronouncements with a fervour rarely seen outside North Korea when a Dear Leader makes an address.

This now puts me in the tricky position of finding that a bloke I never liked or trusted, apparently held the same views as me, though conversely of course, all the Ranson supporters(who still are) when agreeing with what he said, were actually disagreeing with his private views, but backing Sisu's business plan.

I just find it confusing that the most vigorous anti-SISU posters, are also the most vocal pro-Ranson supporters, though not as confusing as they must obviously find it.

Suppose that Ranson did come in again in some role, Chairman perhaps, how would you find it possible to believe that what he was saying was the truth, as he apparently didn't tell the truth for the entire time he was in charge?

Delboycov · Dec 28, 2011

thorn in my side said:
Delboycov said:

That must be it - just one big conspiracy on my part.

As for totally pro-SISU views, I would suggest you perhaps actually read what I am saying as you will see the error in your comment. I have lost track how many times I have said I am undecided.

There are 2 common themes to threads - (1) Anti Sisu (2) Pro Hoffman. If you are not anti SISU AND pro-Hoffman then you are (1) a mole (2) a Villa fan (3) an idiot (4) a moron (5) part of some conspiracy etc etc.

Is it possible to be Anti-Sisu and undecided about Hoffman and in being undecided posting an opinion one way or the other?

That said, it is a sad indictment that if a view is posted that does not conform with the consensus that such view is unworthy of this forum

Click to expand...

I wasn't for a second suggesting it was a conspiracy on your part....where do I say this? I was however, pointing out that your writing style and your views are very similar to the formerly prolific poster, Godiva....the implication being that you are one and the same. If that's an incorrect assumption to make then I apologise unreservedly-although interestingly you chose not to comment on my assumption.

It wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility that a poster who has repeatedly supported everything that SISU have done and told us consistently that it is all part of a very shrewd business plan and it's the rest of us that aren't 'getting it' has realised that maybe they aren't doing such a wonderful job after all. After making statements praising their every act, supporting Leonard Brody's text vote idea, his plan to make us pay for signings, suggesting we play the same formation, tactics and style 'till the end of time', said poster loses credibility and reinvents himself with a different user name. This time with more 'toned down' support of SISU but still very much anti-Hoffman or anyone that wants to take the club over rather than merely invest....Believe it or not some people find it a lot easier to do that rather than just admit they were wrong.

As I said if I'm wrong I apologise and I would agree with much of your post regarding caution. And if am wrong my comment about the writing style is still a compliment as Godiva has always come across as a very articulate, intelligent and interesting poster....just completely blinkered in his views of what SISU have done to our beloved club!

thorn in my side · Dec 28, 2011

Delboycov said:
thorn in my side said:

I wasn't for a second suggesting it was a conspiracy on your part....where do I say this? I was however, pointing out that your writing style and your views are very similar to the formerly prolific poster, Godiva....the implication being that you are one and the same. If that's an incorrect assumption to make then I apologise unreservedly-although interestingly you chose not to comment on my assumption.

It wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility that a poster who has repeatedly supported everything that SISU have done and told us consistently that it is all part of a very shrewd business plan and it's the rest of us that aren't 'getting it' has realised that maybe they aren't doing such a wonderful job after all. After making statements praising their every act, supporting Leonard Brody's text vote idea, his plan to make us pay for signings, suggesting we play the same formation, tactics and style 'till the end of time', said poster loses credibility and reinvents himself with a different user name. This time with more 'toned down' support of SISU but still very much anti-Hoffman or anyone that wants to take the club over rather than merely invest....Believe it or not some people find it a lot easier to do that rather than just admit they were wrong.

As I said if I'm wrong I apologise and I would agree with much of your post regarding caution. And if am wrong my comment about the writing style is still a compliment as Godiva has always come across as a very articulate, intelligent and interesting poster....just completely blinkered in his views of what SISU have done to our beloved club!

Click to expand...

Many thanks - No offense taken. I am not Godiva. I am a new poster having been recommended to the site by a friend as a friendly forum.

I am not blinkered in my views, just opened minded and cautious. I certainly will not be railroaded into other people's way of thinking by people doubting my credentials as a fan (a comment not aimed at you).

I do want to see change of ownership but for there to be change there must be a viable alternative. SISU are not just going to walk away. SISU will only go if there is a credible alternative. No amount of shouting and screaming at them will change that fact.

At the moment the only alternative is Hoffman, yet we know nothing of the bid - who is behind it, what is the nature and extent of the investment, who are the personnel, what is the blue-print to move the club forward etc? I cannot blindly back a take-over that I know nothing about. I certainly do not subscribe to the Hoffman "stature" point and I am perturbed to read that Ranson may be in some way connected to this take-over. What if, for example, Hoffman's investors are simply another financial institution looking to make a quick buck?

I have my reservations and for that I am perceived by some as in some way lacking in my support for my team. I suspect SISU want out if the truth be told but this is business and they will look to recuperate as much as their outlay as possible.

For my part I feel we need some closure this month.

If Hoffman has genuine investment then he should open talks with SISU and look to wrap this up quickly - but investment is only part of the bargain. We as fans need to know the business plan so we can see it is credible from a fans perspective. Change for the sake of change is pointless, whatever your view on SISU. If Hoffman therefore has the investment coupled with a credible plan for sustained improvement, then great - get on with it and he has my support.

If however Hoffman cannot conclude this take over this month then I believe he should back off and resurrect his interest at the end of the season. The priority is maintaining Championship status. Once the window closes then that is it and we must make the most of our lot and get wholesale behind the team. The "on/off pantomine" of a take-over does nothing to assist and encourage the team in their battle for survival. The team will need each and every fan. We need to create a real atmosphere about the games - the 12th man. We need to focus on supporting the team. In that sense we should almost call a truce with SISU and simply see the season out on the strict understanding SISU actively engage in dialogue with Hoffman (or whoever) at the end of the season.

I am not blinkered - just ever the optimist when it comes to the relegation fight.

Cheers

thorn in my side · Dec 28, 2011

Sorry - double posted cos I am still getting used to the workings of the site !

georgehudson · Dec 28, 2011

in reading, at length, all posts on this thread,
i would acknowledge the right and opinion of all to make a point,
there are though the 2 relevant points,
1. sisu have made a complete 'pigs ear' of their ownership (clouded), of OUR CLUB,
2. we have no definitve information of new investment / proposed take over of OUR CLUB,
we would, i believe, all welcome the demise of sisu,
@ the moment we can only wait, & trust that any interested parties are doing it for CCFC,

PUSB

Delboycov · Dec 28, 2011

thorn in my side said:
Delboycov said:

Many thanks - No offense taken. I am not Godiva. I am a new poster having been recommended to the site by a friend as a friendly forum.

I am not blinkered in my views, just opened minded and cautious. I certainly will not be railroaded into other people's way of thinking by people doubting my credentials as a fan (a comment not aimed at you).

I do want to see change of ownership but for there to be change there must be a viable alternative. SISU are not just going to walk away. SISU will only go if there is a credible alternative. No amount of shouting and screaming at them will change that fact.

At the moment the only alternative is Hoffman, yet we know nothing of the bid - who is behind it, what is the nature and extent of the investment, who are the personnel, what is the blue-print to move the club forward etc? I cannot blindly back a take-over that I know nothing about. I certainly do not subscribe to the Hoffman "stature" point and I am perturbed to read that Ranson may be in some way connected to this take-over. What if, for example, Hoffman's investors are simply another financial institution looking to make a quick buck?

I have my reservations and for that I am perceived by some as in some way lacking in my support for my team. I suspect SISU want out if the truth be told but this is business and they will look to recuperate as much as their outlay as possible.

For my part I feel we need some closure this month.

If Hoffman has genuine investment then he should open talks with SISU and look to wrap this up quickly - but investment is only part of the bargain. We as fans need to know the business plan so we can see it is credible from a fans perspective. Change for the sake of change is pointless, whatever your view on SISU. If Hoffman therefore has the investment coupled with a credible plan for sustained improvement, then great - get on with it and he has my support.

If however Hoffman cannot conclude this take over this month then I believe he should back off and resurrect his interest at the end of the season. The priority is maintaining Championship status. Once the window closes then that is it and we must make the most of our lot and get wholesale behind the team. The "on/off pantomine" of a take-over does nothing to assist and encourage the team in their battle for survival. The team will need each and every fan. We need to create a real atmosphere about the games - the 12th man. We need to focus on supporting the team. In that sense we should almost call a truce with SISU and simply see the season out on the strict understanding SISU actively engage in dialogue with Hoffman (or whoever) at the end of the season.

I am not blinkered - just ever the optimist when it comes to the relegation fight.

Cheers

Click to expand...

Thanks for confirming that TIMS and I apologise unreservedly for insinuating you were Godiva! One of the saddest things about the turmoil the club are currently in is that it has created divisions amongst the fans....Pro SISU..anti SISU..pro Hoffman...anti Hoffman..Pro Thorn...anti Thorn! It mirrors the mess the club are in generally. Never in all my years supporting the club have I known there being so many opposing camps. We all have one thing in common though....we all love City. Nobody is more of a fan just because they want SISU out unreservedly or want SISU in-we all have different views and I respect everybody's right to hold them.

My view is that SISU have had 4 years to attract investment and they have failed miserably. I think even the most passionate SISU defender realises that without investment, this club will continue to slowly die and none of us wants that. I don't believe they can go it alone anymore and in Hoffman we have someone who is working tirelessly to give us an alternative. I doubt very much if he or anyone will work with SISU so the only option appears to be a takeover. Deep down he's 'one of us'...he loves the club and wants the club to have a bright future on and off the pitch. Therefore I'm happy to put my trust in him as I feel he won't knowingly steer us in the wrong direction...yes I'm cautious but in my view it is the only hope we have.

I agree with a lot of your points although I would say that maybe the only way GH can get SISU back to the negotiating table is to shame them publicly. We have no idea what SISU are thinking right now..they may actually be on the verge of walking away. I think the majority would be in favour of that as due to incredibly bad judgement and decisions they have lost most if not all credibility with the fans.

Respect your views TIMS and lets hope that 2012 turns out to be the year that our club rises like a 'phoenix from the ashes' once more!

Godiva · Dec 29, 2011

Delboycov said:
thorn in my side said:

I wasn't for a second suggesting it was a conspiracy on your part....where do I say this? I was however, pointing out that your writing style and your views are very similar to the formerly prolific poster, Godiva....the implication being that you are one and the same. If that's an incorrect assumption to make then I apologise unreservedly-although interestingly you chose not to comment on my assumption.

It wouldn't be beyond the realms of possibility that a poster who has repeatedly supported everything that SISU have done and told us consistently that it is all part of a very shrewd business plan and it's the rest of us that aren't 'getting it' has realised that maybe they aren't doing such a wonderful job after all. After making statements praising their every act, supporting Leonard Brody's text vote idea, his plan to make us pay for signings, suggesting we play the same formation, tactics and style 'till the end of time', said poster loses credibility and reinvents himself with a different user name. This time with more 'toned down' support of SISU but still very much anti-Hoffman or anyone that wants to take the club over rather than merely invest....Believe it or not some people find it a lot easier to do that rather than just admit they were wrong.

As I said if I'm wrong I apologise and I would agree with much of your post regarding caution. And if am wrong my comment about the writing style is still a compliment as Godiva has always come across as a very articulate, intelligent and interesting poster....just completely blinkered in his views of what SISU have done to our beloved club!

Click to expand...

I am flattered you think I am thon-in-my-side, but it is really unfair to him. We are definately not one poster using two signatures.

Another thing you have completely wrong is me being pro sisu. I am not and I have said this so many times but have resigned to the fact that not many believe me.

I joined in March and my second post was actually about the looming administration and Ransons dismissal. In there I explained my view on Ranson and how I thought he failed. I also said I didn't think we would be put into administration as it would make no sense from the owners point of view.

http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threads/7967-admin-looms?p=28256#post28256
(post ¤15)

Much of what I have been writing have been with my personal experience with running businesses with private investors in the boardroom. As virtually nobody on here seemed to have this experience and nobody really understood how they think and how they do their part, all kind of conspiracy therories emerged ... and still do.

In the shadows of events I could see Ranson, Hoffman and Elliott having a score to settle and I have a few times tried to ask if we really are happy to play their game. To be pawns in their attempt to remove sisu and get back in where they previously failed.

I was against the sisu-out movement from day one ... and I still am. Not because I have any emotional feeling for sisu, but because the disruption and turmoil would eventually get to the team.

In an attempt to at least bring some facts to the table, I invited OSB to become cowriter on the three FAQ's (Board/Finance discussions). Nobody on here thinks OSB is pro sisu, so why would he team up with me if I was/am? We may see things differently, yet we agree on the facts - as clearly displayed in the FAQ's threads - and at least we respect each others views. Had we met in real life, we would easily become instant friends.

Again, I am not pro sisu, but I have resigned to the fact that the runaway train is unstoppable. Sisu's plan to get co-investors seem to have failed as no investors in their right mind would walk into a company in open war with its customers. Hoffman, Elliott and Ranson will probably come back and hopefully they will do a better job than when they were here first (though I remain doubtful).

I wish us all a happy new year!

Astute · Dec 29, 2011

TIMS, I can see we agree on so much, including our belief that we can stay up. You still seem to say that if interested in any Hoffman bid then you are pro RR with no reservations. You can't put everyones views together that don't always agree with your own.

We all want what is best for our club. I would prefer our club to be run by CCFC fans, not faceless individuals that do not have to answer to anyone or anything. When there is proof of a bid/takeover I will reconsider. Until then my main thought is that no group could be much worse than SISU.

Jack Griffin · Dec 29, 2011

We moan about SISU being shadowy operators, but so far Hoffman & co have not disclosed their backers. I'd like to hear them say there will be transparency in that area if they take over, it would go a long way towards removing my reservations about them.

ICHAN · Dec 29, 2011

There's the one word why I am sceptical Astute COULD be worse.
Ok sisu have gone but we could again be run by faceless individuals who we have no idea who they are.

In 1 years time we could find ourselves back where we are now.
This group of individuals back the plan if relegated they spend a few million, to help with promotion and it does not happen, sell the best players to recoup some money, hopefully this is sounding very familiar now.

Ok this is all if's, could,maybe's but we have been here and we beleived that saviors were coming last time because JE was asking for shares, he's a cov fan he would not lie to us, he would not let us down.

Then their was RR who led these people in saying things people wanted to hear, he's ok he's a football man and business man he knows what he's doing.
Then Hoff he's a cov fan no way would he let us down.
He walked out saying they have sold players under us etc what's he going to do this time, or will he not have anything to do with the club once the people he has introduced to the club takeover and so absolve himself from any blame should the plan not work?

WE did not get anywhere near promotion and so the downward spiral began.
Sisu did back the club in the beginning so where is the blame for us not getting anywhere near promotion when sisu first came in?
The same could and more than likely happen with this next group of faceless people, all business want a return on their investment, if they come in and we do not get promoted/play offs then the spiral will begin again.

I realise there is a lot of if's and but's their but how many times have we had false dawns?
This is why I am so sceptical of the takeover as I have heard it all before and I do not forget what has happened just because their are differant faces involved, regarding the investors.

lordsummerisle · Dec 29, 2011

ICHAN said:
This is why I am so sceptical of the takeover as I have heard it all before and I do not forget what has happened just because their are differant faces involved.

I'm sceptical because there aren't any different faces involved.

ICHAN · Dec 29, 2011

I meant with the investors lordsummerisle but know what your saying.

Delboycov · Dec 29, 2011

Fair play to you for the reply Godiva and welcome back! I missed your posts over the last few weeks.....

As I said the similarity between yours and TIMS posts are that they are both written by clearly articulate and intelligent people with a knowledge of business....so have the compliment on me The fact you have both defended SISU so passionately also came into it!

What am I not wrong about however is that in the past you have been completely pro SISU. Admittedly you were at your most passionate in your support of them on GMK and in all your posts on boths sites I have only ever seen you defend them and tell us that what they were doing was all part of a great business strategy which ultimately would result in the club being better off. Not once have I seen you question any of their actions or ideas...you even praised Leonard Brody's texting idea and other clearly unworkable plans. You'd wax lyrical and laud them for cutting our debt from 60m to 30million without even hinting that this was down to others walking away with nothing...something they have steadfastly refused to do. I admire you for standing firm in your beliefs but I as I've said before you are as unbalanced a poster in your views as any of the SISU out brigade.

You were quite condescending in the way you replied to others on GMK who questioned what SISU are doing to the club and anyone that dared think we would be in trouble on the pitch this season was brushed off with a "we'll be fine, lets talk about having a football charter instead". You seem to be a lot more measured in your opinions now...are you able to say anything negative about SISU yet?! Still think we'll stay up?

I respect your opinions as much as I respect anyone's Godiva and I think this and other forums would be a lot less interesting without you on it. As i said earlier in this post is that one of the most sad aspects of the club being in crisis is that it has created divisions amongst us. More than ever we need to stand firm together as how the next few months pan out will probably have a bearing on what state we're in for the next few decades.

Happy new year to you too!

Godiva · Dec 29, 2011

cloughie said:
To say ranson and sisu are one and the same is to simplistic and people seem to forget that ranson was persuaded by hoffman not to quit when sisu decided to sell dann and fox.
There lies the difference and the seperation of the original vision, not to say that ranson never made mistakes
.
If ranson is involved in the takeover bid are people saying we should reject it and stay with sisu?

@richh87 said:
Exactly. SISU did not stick to the agreed strategy. This is not Ranson's fault.

And we know this as certain facts? Really?

Investors - like sisu - get in with a plan and a budget to back it.
Ranson was in charge of running the club, so he was in charge of the finances.
Sadly he failed to deliver on the budget and so when the money after almost three years were all spent and the club was still running at a considerable loss, then there were two options left. Either the investors threw in some more money, or the club needed to sell a few players to cover the deficits.
Selling players with a profit was probably part of the strategy.

Either way you look at it, Ranson failed and the failings were before selling Fox and Dann. Selling those players were the direct concequence of Ransons failure.

As I see it, sisu are now back sticking to the original strategy: Buy young and (hopefully) upcoming players, get the club to a financial breakeven, sell players with a profit and invest when possible in new players without (again) risking the life of the club.

Should Ranson, Hoffman, Elliott be succesful in buying out sisu, then we can all hope for a new beginning. But somehow they will have to abide to a plan and a budget set by the new investors. In that plan getting the club out of the constant financial problems will be a key factor, so don't expect too many high profile signings and players on 15K/w. Any investor would only have to look at our neighbors to see that splashing millions for fun on players and high profile managers do not necessarily bring about success and promotion.

Delboycov · Dec 29, 2011

"As I see it, sisu are now back sticking to the original strategy: Buy young and (hopefully) upcoming players, get the club to a financial breakeven, sell players with a profit and invest when possible in new players without (again) risking the life of the club"

How have you come to this conclusion Godiva?!!! Because from what I can see the strategy has been sign nobody apart from a free loan signing who's now gone back and keep their fingers crossed that the current mix of youth and dross can somehow keep us up....that's if they really give a toss about that anyway! And you wonder why I say you're pro SISU!

EleanorRigby · Dec 29, 2011

lordsummerisle said:
I'm sceptical because there aren't any different faces involved.

This investor is a different name, very different as you will soon see.

lordsummerisle · Dec 29, 2011

EleanorRigby said:
This investor is a different name, very different as you will soon see.

Thanks Mr Insider, just so that when, if, any new investors are announced, could you give just the merest clue as to their identity, nationality, sphere of business etc.

Not that I think that you're bullshitting to give yourself a sense of being involved at all.

Godiva · Dec 29, 2011

Delboycov said:
What am I not wrong about however is that in the past you have been completely pro SISU. Admittedly you were at your most passionate in your support of them on GMK and in all your posts on boths sites I have only ever seen you defend them and tell us that what they were doing was all part of a great business strategy which ultimately would result in the club being better off. Not once have I seen you question any of their actions or ideas...you even praised Leonard Brody's texting idea and other clearly unworkable plans. You'd wax lyrical and laud them for cutting our debt from 60m to 30million without even hinting that this was down to others walking away with nothing...something they have steadfastly refused to do. I admire you for standing firm in your beliefs but I as I've said before you are as unbalanced a poster in your views as any of the SISU out brigade.

You were quite condescending in the way you replied to others on GMK who questioned what SISU are doing to the club and anyone that dared think we would be in trouble on the pitch this season was brushed off with a "we'll be fine, lets talk about having a football charter instead". You seem to be a lot more measured in your opinions now...are you able to say anything negative about SISU yet?! Still think we'll stay up?

I admit I have agreed to sisu's strategy and still do. It is important - for whoever owns the club - that the costs and income are balanced in a way the club is not bled to death. To have a future we need to be profitable to invest. I don't like the idea that we get new owners and when they don't have more money to spend we run them out of town and invite in new investors, spend their money and then run them out of town. I simply don't like the morale behind it.

So I don't like the way sisu came in, and I don't like the way they are being forced out.

I also admit that I am junkie for new and innovative ideas. We won't progres if we keep doing the same thing. Brody's ideas are not bad - they are untried at the club, but only by putting them to the test will we know if they are brilliant or bad ideas. If we - the fans - were content with our owners, we wouldn't automatically shoot down new ideas. But as things are, we will never accept anything from sisu other than their departure.

My own suggestion to have a blueprint for how we play was also shot down. Yet, we see every match how we struggle to find a system that will work for even 45 minutes. When AT goes we will get a new manager who will introduce a new system that requires different players. I can't see us getting anywhere near promotion that way.

Never mind - I am not balanced in my postings, who are?
Can I criticise sisu? Certainly! And I have.
Let me summarize where they in my eyes have failed miserably:
1) They failed to get in co-investors at an early stage when they must have realized it would be the only way to buy into the stadium.
2) They sat back for way too long and let Ranson/Hoffman run us to the ground.
But their biggest failure is:

3) After reshuffling the board in march they should have been frank, honest and open in their communication with the fans. After three years they should have realized just how important it is to treat the fans with respect and be on friendly terms. I realize that is not how they go about their normal businesses, but they should have listned to Brody and let him handle the communication. They should really have laid the cards on the table for all to see - held an open meeting explaining exactly where the club was in terms of finances and how they intended to turn the tides. Yes, players would be leaving to cut costs. No, we really shouldn't expect high profile replacements for players leaving. Yes, we are back to square one with buying young players with the intend of selling them again with profit.

Instead they shut up more or less completely and only communicated when absolutely forced to.

In my professionel life I am used to deal with investors, and between you and me: Sometimes I absolutely hate them. They are a specie not originating from this planet!
Still, we can't live without them.

The Reverend Skyblue · Dec 29, 2011

Delboycov said:
"As I see it, sisu are now back sticking to the original strategy: Buy young and (hopefully) upcoming players, get the club to a financial breakeven, sell players with a profit and invest when possible in new players without (again) risking the life of the club"

How have you come to this conclusion Godiva?!!! Because from what I can see the strategy has been sign nobody apart from a free loan signing who's now gone back and keep their fingers crossed that the current mix of youth and dross can somehow keep us up....that's if they really give a toss about that anyway! And you wonder why I say you're pro SISU! :confused:

Does it really matter if Godiva is anti or pro SISU, it is his point of view/opinion. Why does it matter so much !!!, This is a forum and if we all had the same bloody opinion then this forum is finished. Any Cov supporter has my respect however he feels or thinks.

The Rev

EleanorRigby · Dec 29, 2011

lordsummerisle said:
Thanks Mr Insider, just so that when, if, any new investors are announced, could you give just the merest clue as to their identity, nationality, sphere of business etc.

Not that I think that you're bullshitting to give yourself a sense of being involved at all.

If what i was told a while back is correct Oriental and it isn't Barry Hearn

procdoc · Dec 29, 2011

Signing 2 keepers an Cody McDonald is not a strategy godiva

DazzleTommyDazzle · Dec 29, 2011

I was resonably happy with SISU when they came in. I didn't expect them to take a "fairy godmother" approach, but I did expect them to introduce more professionalism to the club.

As is now clear, the original business plan failed (whether the blame is down to RR's decisions, SISU's cash restrictions or a combination of the two) is down to personal opinion.

My issue is what's been going on for the last 6-9 months. Communication with the fans (sometimes known as customers in a business context) has been quite staggeringly bad. We seem to have been appointing and losing Board members with about the same frequency most people change their socks. And as for a business plan.....

As far as we can see the plan has been to cut costs - irrespective of the consequences. In one of his last interviews, KD was seemingly proud that the cost cutting meant we would be approaching breakeven by the summer - but then went on to say that relegation would be a disaster. Did they really not understand that the cuts that had been made in the budget made relegation (lets put this gently) a serious possibility?

That's my issue with SISU. In the absence of any communication to the contrary, I can only see us continuing in a spiral of decline while they remain in charge (with the current policies). When we're in League 1 next season (as, sadly, looks very likely) we'll presumably have to embark on another round of cutbacks to offset the lost income that the Premier League drips down to the Championship. Will we then have sufficient resource to stabilise in League 1 or will League 2 beckon?

I share the concern about the identities and motives of any potential new owners, but at the moment am not sure that things could get much (any?) worse.

EleanorRigby · Dec 29, 2011

Well i think Ken Dulieu's task on behalf of SISU was to sell the club for as much as possible and he failed and the sale of players such as Turner and Gunnarsson was simply to get in enough money to pay our way. I suspect Tim Fisher has the same brief.

Ranson (8 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

New Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency