I will say again as sole owner Patrick cryne makes the big financial decisions. That is not a slight on Patrick cryne at all it is common sense. A diluting of his ownership would stop that. It is my opinion but it certainly isn't an insult towards Patrick cryne regardless of how many people believe it is
You are one of the big thinkers on here. When it comes to political ideas and idealism, twitter is lost on you too. Barnsley FC is my love of 50 odd years. Twitter is simply not the tool to describe that love.
Like I say, every company has someone who takes the final and most difficult decision. Unfortunately, it just has to be that way otherwise there can be deadlock. That person will take into consideration the views of other interested parties, but at the end of the day the decision always comes down to just one person. It happens in all walks of life. The hugely difficult decision concerning the terminally ill baby at the centre of the Charlie Gard case is a tragic illustration of the stalemate that can occur when there are competing strong interests at the heart of an argument. In that case, a judge has had to at least threaten to take the final decision on behalf of the competing interests. Business and especially football business moves far quicker. You simply have to have someone at the top who decides between A and B. Please think this through again because you are coming over as someone who is bitter about something for no good reason.
I will inform the millions of companies with multiple shareholders that the way they operate is not possible. Ta Thanks for the business lesson by the way I bow to your superior knowledge again
I think where the Hume incident and fall out may well have influenced future decisions, I actually wonder if the relegation season was the point of no return for him. We had gone through another phase of losing manager after manager, pay off after pay off and most restraining, paying off player failures to create room to get mercenaries and lost causes into the club, who also turned out to be abject failures. That must have been both draining emotionally and financially costly. I don't think its any coincidence that we haven't had a broken toy since then and have instead gone for young prem players on loan or lower league players who have made an impact at their former clubs and seemingly had the right mentality.
You know when the press say that shareholders have banded together to get rid of the Managing Director, you know what that means don't you. It means that the few major shareholders have told the board to get rid. You are harking back to a time when the club was owned by lots of individuals who lost their shares when the club went bust. But who ran the club then. John Dennis did. Was the way that John Denis ran the club any different than the way that Patrick Cryne does. Well, the only difference that I see is that John Dennis did not have the cash to pay for his mistakes. Sarcasm does not excuse lack of thought. Please think through your position and do not try to cover up a lack of thought by making a sarcastic response. As I say, you are better than Conan. That is my position and I would hate to be proven wrong.
Got to feel sorry for Angus MacDonald on his 900 quid a week. Skimmed through that but it seems to be the usual - a bit of guesswork, presenting a few opinions as fact, hiding the lack of substance by making the post five times too long, then calling everyone who doesn't agree thick.
But neither have you explained why 2 or 3 shareholders would improve the decision making process. There would have to be a consultation process in order to determine policy and when it comes around to making the big decisions, and it is not unreasonable to suggest that the 2 or 3 shareholders would be part of that consultation process. But currently that process involves the team manager, the CEO and the board of directors. As I keep saying, the process in all companies is that the Managing Director takes opinions from all major stakeholders, but it is he who takes the final decision. If more experience, or experience in different areas is required, it is usual to find an appropriate person and to bring that person on to the board of directors. Shareholders fund the club. They do not have to have any knowledge other the knowledge of the stock market. I would be interested who you think would want to put money into a football club in exchange for a minority interest or indeed why Mr Cryne would wish to take the contributions of others in the form of share capital in order to dilute his own interest. It just does not seem to be a feasible proposition from either side. Please rethink this issue.
I know of at least one major sponsor who has offered to "buy-in" who didn't even get the courtesy of a "no".
Good morning Red Rain. As the friendlies have gotten under way I found myself lamenting that we didn't have a minority report on them! Truth be told though, it would be a bit of a bugger to analyse when the team totally changes midway through the match. I look forward to their return when we entertain Mr McCarthy's men on the glorious 12th! As I recall, what seemed to hack Mr Cryne off more than anything was the expensive loan recruits who turned up for one last good payday. Whereas we were decried as a selling club in the old days, developing players and selling them on at the right price is now the declared policy of the club. And it has brought us promotion, a Wembley trophy final win and a season of comfortable survival in the Championship. We start afresh again this season, and there was a sense of the hard work that Hecky knows lies ahead in his interview. The Hourihane situation was slightly different, and I felt we could have let our bet run in that case rather than using the "cash out" facility, but I've bored folk enough with my views on that one already. Cryne, Hecky and for that matter, Gauthier and his predecessors have earned our patience right now, and there are already some promising signs ahead. I hope Jacob Brown's contract is a three year one though!
There seem to be many on here who believe that we have the potential to be a Manchester United, to compete at the very top of the national game. Come on now seriously? This is grand hyperbole. There is no one on here who believes such a thing, not even the romantic fantasists. I would rather suggest that there are a few who consider we could be less conservative, but only and rightly moderately so.
Thank-you for your kindness regarding Minority Report. I had thought that it might be a season long thing only, and the huge churn of players over the summer had convinced me that my addled brain would fail to recognise anyone until at least January, but following your kind words I am reconsidering. I am afraid that you may be the Minority Report's one and only fan. If you recall, we lost £1m in our promotion season which was only partly offset by a £500k injection by our owner, which staved off the league who would otherwise have called foul on grounds of fair financial play. Mr Cryne has stuck with the club through thin and thinner. He has put more into the club than we had any right to expect and deserves our thanks and support. However, I feel that since the Stones bonus following his sale by Everton and the Mawson sale, we have not needed to sell to survive. All the other sales have been forced upon the club by good players who could see that they would earn more elsewhere. That is no reflection on those players. It is just a simple fact of life. In such circumstances it is not so much cashing in as it is safeguarding a financial asset to be used in the future. I am sure that if any of those players had been willing to re-sign on terms that the club had thought it could afford, then the club would have done so. All the chat on here is just that and it will never make the situation otherwise. However, what our policy has done is make us an attractive choice for young players who are anxious and willing to better themselves. They can see that we are a club that has similar goals to themselves, and because our goals align, we are a good choice for career progression. The downside is of course that fans cannot expect to see a player develop for a period longer than 3 years. That is sad, but it is football in the unfair world that has resulted from the influx of cash from SKY. Excuse me whilst I pause to wash my fingers having typed that word. The policy has been an outstanding success over the last 2 years. It has brought us promotion and financial stability. Whether that success can continue is open to debate. Frankly, I have no idea whether the new intake will make it or not. Our rebuilding is far from complete yet, but unlike others I do not see that the rebuilding has only 10 days to complete. The transfer window does not close until 31 August, and there will always be another. Aging bring a different outlook on life. There is always going to be more time.
Our club has been operating under a policy that over the last two years has brought outstanding success, both on the field and on the Balance Sheet. There are those who think they know better. They think that the better thing to do would be to blow the lot on inflated transfer fees and wages. They justify their case by trying to make out that Mr Cryne is holding back the club by keeping the purse strings tight. When they are questioned, they fail miserably to justify their reasoning and are deeply reluctant to think things through again, or debate without goading, insults or sarcasm. Well I tell you what. I will prove to you that I am someone who can change his mind and keep hyperbole out of his argument. I want you to convince me that you know more about football policy than our owner, current board members, CEO and team manager. Tell me who we should buy, how much we should pay in transfer fees and wages and how that guarantees us more success both on the field and on the Balance Sheet than our current proven policy.
While Havana red1 is pondering that one, I'd just interject that of the players we've signed since our last relegation I can recall few, if any, that I'd heard of prior to our securing them. Not surprising really, as they have mostly been the result of some superb scanning of statistics, databases and observations. And you can't argue with the fact that they have been less risky investments - even including the ones who haven't worked. It never ceases to amaze me the number of threads on here titled something like: "Maldwyn Bufton - worth a punt?" etc. The club's methos of identifying recruits certainly doesn't start with random threads on here, so that's just a waste of time.
John ran the club very differently I think. Ran it in a much more collegiate way in far more difficult circumstances (miners strike/Taylor reported) he managed to keep us as a thriving championship club on a well run budget, build the modern Oakwell and get us promoted to the Premiership. It's a bit disingenuous to say that risk analysis is key when it may not have warned against the loss of 'guaranteed' income. Which is the thing that sunk us rather than any profligacy. In my opinion and it is only mine. The model operated by Dennis with fans such as Spinks in key positions suited us as a family club better than the current model which has hived off catering and allowed the ground to go to ruin. There are similarities but the differences are crucial and important. While I will always appreciate Mr Cryne and woukd not want us to spend beyond our means I have to say in a lot of ways we have gone sideways or backwards over the last 13 years which is of course better than going out of business and he will always be our hero for saving us from that. Bugger so many words...I blame you. Onwards and upwards
I have not posted much on here this summer but I have read most of what has been posted. I resolved that when I started posting again, that I would not be drawn into pointless argument that ends in the swapping of insults. So much for that resolution. I do not profess to know much about players outside the club. I have enough keeping up with our own players. But the number of posters on here who have an almost universal knowledge of all players in the football league amazes me. Then there are those who can look at a players statistics and know immediately that he is of the right character and would fit right in to our patterns of play. The thing is that they are always spot on, and even if they aren't is will be the manager's fault.
Firstly I have never mentioned Mr Cryne at any level throughout my time as a member of this board, nor his ability to run a business. Yes we have had success over the last couple of seasons but we must not forget the failures and mistakes of those that came before. However, the point is that we are in a much better position now than 2 years ago, and we have another season in the championship which solidifies our financial position further. There are teams in our division that are wealthy. These teams pay hyper inflated wages and transfer fees because they can: it doesn't guarantee success though does it. We of course are 'poor' in comparison, but we are not poor: we are healthy. All I would suggest is a little more dynamism, just a little. I think you should lose the condescension too, for this detracts from the arguments you put forward and allies you with those who you decry ("goading, insults or sarcasm").
