Given the owners do not put capital in to the club, it doesn’t take a forensic accountant to work out that for any arrivals these will need to be funded by departures. The cash pile that sat on the balance sheet at the time of takeover will have dwindled substantially in the nearly 5 years of ownership. Unless the aim is to put debt in to the club and try to leverage their position then the only option to fund permanent additions Is through player sales.
Let me take the discussion in a different direction by asking you firstly what you thought about Dane Murphy and what you thought about the way he left the club?. For what it’s worth I thought Dane was brilliant and arguably the best ceo we’ve ever had. My view on why he left in such an unceremonious fashion was because he put the needs of the fans and club before those of the owners. Now that Dane has gone they have, in my view, replaced him with someone as diametrically opposite as they could find in Kaled. Ie a yes man. I mention the above merely to further supplement the reasons for my concerns over what might happen in the forthcoming window.
I thought Dane benefitted from having an excellent team around him that drilled home what Barnsley fans expect from a CEO. Openness, updates, and transparency. Dane Murphy didn’t want to be any of those things initially, but thankfully we had people at the club who turned that around and he delivered on those expectations. He also brought us Dike and was at the club when we had such a great season. He also pretty much lied to us with his last comments about plans for this season, probably fully knowing he was off to Forest. I’m not sure how you get to a point where he gets put on such a pedestal of putting the needs of us first though? He left us in a state of turmoil and took the club secretary with him? In terms of the new CEO he’s had a far more turbulent start. But he hasn’t needed to be told about openness, updates and transparency - although with the latter he has had a bit of a mare with the West Stand. I didn’t agree with some of his answers the other night, but respected the willingness to answer them. I don’t agree with the West Stand closure, but appreciate there’s a chance it might have been a necessity - however that doesn’t forgive the way it was communicate which was poor to say the least. I don’t think he’s a yes man at all. Too much experience with the City group to be like that. I also like the fact he wants to be here and has moved his family from Sweden.
Appreciate that you have a good handle on what is happening down at the club but think you are being a bit hard on Dane. He did I believe bring his partner with him, he got the players in that Struber wanted including Micheal Sollbauer. He also got in Carlton Morris in addition to Dike for Val, and he was working through the most difficult period in history since WW2. Regarding the fans we enjoyed an against all the odds survival (albeit aided by the plight of Wigan) and only the second stab ever at the championship playoffs in the club’s history
Not being harsh I thought his time here was great and he was more than competent at his role and did right by us during him time here. I also wasn’t suggesting that Khaled moved here and Dane didn’t, just that moving here is a sign of commitment as is the fans’ meetings. My point was, in terms of me personally, that I can’t look at it universally positive when the way he left, and the comms that came before, we’re fragmented from the reality of the situation. I also hold Paul Conway accountable for many of our failings this season thus far. The new CEO hasn’t managed a transfer window yet.
Nope, broadcasting the event is the best way to do it. That way everyone can draw their own inferences without having someone else interpret it for them.
Where as it been said that we basically begged Stendel to join us ? Not being a arse just interested as I heard the complete opposite
I said as much in my mini-review but this comment was based on that not currently being an option. The minute you broadcast live you turn it in to press conference territory though and would probably lose 20% of the content. But I think that would be fine to ensure everyone gets to see the majority.
Stendel and the board said as much. Spoke about how Daniel was unsure about coming to England but they pursued him relentlessly as they knew he was the right man for the job. For a year anyway.
Thanks for clearing up ,I honestly haven’t seen any of them quotes That version of events certainly differs from what I heard
Maybe there’s two different stages we’re talking about? Was Guathier the CEO at the time? Could have been getting him to have an interview vs. taking the job. Who knows!
There's quite a simple rule of interpretation of comments and statements coming out of Oakwell unless there's cast iron evidence there true don't believe a word.
Depends how you interpret what was said. They admitted they’d been monitoring Struber since before Stendel or words to that affect. But they also said that they were really vigorous in convincing Stendel about the ‘project’ (or words to that affect)
I remember them saying they were impressed with his presentation which suggested that there were a few in the frame and he'd done his homework.