Latest Update from Kris

28 minutes ago, royalowlisback said:

We finished 3rd 35 years ago, if we had kicked on from there who knows what might have happened.

It was downhill from then on.

But this is because of the way we were run.

Richards must have known that without a rich owner and without a youth policy we'd struggle, yet did nothing.

1 minute ago, Athelwulf said:

 

It was downhill from then on.

 

But this is because of the way we were run.

 

Richards must have known that without a rich owner and without a youth policy we'd struggle, yet did nothing.

A couple of Wembley finals and good league table finishes suggest otherwise - it was more late 90's that the rot set in.

42 minutes ago, Bahrain Owl said:

It's certainly very interesting to read about the differences spread over the industry.

May I ask if you work in asset disposals, restructuring, phoenixing etc?

All these things have to done legally. As far as I know an administrator is not legally allowed to rule on a company's status. They are there as "project managers" to a certain extent as all directors have to stand down under administration. 

The creditors still say yes or no to the OTB (note I do not use "takeover") which must be arranged through the administrator as ruled by a court. If the creditors no not accept, after a declared period of time, the administrators put their coats on and it goes back to the court.  The court may rule the company bankrupt and if so, it ceases to exist. Then another company, such as my own, is appointed to dispose of the assets. The examples you illustrate about retail branches being closed etc comes under restructuring (as far as I make out). Industrial scaling back, we call capacity adjustment..

Yes, I accept it may vary depending on each industry or sector but the process seems to be exactly that; a process.

No I don't work in the business. I have some knowledge of the process from running businesses and knowing people who have had going in to administration. I don't  profess to be an expert as there are big gaps in my knowledge.

48 minutes ago, royalowlisback said:

We finished 3rd 35 years ago, if we had kicked on from there who knows what might have happened.

Under Catterick and Buckingham we were in Europe beating the likes of Barca and Roma...I thought it would always be like that 

25 minutes ago, Athelwulf said:

 

It was downhill from then on.

 

But this is because of the way we were run.

 

Richards must have known that without a rich owner and without a youth policy we'd struggle, yet did nothing.

Richards is scum. 

More concerned with setting himself up at the FA then us when he was chairman. 

The sacking of big Ron to satisfy his ego was the start of the last 25 years of poo

1 hour ago, Daveyboy66 said:

I think the actions and support of the fans prove it's a going concern and this should be the selling point for any owner wanting to buy us. 

Indeed. The reason why it is a viable business is not because it is profit making. It’s because owning an English football club with history and potential scale has kudos and also possible capital investment growth if run well (ie. Reach prem)

1 hour ago, royalowlisback said:

A couple of Wembley finals and good league table finishes suggest otherwise - it was more late 90's that the rot set in.

Think Richards arse fell out at the cost of staying up the top with the big boys. Sacked Francis and went on the cheap route. Soon ran off to join the FA. If we had held on for a couple more seasons the sky TV money started to roll in and our history could be somewhat different.

1 hour ago, royalowlisback said:

A couple of Wembley finals and good league table finishes suggest otherwise - it was more late 90's that the rot set in.

Atkinson/Francis built a good side, but an ageing one.

What would the likes of Hirst, Waddle, Walker etc have cost, as young players, in the mid- to late-1990s? Too much.

If you look at Man Utd's squad in the 1980s, many of the players had been cherry-picked from other teams, not developed at Old Trafford.

Even Man Utd realized by the 1990s that they had to develop their own talent, whereas we did nothing.

With the PL, and Uncle Jack and Uncle John inflating the transfer market at Blackburn and Newcastle, there's no way that we could hack it without a rich owner and youth development.

22 minutes ago, ZicoSterland2 said:

Think Richards arse fell out at the cost of staying up the top with the big boys. Sacked Francis and went on the cheap route. Soon ran off to join the FA. If we had held on for a couple more seasons the sky TV money started to roll in and our history could be somewhat different.

 After he'd been dismissed, I remember Francis saying on Monday Night Football that he wished Wednesday well, but thought that it would be difficult as there "wasn't as much money there as there was at other clubs".

When Brearley wanted to merge Wednesday and United in 1996, he warned that if Wednesday weren't still in the PL in the new millennium, then they'd be in trouble.

2 hours ago, Daveyboy66 said:

Under Catterick and Buckingham we were in Europe beating the likes of Barca and Roma...I thought it would always be like that 

There's always Barnsley and Rochdale.... 

55 minutes ago, Athelwulf said:

 

Atkinson/Francis built a good side, but an ageing one.

 

What would the likes of Hirst, Waddle, Walker etc have cost, as young players, in the mid- to late-1990s? Too much.

 

If you look at Man Utd's squad in the 1980s, many of the players had been cherry-picked from other teams, not developed at Old Trafford.

 

Even Man Utd realized by the 1990s that they had to develop their own talent, whereas we did nothing.

 

With the PL, and Uncle Jack and Uncle John inflating the transfer market at Blackburn and Newcastle, there's no way that we could hack it without a rich owner and youth development.

Agree with all of this - just saying as late as the 96/97 season we finished 7th in the Premier League and got to the QF of the FA Cup.

Can you imagine that now?

Sigh.