Re: Official team photo
Posted: Wed Jul 25, 2018 2:15 pm
This !!Darlogramps wrote:No one has ever ruled out having a single "benefactor" owner.Quakerlad wrote:Absolutely not saying that we should live above our means, and credit to TW for getting us within budget.
All I am saying is that I believe that many of the clubs around us have strengthened what were already decent squads, whereas us having to reduce budget has, in my opinion, made us weaker than last year, with replacement players not as good as those that finished last season. I agree, I may be proved wrong once the real games start, and hope I am.
This is reality without a benefactor. I hear too many people saying “ we will always be fan owned, even if it means we have reached our level” , “ never want another benefactor owner” etc. All I am saying is let’s not let the fan owned concept strangle us if after due diligence an investor opportunity comes along in the future. Unlikely as it is.
Just so long as they run us sustainably and sensibly. To pursue the likes of York etc, which is what you've said you want, would require us living beyond our means, regardless of the ownership model.
If a benefactor owner came and had us live within our means (which to me means spending the revenue we make, as opposed to an owner swallowing losses), we'd still have a similar budget.
So I don't see how you can complain we're not competitive, while at the same time want us to live within our means.
I'd much rather grow revenues through increasing crowds, sponsorship, selling on players etc, than place it in the hands of a single owner, who may or may not get bored with us eventually.