RevidgeBlue

We can't let Leonard go at the moment without probably two coming in that are an upgrade on him. So of course we probably will.

And which doesn't even matter anyway because they only have to give personal guarantees if they want to send any money over.

Tyler Morton - for the love of God, No.

Explained earlier. Someone said words to the effect that savvy owners wouldn't have to fund losses. I replied that was "optimistic" (meaning I think the Club would take a while to turn round due to the state the V's would no doubt leave it in and that any new owners would have to tolerate losses for a period no matter how clever they were)

Aunty, balls, uncle. You're talking about something completely different to the point I was trying to make.

At this point, no idea what you're on about. Original point: "Savvy owners wouldn't need to fund losses" To which I disagreed and to which you now seem to be agreeing with me. I'll leave it there.

Cheers. I think I might have been looking at FIFA regs which seemingly required 28 days notice before you get get the player back.

Not sure the actual ability or value for money of the player is the main point here, which is those 2 Clubs obviously fancy him and think he will improve their fortunes and are making an effort accordingly whereas us....... *Tumbleweed*

Surprised, when I've seen bits of him.on TV I thought he looked lethal.

I think he's a really good player. Do you not?

Again don't disagree - we've been a selling club and not the trading club we need to be obviously - but that wasn't the point I was making. At best there would still be quite a turn round period when not insubstantial losses would be incurred and need to be covered imo.

Meanwhile in the real world Middlesbrough have accepted bids of £5m from Luton and (ironically) WBA for Issiah Jones. And we are doing.......what?

I couldn't agree more with that analysis.

That wasn't the point under debate. The proposition I was replying to was that savvy owners (i.e. not Venky's) wouldn't have to fund losses. They would for quite a while imo.

Thanks. Do you know if players can be recalled instantly or if there is a minimum notice period?

We haven't got any Szmodics' or Wharton's left to sell. New owners would still have to find that £10m (at least) plus cover annual operating losses for a while

I think that's a fairly optimistic take.

They have in the past up until the Court case, I meant when the last bits of family silver have been sold off. They'd have no option then but to cover or sell.

Surely if you've committed to a flexi- ticket you should get priority over a potential walk on? Good idea in principle but I can't decide if they've negated the point of it by having to give at least 3 working days notice. Surely there's enough spare capacity to accommodate 1) ST'S 2) Flexi tickets and 3) Walk ons in that order?

Apart from that...........

Especially as we weren't a Championship Club but a Premier League one when they bought us. No point swapping owners who can fund losses for ones who can't though.

To be fair, to them we're probably just a bottomless money pit but the only chance they have of getting a decent chunk of their money back is for us to be promoted so you'd think that in itself would be the motivation to provide the manager with some clever and strategic investment in players.

The news has only broken publicly just now but I presume the Club will have known about it for a while, I'd assume Stoke did us the courtesy of tipping us off in advance, maybe had to give us 28 days prior notice as per regulations. So we can expect the blue touch paper to be lit any time now then.............

Another day, another player needed.

No problem. John Fleck has apparently successfully completed 1 game for Chesterfield in the EFL trophy this season so I'm sure he'll be available come deadline day!