West Ham United FC Ownership Poll (13/01/10)

[Denbighammer]

Intermarket are favourites?

The only one we know nothing about and they are the favorites? Brilliant.

Who says football fans are thick....

[Antnee]

Fernandes is a West Ham supporter that has got a high profile badly performing company doing very well.

No brainer for me.

[Up the Junction]

Who says football fans are thick....

You, by the sounds of it.

[Kent Bubble Blower]

You must admit, UtJ, it's a pretty odd situation, really. The one "candidate" that we really know absolutely nothing about (who they are, where they're actually based, how much money they have, where they're getting it from, their overall plans for the club, etc) is the one that most people seem to be pinning their hopes on. When you ask why you either get no answer, they tell you it's just "gut feeling" or it's the simple hope that they'll take us somewhere.

Hope based on what, exactly? I just don't understand it. How can you, possibly, pin your hopes on something you know absolutely nothing about? Not digging him out but I'll take Happyhammer93's post as an example

I voted for them (Intermarket) as they are the ones who could - potentially - take us the furthest foward.G&S won't invest a lot of money in new transfers and the Italien seems similar. TF is borrowing money, so I can't see him putting a lot of money into the club to move us foward. Whereas we don't know who is behind Intermarket and so they could have bigger potential to fund new and better players

Based on what, exactly? The fact they said they'd invest £100 million into the club? Didn't Joorabchien say they same thing but was dismissed as a chancer, even though people knew more about him than they do Intermarket?

That makes no sense at all, though. Because you don't know anything about them you're assume they're the best placed out of all the potential investors/owners to take the club forward? It's completely illogical! They could, just as easily, saddle us with a massive amount of debt by doing a Glazer and securing the loans used to buy the club against the club itself.

It just makes no sense to me at all why people are blindly backing the most mysterious bidders out of all of them!

[QuintonNimoy]

I think KBB that a lot of kumbers probably haven't adjusted to the new football economy. No one is going to be putting money into their club, with the probable exception of Man City and the possible exception of Chelsea. The Glazers/Lerners/Hicks/Gillets of this world bought their clubs at the height of the credit bubble believing values would carry on rising forever. The investment choices they made then are completely blown.

No one will buy West Ham on borrowed money with the idea of chucking a load more of it at the club and reaping the rewards, it just isn't going to happen. Every party has said they will run the club 'sensibly', but because Intermarket are otherwsie silent people's hopes that somehow they will take us 'forward' are being placed on them, and IMO there's no reason for it. If they're borrowing to fund the buyout then there's not going to be any long term commitment to injecting cash into the club. On the contrary, the club will be paying them.

The best bets IMO are people who can fund the buyout without bringing debt onto themselves or the club. They will still most likely run the club to make money for themselves, but there won't be a bankrupting imperative over our heads at all times and there will be more left over from not handling a large debt burden for running the club. If Intermarket fall into this bracket then so be it, but what I've gathered so far is that they don't.

[Kent Bubble Blower]

I think KBB that a lot of kumbers probably haven't adjusted to the new football economy. No one is going to be putting money into their club, with the probable exception of Man City and the possible exception of Chelsea. The Glazers/Lerners/Hicks/Gillets of this world bought their clubs at the height of the credit bubble believing values would carry on rising forever. The investment choices they made then are completely blown.

No one will buy West Ham on borrowed money with the idea of chucking a load more of it at the club and reaping the rewards, it just isn't going to happen. Every party has said they will run the club 'sensibly', but because Intermarket are otherwsie silent people's hopes that somehow they will take us 'forward' are being placed on them, and IMO there's no reason for it. If they're borrowing to fund the buyout then there's not going to be any long term commitment to injecting cash into the club. On the contrary, the club will be paying them.

The best bets IMO are people who can fund the buyout without bringing debt onto themselves or the club. They will still most likely run the club to make money for themselves, but there won't be a bankrupting imperative over our heads at all times and there will be more left over from not handling a large debt burden for running the club. If Intermarket fall into this bracket then so be it, but what I've gathered so far is that they don't.

You're probably pretty close to spot on with that post, QN.

That's, pretty much, how I see it too. If they're having to fund the purchase of the club by securing investment from elsewhere in order to raise the funds they certainly won't have pots of cash to throw around for new players, etc
Again, agree completely. If someone has the cash to take over the club without having to secure investment from outside then they're, surely, the best bet. We shouldn't be so naive as to think they won't be looking to make a few quid from the club while they're here. And I'm in complete agreement with you about Intermarket. Until we know more about them and the source of the funds to secure the club, I really can't see how anyone can say they're our best bet.

[Happyhammer93]

Based on what, exactly? The fact they said they'd invest £100 million into the club? Didn't Joorabchien say they same thing but was dismissed as a chancer, even though people knew more about him than they do Intermarket?

That makes no sense at all, though. Because you don't know anything about them you're assume they're the best placed out of all the potential investors/owners to take the club forward? It's completely illogical! They could, just as easily, saddle us with a massive amount of debt by doing a Glazer and securing the loans used to buy the club against the club itself.

It just makes no sense to me at all why people are blindly backing the most mysterious bidders out of all of them!

The reason I believe they can take us the furthest is because the other 3 bids are very similar - won't invest a lot of money and progress will be very slow.

There is an element of risk with having people who we don't have a clue about in charge and they could put us in a worse position than we are currently but they may be rich enough to make us progress at a good rate. It would be easier to make a decison if we knew who they were but we don't so I am hopeing they can take us foward rather than do a Glazer on us

[speculator]

I'll vote for anyone who frog marches LBM down Green Street.

[Kent Bubble Blower]

Sorry, Happyhammer, I respect your opinion but, to me, that still really doesn't make sense. You're still banking on Intermarket being different to the others purely because they've not revealed anything about their identities, their money or their plans. We don't know anything about them so they must be better than those who are known entities? It just defies logic.

I can't see why you'd think they're more likely to blindly throw cash at the club simply because they haven't said they won't, especially when they haven't, really, said anything at all!

In my eyes, the fact they're being so secretive is more of a reason to distrust them then it is to blindly nail my colours to their mast.

[Hampshire Hammer]

The contributions from QN and KBB sum up why I ended up voting for G&S. Basically the belief that they *seem* to be funding their bid with the least debt and that they will invest for steady improvement. But all any of us can go on is belief and instincts at this time.

[Denbighammer]

Two words r.e. Intermarket; Munto Finance. Mystery buyers of Notts County, outed as a sham within months. Left the club in an even worse state than when they bought it.

Mystery consortiums spell danger to me, apologies if I offended any one with the way I expressed it. I just feel strongly that massivr decisions regarding the ownership and future of the club shouldn't be done on a wing and prayer and I am very wary of total strangers bearing 'gifts'.

Not saying Intermarket are going to be bad news I just fail to see how they can be anyone's preferred bidder when we know nothing at all about them. Surely, everyone who voted Intermarket should actually have voted 'None of the above' until we know more?

[the pink palermo]

Two words r.e. Intermarket; Munto Finance. Mystery buyers of Notts County, outed as a sham within months. Left the club in an even worse state than when they bought it.

Not saying Intermarket are going to be bad news I just fail to see how they can be anyone's preferred bidder when we know nothing at all about them. Surely, everyone who voted Intermarket should actually have voted 'None of the above' until we know more?

Yep .

Chelsea and City ( 2nd time around) got lucky .

Liverpool , Manure less so

Villa - it's all loans at this stage

Pompey - will be in 4th division in 3 years time .If they are lucky .

[bubbles1966]

Votes for Intermarket are effectively Votes For A Dream.

West Ham fans who will bankroll immediate improvement, followed by continual investment.

The problem remains that there seems to be little substance to it. Until they come clean about their identities, and I'm not sure what the argument is for them remaining invisible, then their credibility is wafer thin.

[carnage]

Until they come clean about their identities, and I'm not sure what the argument is for them remaining invisible, then their credibility is wafer thin.

Trap knows one of them.

[Eastbourne Hammer]

Votes for Intermarket are effectively Votes For A Dream

Welcome to cloud cuckoo land!

Gives me a good laugh with some of the stuff posted though. Intermarket feels just like someone marketing New Labour.

[Happyhammer93]

Sorry, Happyhammer, I respect your opinion but, to me, that still really doesn't make sense. You're still banking on Intermarket being different to the others purely because they've not revealed anything about their identities, their money or their plans. We don't know anything about them so they must be better than those who are known entities? It just defies logic.

I can't see why you'd think they're more likely to blindly throw cash at the club simply because they haven't said they won't, especially when they haven't, really, said anything at all!

In my eyes, the fact they're being so secretive is more of a reason to distrust them then it is to blindly nail my colours to their mast.

I understand where your coming from but I hope they will have the money to invest and like Bubbles said its a "vote for a dream" which the other three - seem - unable to provide.
Them being secretive is a reason to be fearfull of them as they might put us in a worse place but they might also have the ability to take us to a better place and to be run properly and successfully.

[dapablo]

Daydream believer, yeah I go withh that, but will suggest some people do find it disasteful, psyche eh !

[saludo de carlitos]

The majority wanted Intermarket. :raver:

[BoB_On]

Yeah, the thickies.