Late David Gold, Sullivan and Brady

The Forum for all football-related discussion, including West Ham United FC. Our busiest Forum and the place to begin if you're new to KUMB.

Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks

Post Reply
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 28203
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 945 likes
Total likes: 2366 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ozza »

For as much as I hate them you can’t compare the spending against a side that finished in the top 4 and got to s champions league final
User avatar
e-20
Posts: 2835
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2016 6:01 pm
Location: London ish
Has liked: 14 likes
Total likes: 4 likes
Contact:

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by e-20 »

Up to his old tricks.
Looks like Gold is now in charge of the West Ham News section on the Official Site. Or is it simply catching.

https://postimg.cc/image/bug09i19h/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
User avatar
nickstanley66
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 10:03 am

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by nickstanley66 »

goingunderground wrote:, our home was blown up,
Literally blown up

https://youtu.be/KCn0S_FLolE
User avatar
East_London_Hammer
Posts: 723
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 9:39 pm
Location: East London

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by East_London_Hammer »

Ozza wrote:Nice long post, but you’re wrong imho.

The lies, the duplicity, the treatment of the “customers” more lies, it stinks.

The re-writing history doesn’t work for me, saying they have been holding back for that special manager after acting the same season after season at two separate clubs and then appearing this year to change all of that. What bull****, let’s stick to facts and historical facts at that.

I hate them, what they’ve done to this club, how they have treated our history and fans what they stand for, how they act, and spending some money this season won’t make me flash my knickers at them.

I realise I’ll probably be a growing minority, especially if results look good, that was probably one thing that Brady has said that’s correct, seriously bringing in a decent manager and spending a bit of cash in a transfer window how fickle must our support be if that’s all it takes?
this, yes i want to see west ham win games but in all honesty i f we went and won the league this year i still wouldnt forgive them for what they have done to this club
User avatar
DDHammer
Posts: 4674
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2014 2:56 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by DDHammer »

The Old Man of Storr wrote:So far this season , Liverpool [ ground capacity of 54,000 ] have spent £119.70m on three players , in a few days' time they will part with another £66.9m breaking the transfer record for a Goalkeeper , last season Liverpool spent nearly as much on a cente half as our owners have spent on 5 players this season , - before we get carried away .
And 7 months ago they sold a player for £142m.

They get £40m a year just for having Standard Chartered on the shirt, £30m a year from New Balance and £5m a year for the sleeve sponsor.

Liverpool absolutely shouldn't be the benchmark for getting carried away.
User avatar
warp
Posts: 14014
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 11:13 am
Location: I am everything about this site which is wrong... i don't give a toss about WHUFC.

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by warp »

Colours never run wrote:Just as a total fantasy hypothetical thought that's unlikely to ever happen, but say we won a Trophy or 2 whilst they're still in charge, I won't think they are completey useless devils incarnate ********s. They would earn some respect back. Anyways, will never happen so useless devils incarnate **** ***** it is for the time being.
if we ever win anything with that pair of b*llocks in charge it will be despite them, not thanks to them.
User avatar
Graza
Posts: 5623
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 10:18 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Graza »

DDHammer wrote: Liverpool absolutely shouldn't be the benchmark for getting carried away.
Manchester Blues spent more on wing backs last year than our combined spend so far this summer and last...

We are in a different financial league completely (especially given "the debt" and it's vastly over market interest rate).
User avatar
Simply Moore
Posts: 3505
Joined: Fri Aug 08, 2008 11:57 am

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Simply Moore »

To be fair we've always had sh** owners, does anyone think owners of yesteryear would have done anything differently for the sake of our fans and tradition? Maybe, maybe not who knows but for sure our history is one of owners lining their own pockets.

Not saying that makes it right, just that we shouldn't be too surprised.

Football isn't what it used to be in general anymore, let alone just us as a club. Its far less tribal, its less working mans more middle class, more entertainment, less loyal support through thick and thin.

For me personally, my expectations of the board are:

1. Give us a manager and a team to be proud of who has a chance of winning something
2. Give us a home OUR home (not rented) and turn it into a football stadium, not a hollow bowl.

They're arguably at least now working on one. I don't think in their tenure we will ever get close to 2.
User avatar
goingunderground
Posts: 1369
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 11:30 am
Location: Maidenbower
Has liked: 39 likes
Total likes: 42 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by goingunderground »

nickstanley66 wrote:
Literally blown up

https://youtu.be/KCn0S_FLolE
I didn’t need to see that again.

A reminder though - let’s never forget how they blew her up for a Hollywood film when the corpse was still warm.

I need a drink.
User avatar
nickstanley66
Posts: 224
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 10:03 am

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by nickstanley66 »

goingunderground wrote:I didn’t need to see that again.

A reminder though - let’s never forget how they blew her up for a Hollywood film when the corpse was still warm.

I need a drink.

Hey think of me, it was literally my season ticket seat they blew up

Image
User avatar
The Old Man of Storr
Posts: 32779
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Lost In the Recesses Of My Mind .
Has liked: 2642 likes
Total likes: 1747 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by The Old Man of Storr »

DDHammer wrote:
And 7 months ago they sold a player for £142m.

They get £40m a year just for having Standard Chartered on the shirt, £30m a year from New Balance and £5m a year for the sleeve sponsor.

Liverpool absolutely shouldn't be the benchmark for getting carried away.

I realise they sold Coutinho , not sure it was for £142m though , Transfermarket.co have the fee down as £112.5m - perhaps the rest was for appearances etc , they also sold Mamadou Sakho for £25m to Crystal Palace - they did however spend £70.92m on Van Dijk , £37.80m on Salah , £34.20m on Oxelade-Chamberlain and £8.10m on Andrew Robertson .

I realise it's unfair to compare Liverpool and West Ham , I also realise that Liverpool have an advantage over us when it comes down to sponsorship etc - what Liverpool did though was to invest all that money they received from transfers , the same can't be said for our owners .

I have said this before and I know that many will disagree - if we are going to criticise Sullivan and Gold for their past misdemeanours then we have to praise them when they do something to put them right - if they keep Marko Arnautovic and continue to invest then in my opinion they do deserve our thanks .

I think compared to some owners they're just small-time operators who saw a chance at making some big money , they've been investing just the right amount to keep us in the Premiership but having found a top Manager [ or a top Buyer ] they're releasing more funds than on an average season , that is if they keep Marko .

I'm not getting carried away by the way .
User avatar
Graza
Posts: 5623
Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 10:18 pm

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Graza »

The Old Man of Storr wrote:what Liverpool did though was to invest all that money they received from transfers , the same can't be said for our owners .

I have said this before and I know that many will disagree - if we are going to criticise Sullivan and Gold for their past misdemeanours then we have to praise them when they do something to put them right - if they keep Marko Arnautovic and continue to invest then in my opinion they do deserve our thanks .

I think compared to some owners they're just small-time operators who saw a chance at making some big money , they've been investing just the right amount to keep us in the Premiership but having found a top Manager [ or a top Buyer ] they're releasing more funds than on an average season , that is if they keep Marko .

I'm not getting carried away by the way .
Quite right that this summer window looks good so far, sorted the defence, some midfield backup, couple of wingers, all needed, decent outlay for a club of our size and as long as they don't try and "balance it all out" they should be commended for it - not lease as you say by bringing in a proper manager.

But, and with this lot there is always a but, where was this 2 years ago? Where was it last year when it all started so well and then they didn't follow through? That's what holds people back. They made the money on the move and the inflated TV deal and sat on it.

A cynical person might think that they know something is going to give on the stadium in the next year or two that will allow them to cash out for no penalty and they are positioning the club to take advantage of that.

Probably bought all the new players on debt to themselves (despite the astounding profits) so they can charge interest and the debts have to be cleared before the sale meaning less to the tax man if they have to give anything...

So far this Summer :thup:. Needs to be sustained for more than one window though before my opinion of them will change.
User avatar
Up the Junction
Thinks he owns the place
Posts: 70930
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
Has liked: 748 likes
Total likes: 3446 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Up the Junction »

The Old Man of Storr wrote:if they... continue to invest
Potentially misleading, that TOMoS. Suggests they've been putting their own money in, which as we know is not the case at all.
User avatar
The Old Man of Storr
Posts: 32779
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:17 am
Location: Lost In the Recesses Of My Mind .
Has liked: 2642 likes
Total likes: 1747 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by The Old Man of Storr »

Up the Junction wrote: Potentially misleading, that TOMoS. Suggests they've been putting their own money in, which as we know is not the case at all.
Didn't mean to mislead anyone , Guv - some of the money they ' invested ' was mine , even more so since I switched to Sky Q . :)

https://www.theguardian.com/football/th ... rket-myths" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
goa127
Posts: 4310
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:38 pm
Has liked: 440 likes
Total likes: 290 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by goa127 »

As dislike of our board is pretty much universal I think the thing that divides people is the stadium move. For some people leaving Upton Park was a disaster. For those no amount of success on the pitch will ever put that right. Generally for me I'm happy at stratford so it comes down to actually trying to move the club forward. This transfer window (so far) has been areal step forward. I agree it's overdue, but I think it's a kind of 'planets aligning' thing more than a reaction to fans anger. (although I'm sure that nudged them along a bit) The most important signing was Pellegrini. Sulli finally got his star name manager and got him just when the club's finances were improving after years of struggle. It seems to be the general belief that Pellers was lined up when slav was sacked, so attributing the spending spree to the Burnley protests might be a bit optimistic. Pellegrini was never going to sign without real money being spent, this must have been decided way back. There's still time to cock it all up, but fingers crossed things may be looking up (that's what everton fans thought last august!)
User avatar
Tenbury
Posts: 9265
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 3:28 pm
Location: Too near Kidderminster
Has liked: 721 likes
Total likes: 1209 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Tenbury »

That's what springs to my mind too.Let's say, and I don't agree at all with the propositon,but anyway.., that this is the moment the poisonous dwarf has been waiting for....the stars are all in line...that quality manager he's been waiting for , finally comes on board...the cheque book comes out and he splashes a shed load of (admittedly not his own) wedge on some quality players.....
What happens if it all goes t*ts up , and we're bottom 3 at Christmas? Would he become so disillusioned he'd decide to sell up?.....well, if that's what it takes.......
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 14643
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 6:00 pm
Location: Overdue warning for being a twat on the rumours thread
Has liked: 22 likes
Total likes: 134 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by Ben »

It truly amazes me that some are happy with the move to the Olympic stadium, i genuinely cant comprehend it at all
User avatar
e17
Posts: 17957
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Deep deep down
Has liked: 280 likes
Total likes: 940 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by e17 »

Ben wrote:It truly amazes me that some are happy with the move to the Olympic stadium, i genuinely cant comprehend it at all
I’m not and wasn’t, but I’m also a realist about what my experience over the Boleyn was like before the final glorious hurrah season under Slav

I reckon about 4 out of the last 7 seasons and 8 out of every 10 games was a maudlin experience with an atmosphere that didn’t match the experience of the 90’s or 80’s - & I was a STH in Chav Corner for 3 years, so at least was plonked in one of the more consistently “lively” spots

There’s no comparison to the matchday experience or soul between the walk from Stratford and Green Street, BUT from Zola’s second rancid season up to Sam’s ear cupping, I was aware that my love for football and even West Ham playing football was dying, and the Boleyn was not doing anything to stop that.

it was possibly destined & even left to feel like the toilets were disgusting, the facilities were crumbling, and the place was dying BEFORE that last season, but I’d honestly felt a disconnect happening to my weekends over there as far back as them moving the pitch further from throw-ins in the 90s, and all the lovely nostalgic walks and pie n mash down the barking road couldn’t fix that

Sadly, the matchday experience at Stratford is the absolute epitome of what happens when boardroom people who have never done “the walk” get given a stadium. Its horrible
goa127
Posts: 4310
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:38 pm
Has liked: 440 likes
Total likes: 290 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by goa127 »

Ben wrote:It truly amazes me that some are happy with the move to the Olympic stadium, i genuinely cant comprehend it at all
It's probably more appropriate for the stadium thread but I'll try and explain briefly. I used to be a chicken run regular in the days before all-seaters. I had the standing season ticket in the eighties. I used to meet friends up at the back. Mainly liked the view(except the corner flags). The atmosphere was great in the 70s, turned a bit sour in the eighties. Upton park in the all-seat era held no great pull for me. I could never afford a season ticket so I often ended up at the back of the main stand where the view was about the same as my view in 235 row 55 at the OS but with very little atmosphere.
Because I'm now an old git I don't want to stand. When I was 17 I didn't want to sit. My ticket costs £450 a year and the view is good. I can get out and get food or drink easily, I can have a quick drink in the bar afterwards with friends who are in other sections. NOW if you like to be near the front then The OS is obviously worse for you. If you like to be behind the goal it'l probably be worse for you. (my son disagrees, he's down there somewhere (sometimes go round for a chat at halftime) he loves it. my Older son who was a Boleyn stalwart came the other week, and turned to me at half-time and said "It is better here isn't it?" I was surprised to hear him say it. The stadium's far from perfect. On a really cold day we shiver at the bar after the game. I went to the stadium in the olympics so I knew what to expect really. Did I prefer 70s Boleyn? yeah but I preferred being young to being anOAP! Hope that explains a bit
goa127
Posts: 4310
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:38 pm
Has liked: 440 likes
Total likes: 290 likes

Re: Gold and Sullivan ???

Post by goa127 »

Tenbury wrote:That's what springs to my mind too.Let's say, and I don't agree at all with the propositon,but anyway.., that this is the moment the poisonous dwarf has been waiting for....the stars are all in line...that quality manager he's been waiting for , finally comes on board...the cheque book comes out and he splashes a shed load of (admittedly not his own) wedge on some quality players.....
What happens if it all goes t*ts up , and we're bottom 3 at Christmas? Would he become so disillusioned he'd decide to sell up?.....well, if that's what it takes.......

Every cloud eh? Read today that the villa owner turned down a £90m bid for the club for the £55m one he accepted because he thought the anglo-egyptian owners would be better for the club. Which one do you think sulli would have taken? :)
Post Reply