Thursday, 26 January 2012

Is Yo-Yo a No-No for Sullivan & Gold or Perfectly Acceptable?

There is a body of opinion that holds that relegation suited Sullivan and Gold. It enabled them to cut wages across the board and nudged a host of high wage earners out of the door. The Eggert, Duxbury, Curbishley, Nani & Zola eras did for us good and proper. Bad signings, bad sales, bad appointments, bad tactics, bad contracts, bad results...between them, they dug the grave, tipped in the corpse and then handed a shovel over to the Undertaker Grant to complete the job. And, with the backing of Sullivan and Gold, Grant duly buried us as a Premiership club.

But so what? The latest accounts suggest that the shake down of relegation has achieved exactly what Sullivan and Gold might have hoped it would. After warning of financial Armageddon if we went down, perhaps it dawned on them that with parachute payments in place, relegation represented the opposite, a means of financial rehabilitation. Had we clung on to Premiership survival, players would have had to be bought and new arrivals would have demanded wage parity with the overpaid leeches already sucking the life out of the club. We were in a Catch 22.

Now it has all changed. Nolan is overpaid and so is Cole, but the rest are presumably on realistic wages, remembering that we refused to increase Green's salary. Now, if we return to the Prem, we will do so with a drastically reduced wage bill and in a position to turn a profit, even if we finish bottom. And those words, "even if we finish bottom" are important.

We may now have a financial model that suits a club of our stature. West Brom Yo-Yoed and because of the parachute payments, are financially stable. What would Sullivan & Gold prefer, huge transfer fees and a massive wage bill to keep us in the Prem, or harvesting the dosh one year, whilst keeping the wage bill low, accepting probable relegation and then focusing on bouncing back up the next season? If it works this year, then why not again, and again, and again, and again, and....

...and looking at that arse, I reckon it might be Princess Karren playing with that yo yo!
at

15 comments:

  1. Anonymous26 January 2012 at 21:53

    Sorry what's exactly is your point?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hammersfan26 January 2012 at 21:57

    Erm, that Sullivan and Gold might be happy for us to go down again next season rather than buy a team fit for the Prem. Can't you work that out reading the article?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous26 January 2012 at 22:13

    Guesswork on your part. No one can prove you right. No one can prove you wrong. Just one more post that adds nothing to the sum of human knowledge. You should stick to your QPR stuff- it's rubbish but at least it's not about my team.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hammersfan26 January 2012 at 22:19

    That's the point, we don't know. But we can postulate. Dear God, applying your reasoning, there would be no books on history, politics, religion...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Clez26 January 2012 at 22:53

    Sorry HF, you are wrong. I think G&S are going to totally go for it IF we get promoted to achieve something with the club they love. Hear me out - with due respect to G&S, they are closer to the end of their lives than the beginning (unless they have invented some giant artifical vagina turned frigid by our style of football to freeze themselves in). If we go up, they will sell Upton Park to generate funds, install Peter Risdale as Chairman, and buy Tevez, Rio and Lampard (and Seth Johnson for £25m) and put them on huge wages. In the current style of comebacks (Scholes, Henry), Geoff Hurst will dust off his boots (he will still be more effective than Piq). After glorious failure, they will sell the club to some Tibetan yak farmers and buy back Birmingham for a pound - and around we go again.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Wilky26 January 2012 at 23:05

    Anonymous can't you attach your name to your posts instead of hiding behind your pointless childlike rants!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous26 January 2012 at 23:17

    HF this is the worst post ever - and that's say something.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous27 January 2012 at 05:50

    Wilky- which anonymous was that? There's loads of us on here.

    If its me you are referring to I can only say no, I won't attach my name, pretty much for the same reason why sex shop punters don't announce theirs when embarking on their latest Soho shopping spree. I don't want my mates to know about this seedy aspect of my life.

    Anony-mouse.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous27 January 2012 at 08:50

    23:05 HF likes the anonymice - because he has a choice to click to allow anonymous or not in his settings for this blog. You have to ask yourself why he allows them......

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous27 January 2012 at 08:51

    05:50 hahahaha visiting here is like visiting a sex shop! Seedy as fcuk.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Hammersfan27 January 2012 at 09:17

    0851, you come here, so what does that say about you? Worrying. Do sex shops still exist in a world with the internet? What's the point?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hammersfan27 January 2012 at 09:18

    0850, God allowed both clean and unclean animals into the Ark.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous27 January 2012 at 11:27

    09:18 god allowed?! and there's me thinking it was Noah.

    ReplyDelete
  14. davefking27 January 2012 at 19:10

    I gotta say Fanny. You're quick aintcha? They've been doing it for years at Birmingham and now you blog it as if you've worked it out all by your widdle self.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Hammersfan27 January 2012 at 20:30

    Is that really you dave or is Wrongy stealing your handle? Bit beneath you to use the Fanny label but I suppose I coigned Grumpy so fair play if it is you. I'm not claiming to be original here, I'm just saying it might be the plan in the light of Phil Parkes' comments about our squad.

    ReplyDelete