Chrysalis

Its how they have handled player assets as well, selling at a loss would have been an admittance book value is too high, so instead they let them rot and expire.

A different day.

Yep, look really faded.

They couldnt even keep bc game off the shirts for this.

So it had to be done the exact day they picked?

This feels wrong, the timing, ticket prices as well.

Well if its accepted he hasnt got a clue, then it doesnt matter how much he wants to fix it, we will just see failure. Also when I say fix it, he probably sees the problem that needs fixing as a different problem, which is again about his lack of ability and decisiveness. I expect the fix for top is "we promote".

Whilst 3 was seen as the great escape, it always felt that the team simply wasnt quite clicking, there was good structure behind the scenes. #2 it just prolongs the pain, and his losses. #1 is what we waiting for.

I think the main issue has always been wages, but it is true we have a player trading issue where unless we can make a nice profit on a player on book value, we just wont sell them. We then just extend the financial pain paying the high wages until contract ends.

Built up debt based on future earnings and player trading income. Squad thats more of a liability than an asset (wage cost exceeding trade value, little young up and coming players in first team squad). Stripped down scouting and sports science. An owner who cant communicate, low effort CEO recruited, reliance on a obsolete sporting director.

Thats what I thought, but I wanted to see if I was wrong, as my question was about financial mismanagement, I remember them from that side of things being ran very well.

What issues were there?

Wasnt his clubs always ran sensibly at a financial level?

I reckon we will only sign one striker, not learning we need competition for places, and the option of playing 4-2-2.

One thing I never understand with penalty takers, why they go low 90% of the time. Our one goal was in the roof of the net.