Independent Leyton Orient Forum

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:32 am

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:24 am I can understand bringing in young players with potential and developing them . The problem is they are not going to get us promoted this season. They are investments for the future . What's the point of bringing in a manager like KJ and only signing kids . it's been the board who's been talking about ambition and promotion but it's not going to happen this season without some real quality being brought in before the window closes .

Are you in a rush for promotion Red?

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:41 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:32 am

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:24 am I can understand bringing in young players with potential and developing them . The problem is they are not going to get us promoted this season. They are investments for the future . What's the point of bringing in a manager like KJ and only signing kids . it's been the board who's been talking about ambition and promotion but it's not going to happen this season without some real quality being brought in before the window closes .

Are you in a rush for promotion Red?

Of course but it's been our board who's been doing all the talking about wanting promotion . Well it's not going to happen this season by only signing young rough diamonds who may or may not come good in a couple of seasons time . If the board wants promotion this season we are going to need to sign the quality necessary this season.

Thor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:46 am In respect to the backroom side of the club, I personally see the sense in what they’ve built. The owners are not thinking of the next five minutes of course they could and then the fans will be moaning about how short sighted the board has been. So they’ve used they’re undoubted business acumen to put in place a structure fit for purpose and the future. They’ve said with their own mouths 5 years to the championship, would a club with a deficient structure be able to get there? Doubt it. We are undoubtedly in a better shape off the field than we’ve been for a long time. They’ve got that part right in my opinion.

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:50 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:31 am

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:09 am Tuffers
You are a very confusing person on here
Be exact in your critical comments - I have not got the propensity to comprehend where I am insulting - apart from my summary of the Italian idiot.
As you regularly post every time I
post on here I be enlightened to understand what the heck you are saying

Anthem of Hope
You assert that the club is set up like a corporate company & state this is wrong .

Then you claim going back to a "different template "
Which 1 ?
Where hearn owned the lease on the ground & built flats ?- No
Where Tony Wood lost his money in Africa?
Where the Ovendens & Winston didn't do an awful lot other than sell star players to survive- No
Where zussman had a bucket going around fans to keep the club alive ?- I put money in that bucket - my pocket money - NO

Offer more than frustrated commentary other than some random former template
That never really did us much kop anyway .

I am not frustrated I think Nigel doing his best with his and the lofc mission statement type of template - however I would of preferred a different leaner non playing structure -

It appears Nigel governance is based on his background particularly American business one
I personally prefer a simpler one that’s not offensive to Nigel or his co backers - it’s just my view - simple tuffers ain’t it
I owned a franchise in USA so I know how they are set up and how easy the money turns up every weeks as a % of gross turnover of the previous week - so my old mate tuffers I know with buckets of money pouring in how a corporate franchise gets their share but others take the risk and investment
Lofc ain’t no easy money for revenue thus notated overheads ain’t the way to go in my mind

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:46 am

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:41 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:32 am

Are you in a rush for promotion Red?

Of course but it's been our board who's been doing all the talking about wanting promotion . Well it's not going to happen this season by only signing young rough diamonds who may or may not come good in a couple of seasons time . If the board wants promotion this season we are going to need to sign the quality necessary this season.

They are hardly going to talk about relegation or mediocrity are they ?
Caveat Emptor .

Personally I see improvement year on year since they took over considering what's happened here .

If we go for broke we could be a Derby a Sheffield Wednesday a Bradford City
or worse still a Bury

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 9:02 am

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:46 am

RedDwarf 1881 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:41 am

Of course but it's been our board who's been doing all the talking about wanting promotion . Well it's not going to happen this season by only signing young rough diamonds who may or may not come good in a couple of seasons time . If the board wants promotion this season we are going to need to sign the quality necessary this season.

They are hardly going to talk about relegation or mediocrity are they ?
Caveat Emptor .

Personally I see improvement year on year since they took over considering what's happened here .

If we go for broke we could be a Derby a Sheffield Wednesday a Bradford City
or worse still a Bury

Yes, I agree we have to be sensible but without the quality signings necessary we won't be getting promotion this season.

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:59 am Disagree
Tuffers you are one demanding poster
My view is based on my experience and I think my experience with evidence is good for my head to use hence it’s my view not your or others.

My view is valid if I think it has some logic to Lofc and the mentally if how they MAY think based on their own experiences.

Personal experience is very valid for any ones view

All viable business have a ratio of acceptable overheads to turnover

With less non playing overheads that ratio becomes more competitive as a business venture.

I don’t believe living in USA with all modern ways of communication needs to be managed in the way they have with this emphasised need that you and others keep banging on

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:26 am Ok tuff - this is a county court and you are the DA
Yes
A DIFFERENT TEMPLATE
- one that has less non playing overheads and not limited to the expenditure relating to CEO (that has just resigned ) and DOF that has it appears reporting to the investors on a whole lot of lofc activity and expenditure
Simply
Rationalisation of the duties they currently execute to other members of staff
That does not mean they reduce the reporting re governance on their investment and introduce risk

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:40 am

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 8:53 am How many clubs don't have a chief executive?

I don’t know the answer
However the answer would be distorted or weighted due to the premiership and clubs that were in the next division down employing a CEO - where the turnover and costs are simply not business like ( the enormous amounts of debt they carry paying ridiculous wages and transfers fees hope to gang on to the status of those two divisions

It’s all bullshit really thinking a business in football should be structured as per other industries

Currently in the top two divisions football is a money game with kicking a ball as a side show and players / chairman / investors on a mixture of ego driven trip to bankruptcy.

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:26 am Ok tuff - this is a county court and you are the DA
Yes
A DIFFERENT TEMPLATE
- one that has less non playing overheads and not limited to the expenditure relating to CEO (that has just resigned ) and DOF that has it appears reporting to the investors on a whole lot of lofc activity and expenditure
Simply
Rationalisation of the duties they currently execute to other members of staff
That does not mean they reduce the reporting re governance on their investment and introduce risk

Monkey Boy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:12 pm

Beradogs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:03 pm We keep being told there are funds available and the board always sound very bullish about new signings but we don’t ever seem to bring in the quality needed. We are crying out for a marque signing (for our level) in the middle of midfield and yet we bring in a kid who can’t get near Derby’s first team and a player that nobody has ever heard of from a team at the bottom of the conference with only a handful of games under his belt. Perhaps they will turn out ok but it’s just a punt as it always seems to be with this club. The new right back looks like a deer caught in headlights. Everyone signs players so just bringing in bodies is not a reason to rejoice. They need to improve us. Is it the board that talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. Is it ling. Is jacket the head of the snake? You decide but I for one am fed up. Can anyone say it’s been a successful transfer window and the club is going all out for promotion. Away from the signings the football is dire. Grim.

They have brought in kids to do a mans job,your right we needed a quality signing in CM,why sign a kid that was on trial at the beginning of the season and wasn’t signed then if he were any good? They have signed squad players and in positions that we don’t really need,they were signed because they were available at a cheap price. Jacket has reached his sell by date and Ling has signed more bad managers than I’ve had hot dinners. I think Jacket will walk before the end of the season

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:34 am

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:26 am Ok tuff - this is a county court and you are the DA
Yes
A DIFFERENT TEMPLATE
- one that has less non playing overheads and not limited to the expenditure relating to CEO (that has just resigned ) and DOF that has it appears reporting to the investors on a whole lot of lofc activity and expenditure
Simply
Rationalisation of the duties they currently execute to other members of staff
That does not mean they reduce the reporting re governance on their investment and introduce risk

Again, how many clubs do not have a chief executive?

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:49 am I doubt if a CEO employment has one hair strand of relevance to any club being above lofc

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:06 am

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 10:49 am I doubt if a CEO employment has one hair strand of relevance to any club being above lofc

Clearly not. But if they are not necessary and an easy cost saving as per your plan then why do all these other teams have them?

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:13 am Let’s use a different method of informing that things in life have a different view it’s not as simplistic as : other do we must do -the majority view does not mean anything is correct
1. How many women had silicon breasts because they wanted them and then decades later we find out they leaked and there is a class action for compensation
2. My mouth was full of UK National Health dentist crap mercury based fillings done in the 1960s
I found today they are being removed as good dentist practice because the data shows they cause poisoning to the human body

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:35 am

Wally Banter wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:26 am So, to be clear, we should buck the trend by sacking our CEO and putting their salary into signing a couple of players, because some women's breast implants leaked?

More than some few women breasts leaked
- a crude simple example where fools copy others without thinking the crap data selling the stuff to these poor women who through the way society is structured or marketed think it going to help them enhance their feminine profile
All I was saying the CEO was a easy example of cost against return to this football club and with our income of substantial less than our operating costs any and I mean any non playing cost overhead should be examined

There no evidence that their employment duties cannot be considered to be distributed to others in the club

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:35 am

Wally Banter wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:26 am So, to be clear, we should buck the trend by sacking our CEO and putting their salary into signing a couple of players, because some women's breast implants leaked?

More than some few women breasts leaked
- a crude simple example where fools copy others without thinking or code ring crap data selling the stuff to these poor women who through thd way society is structured or marketed think it going to help them enhance their feminine profile
All I was say and the CEO was a easy example of cost against return to this football club and with our income of substantial less than our operating costs any and I mean any non playing cost overhead should be examined

There no evidence that their employment duties cannot be considered to be distributed to others in the club

Smendrick Feaselberg wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:47 am

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:35 am

Wally Banter wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:26 am So, to be clear, we should buck the trend by sacking our CEO and putting their salary into signing a couple of players, because some women's breast implants leaked?

More than some few women breasts leaked
- a crude simple example where fools copy others without thinking or code ring crap data selling the stuff to these poor women who through thd way society is structured or marketed think it going to help them enhance their feminine profile
All I was say and the CEO was a easy example of cost against return to this football club and with our income of substantial less than our operating costs any and I mean any non playing cost overhead should be examined

There no evidence that their employment duties cannot be considered to be distributed to others in the club

You're really still taking a lifestyle choice that some people in different subsets of society made and comparing it to what a group of like minded organisations in the same industry deem a necessity?

There is evidence that their employment is needed - and that is that pretty much every team doesn't think that the CEO tasks are unnecessary or could be distributed to other staff. You're completely wrong on this yet despite hitting rock bottom you're still wanting to dig.

ComeOnYouOs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:10 pm

Beradogs wrote: ↑Tue Jan 25, 2022 10:03 pm We keep being told there are funds available and the board always sound very bullish about new signings but we don’t ever seem to bring in the quality needed. We are crying out for a marque signing (for our level) in the middle of midfield and yet we bring in a kid who can’t get near Derby’s first team and a player that nobody has ever heard of from a team at the bottom of the conference with only a handful of games under his belt. Perhaps they will turn out ok but it’s just a punt as it always seems to be with this club. The new right back looks like a deer caught in headlights. Everyone signs players so just bringing in bodies is not a reason to rejoice. They need to improve us. Is it the board that talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. Is it ling. Is jacket the head of the snake? You decide but I for one am fed up. Can anyone say it’s been a successful transfer window and the club is going all out for promotion. Away from the signings the football is dire. Grim.

Been saying this for a while now. So much funds but every player is brought in on the cheap.
KJ only signed a one year contract, so he'll be gone, and Ling needs to go to.
We just go round in circles

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:42 am

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:35 am

Wally Banter wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:26 am So, to be clear, we should buck the trend by sacking our CEO and putting their salary into signing a couple of players, because some women's breast implants leaked?

More than some few women breasts leaked
- a crude simple example where fools copy others without thinking the crap data selling the stuff to these poor women who through the way society is structured or marketed think it going to help them enhance their feminine profile
All I was saying the CEO was a easy example of cost against return to this football club and with our income of substantial less than our operating costs any and I mean any non playing cost overhead should be examined

There no evidence that their employment duties cannot be considered to be distributed to others in the club

Thor or George ?

Thor wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 12:04 pm

tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:42 am

Anthem of Hope wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 11:35 am

More than some few women breasts leaked
- a crude simple example where fools copy others without thinking the crap data selling the stuff to these poor women who through the way society is structured or marketed think it going to help them enhance their feminine profile
All I was saying the CEO was a easy example of cost against return to this football club and with our income of substantial less than our operating costs any and I mean any non playing cost overhead should be examined

There no evidence that their employment duties cannot be considered to be distributed to others in the club

Thor or George ?

Wrong, re read what I wrote and you liked. Thats my position and it ain't changing. I personally can't believe this is still on going!

However, my mates wife was one of those women who potentially had the leaking variety and they were replaced free of charge!! Mind you he hates them as they are not natural and hard. Still how this relates to a CEO is beyond me.