+- TrueBlueArmy Forums (https://forum.truebluearmy.com)
+-- Forum: TBA forums (https://forum.truebluearmy.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Play Up Pompey (https://forum.truebluearmy.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Rating Tornantes ownership so far (/showthread.php?tid=1553)
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 17-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 05:03 PM)Pedalo_menders Wrote: And this is the crux of the issue for me. I'm all for building a sustainable club that pays for itself. What I am not for is sitting on your arse for 5 years and doing the absolute bare minimum to keep the ground open and only have ambitions of getting capacity back to what we already know is too small.If spending money was a guarantee of promotion we may as well pack and go home, let the fixtures computer decide the scores based on who spent most.
The whole point is of being a billionaire is that you can invest in these sorts of projects to improve the value of your asset in a shorter time period to the average joe.
We don't need someone who knows nothing about football if they're not willing to make the proper investment required to get the clubs infrastructure up to scratch.
There are 2 strategies the eisners could have chosen:
1: Stay in League 1 and have a cheap wage budget. Get cracking on the stadium quickly and then in 5 years you have a stadium ready to fill when you move up the leagues.
2: Put together a larger playing budget to get promoted to the championship. Keep that budget flat in the championship and cream off the extra 6-10M you get in the higher league. Survive or get relegated, doesnt matter, you've got the money to pay for the infrastructure.
The eisners have done neither of these, which is why we sit 10th in L1 after FIVE YEARS with a capacity of 14,000!!! And I'm supposed to be happy with this situation?
Also had we got promoted and not increased the budget, fans would bloody moan!!!
We move grounds, fans moan. We stay at FP, fans moan.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Tomsk - 17-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 03:46 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote:(17-02-2022, 02:37 PM)Tomsk Wrote: I think the names Cook, Jackett, Cowley(s) stand up pretty well against those three
You are joking about the Cowleys right?
No, not at all
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - bluebollox - 17-02-2022
I give them 4/10. I expected far more with regard to the ground & academy. The ground afaics they are just doing H&S required improvements. The ME idea of dropping a a new stand onto the old is frankly..well crap. Still seating with restricted views in the 21st century. @ The Guildhall Michael went to great lengths to show us pictures of the Ducks stadium..ahem. Also went to great lengths to tell us about producing our own "Justins & Brittany's". Within weeks of taking over Dave Wright & team has seen enough & gone to Brighton.
With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked. Yes they'll pay the bills, but FP needs a huge revamp not just H&S work. The academy after 5 yrs is a disgrace. If this is the grand plan (is there even a grand plan?) then I'd never ever have voted for it 5 yrs ago.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - slayer - 17-02-2022
7 out of 10 off the pitch.
They can have the other 3 out of 10 for what they've done on it.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 17-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 08:16 PM)bluebollox Wrote: I give them 4/10. I expected far more with regard to the ground & academy. The ground afaics they are just doing H&S required improvements. The ME idea of dropping a a new stand onto the old is frankly..well crap. Still seating with restricted views in the 21st century. @ The Guildhall Michael went to great lengths to show us pictures of the Ducks stadium..ahem. Also went to great lengths to tell us about producing our own "Justins & Brittany's". Within weeks of taking over Dave Wright & team has seen enough & gone to Brighton.
With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked. Yes they'll pay the bills, but FP needs a huge revamp not just H&S work. The academy after 5 yrs is a disgrace. If this is the grand plan (is there even a grand plan?) then I'd never ever have voted for it 5 yrs ago.
You wouldn’t you a club to support so it’s a bloody good job you did vote for it!
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 17-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 07:19 PM)Tomsk Wrote:(17-02-2022, 03:46 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote:(17-02-2022, 02:37 PM)Tomsk Wrote: I think the names Cook, Jackett, Cowley(s) stand up pretty well against those three
You are joking about the Cowleys right?
No, not at all
Oh……ok.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - bluebollox - 17-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 08:25 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote:In English please.(17-02-2022, 08:16 PM)bluebollox Wrote: I give them 4/10. I expected far more with regard to the ground & academy. The ground afaics they are just doing H&S required improvements. The ME idea of dropping a a new stand onto the old is frankly..well crap. Still seating with restricted views in the 21st century. @ The Guildhall Michael went to great lengths to show us pictures of the Ducks stadium..ahem. Also went to great lengths to tell us about producing our own "Justins & Brittany's". Within weeks of taking over Dave Wright & team has seen enough & gone to Brighton.
With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked. Yes they'll pay the bills, but FP needs a huge revamp not just H&S work. The academy after 5 yrs is a disgrace. If this is the grand plan (is there even a grand plan?) then I'd never ever have voted for it 5 yrs ago.
You wouldn’t you a club to support so it’s a bloody good job you did vote for it!
But the gist is we're lucky to have a club is it? Tks for that Michael.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 17-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 08:28 PM)bluebollox Wrote:(17-02-2022, 08:25 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote:In English please.(17-02-2022, 08:16 PM)bluebollox Wrote: I give them 4/10. I expected far more with regard to the ground & academy. The ground afaics they are just doing H&S required improvements. The ME idea of dropping a a new stand onto the old is frankly..well crap. Still seating with restricted views in the 21st century. @ The Guildhall Michael went to great lengths to show us pictures of the Ducks stadium..ahem. Also went to great lengths to tell us about producing our own "Justins & Brittany's". Within weeks of taking over Dave Wright & team has seen enough & gone to Brighton.
With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked. Yes they'll pay the bills, but FP needs a huge revamp not just H&S work. The academy after 5 yrs is a disgrace. If this is the grand plan (is there even a grand plan?) then I'd never ever have voted for it 5 yrs ago.
You wouldn’t you a club to support so it’s a bloody good job you did vote for it!
But the gist is we're lucky to have a club is it? Tks for that Michael.
Well done for working that out, aren’t you a clever boy!! Give yourself a gold star.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Cunninglinguist - 18-02-2022
(17-02-2022, 08:28 PM)bluebollox Wrote:(17-02-2022, 08:25 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote:In English please.(17-02-2022, 08:16 PM)bluebollox Wrote: I give them 4/10. I expected far more with regard to the ground & academy. The ground afaics they are just doing H&S required improvements. The ME idea of dropping a a new stand onto the old is frankly..well crap. Still seating with restricted views in the 21st century. @ The Guildhall Michael went to great lengths to show us pictures of the Ducks stadium..ahem. Also went to great lengths to tell us about producing our own "Justins & Brittany's". Within weeks of taking over Dave Wright & team has seen enough & gone to Brighton.
With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked. Yes they'll pay the bills, but FP needs a huge revamp not just H&S work. The academy after 5 yrs is a disgrace. If this is the grand plan (is there even a grand plan?) then I'd never ever have voted for it 5 yrs ago.
You wouldn’t you a club to support so it’s a bloody good job you did vote for it!
Bloody hell, that's rich!
After wasting part of my life trying to decipher your views, BB, I'm curious as to know what you think would have happened if the Trust had continued to own the club.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - bluebollox - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 07:58 AM)Cunninglinguist Wrote:It really isn't difficult. But just for you I'll try even plainer English.(17-02-2022, 08:28 PM)bluebollox Wrote:(17-02-2022, 08:25 PM)Pompeyg100 Wrote:In English please.(17-02-2022, 08:16 PM)bluebollox Wrote: I give them 4/10. I expected far more with regard to the ground & academy. The ground afaics they are just doing H&S required improvements. The ME idea of dropping a a new stand onto the old is frankly..well crap. Still seating with restricted views in the 21st century. @ The Guildhall Michael went to great lengths to show us pictures of the Ducks stadium..ahem. Also went to great lengths to tell us about producing our own "Justins & Brittany's". Within weeks of taking over Dave Wright & team has seen enough & gone to Brighton.
With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked. Yes they'll pay the bills, but FP needs a huge revamp not just H&S work. The academy after 5 yrs is a disgrace. If this is the grand plan (is there even a grand plan?) then I'd never ever have voted for it 5 yrs ago.
You wouldn’t you a club to support so it’s a bloody good job you did vote for it!
Bloody hell, that's rich!
After wasting part of my life trying to decipher your views, BB, I'm curious as to know what you think would have happened if the Trust had continued to own the club.
I never mentioned the Trust & Presidents Ownership @ all. When promoted in 2017 we were debt free & quite a attractive proposition, do we know Tornante were the only gig in town? I gave them 4/10 because the 4 is tbf to them on the pitch has gone pretty much as I thought it would, they never promised to spend big money on the team. Fair enough.
But I'm bitterly disappointed with the lack of progress on the ground (Slides of ducks stadium..) & the Academy. I sold my share thinking these 2 crucial things would be sorted, they haven't been after nearly 5 yrs.
I did say earlier "With apologies to those that think they're doing a good job personally I think we were hoodwinked".
Maybe I should of added, " with ref. to the Ground & Academy" I hope that's clear enough.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - DeepBlue - 18-02-2022
We may have been debt free but not commitment free. Whoever bought the club had to spend millions on the ground to keep it open - and that was the only reason the PST had to sell. Just as well too, because we would never have come through Covid debt-free otherwise. In fact, we were very lucky to get owners that covered that without loading any debt on the club, most other clubs still have that hanging over them.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - bluebollox - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 11:29 AM)DeepBlue Wrote: We may have been debt free but not commitment free. Whoever bought the club had to spend millions on the ground to keep it open - and that was the only reason the PST had to sell. Just as well too, because we would never have come through Covid debt-free otherwise. In fact, we were very lucky to get owners that covered that without loading any debt on the club, most other clubs still have that hanging over them.
Those are very good points DeepBlue, but I do think 5 yrs in we should stop looking back @ maybe how lucky we are to have a club/or owners in Tornante & start judging them on their record on FP & the Academy. Thats why I'm very disappointed in them thus far.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Rescue Dog - 18-02-2022
"I'd give them 10/10 for subsidising the club during Covid without making a fuss about it, that was a huge unexpected expense.
I'd give them 10/10 for doing all the above without incurring a penny of debt to the club.
and finally I'd give them 10/10 for producing those pre-match videos ... they are first class and I never tire of watching them."
Agree, with this.
My fears are that Tornante are safe and comfortable but are a firmly mid-table outfit; guaranteed to get a return on their investment with minimal/no risk taken on their behalf.
On the pitch we have seen year on year decline since Tornante took over (2/10) and I am massively unimpressed by a 20,000 capacity (2/10)...but, if there is no real ambition then 20, 000 is OK for an average mid table League-1 side.
IF the football financial bubble bursts then Tornante's 'cautious' approach could be seen to be wise.
However, in reality we are losing players to the likes of Wycombe and Gillingham with 'ambitions' to achieve a ground capacity befitting a small club. Tornante's sporting record in the US seems unimpressive and it seems they are continuing their record of mediocrity with Pompey.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyloyal - 18-02-2022
(16-02-2022, 05:32 PM)Pangus Wrote: What does concern me are their apparent budget restrictions as far as building a team capable of challenging for promotion is concerned. Thats worrying. For me the present squad is nowhere near strong enough to take into next season to mount a challenge. 0/10 for ambition.
Its no good aiming for increased capacity to say 25000 if we haven't got a team capable of attracting that sort of attendance.
I would imagine the plan is to have a team to attract that kind of support - would be pess poor planning otherwise wouldn’t it
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - BlueArmy - 18-02-2022
Teams go between good and bad regardless of investment, most of the time.
We shouldn't be waiting for a good team and then increase capacity to above 25k then, we should increasing capacity now ready for when we have a good team.
IMO of course.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 12:17 PM)Rescue Dog Wrote: "I'd give them 10/10 for subsidising the club during Covid without making a fuss about it, that was a huge unexpected expense.
I'd give them 10/10 for doing all the above without incurring a penny of debt to the club.
and finally I'd give them 10/10 for producing those pre-match videos ... they are first class and I never tire of watching them."
Agree, with this.
My fears are that Tornante are safe and comfortable but are a firmly mid-table outfit; guaranteed to get a return on their investment with minimal/no risk taken on their behalf.
On the pitch we have seen year on year decline since Tornante took over (2/10) and I am massively unimpressed by a 20,000 capacity (2/10)...but, if there is no real ambition then 20, 000 is OK for an average mid table League-1 side.
IF the football financial bubble bursts then Tornante's 'cautious' approach could be seen to be wise.
However, in reality we are losing players to the likes of Wycombe and Gillingham with 'ambitions' to achieve a ground capacity befitting a small club. Tornante's sporting record in the US seems unimpressive and it seems they are continuing their record of mediocrity with Pompey.
How are they going to get a return on their investment? The only way that could possibly happen is to get us to the prem.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - DeepBlue - 18-02-2022
Why the prem ? They only paid a pittance for the club (£3.6m?) because of the limits imposed on the PST buy-out. So even if they spend all £20m planned on the ground they should be able to sell at a profit as soon as we reach the championship.
But seeing as they have kept their word on everything else I see no reason to disbelieve them when they say they are here for the long term. Unless they get fed up with the abuse that is.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Rocketman - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 04:18 PM)DeepBlue Wrote: Why the prem ? They only paid a pittance for the club (£3.6m?) because of the limits imposed on the PST buy-out. So even if they spend all £20m planned on the ground they should be able to sell at a profit as soon as we reach the championship.
But seeing as they have kept their word on everything else I see no reason to disbelieve them when they say they are here for the long term. Unless they get fed up with the abuse that is.
Absolutely agree, good post.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Jizbag - 18-02-2022
I'd give them a 4 on the pitch, can't believe they kept Jackett for as long as they did, then appoint Cowley after he failed to get into the playoffs.
5 for the ground. I never understand why people think we should be grateful for them spending money on, what is essentially their asset. I honestly thought we'd be relocating or building new stands, not this tart up.
I don't go along with being happy we've still got a club. We saved it 9 years ago. Got promotion 5 years ago and would have been a good prospect for a lot of buyers. We managed to get the tightest one of the lot.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - DeepBlue - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 04:54 PM)Jizbag Wrote: I'd give them a 4 on the pitch, can't believe they kept Jackett for as long as they did, then appoint Cowley after he failed to get into the playoffs.
5 for the ground. I never understand why people think we should be grateful for them spending money on, what is essentially their asset. I honestly thought we'd be relocating or building new stands, not this tart up.
I don't go along with being happy we've still got a club. We saved it 9 years ago. Got promotion 5 years ago and would have been a good prospect for a lot of buyers. We managed to get the tightest one of the lot.
Why did you think we would be relocating when they said their preference was to stay at Fratton if it was possible, reflecting the fans majority views ?
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 04:54 PM)Jizbag Wrote: I'd give them a 4 on the pitch, can't believe they kept Jackett for as long as they did, then appoint Cowley after he failed to get into the playoffs.
5 for the ground. I never understand why people think we should be grateful for them spending money on, what is essentially their asset. I honestly thought we'd be relocating or building new stands, not this tart up.
I don't go along with being happy we've still got a club. We saved it 9 years ago. Got promotion 5 years ago and would have been a good prospect for a lot of buyers. We managed to get the tightest one of the lot.
The tightest of the lot? Who were the others lining up to buy us? They kept KJ because we were heading for the playoffs.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - BilltheCat - 18-02-2022
"Who were the others lining up to buy us?"
We were not looking for buyers.
Catlin saw the opportunity to make a quick buck and decided to do a massive u-turn declaring that community-ownership was no longer viable.
What's he doing now?
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - mikey393 - 18-02-2022
Very Good thought provoking thread. Id probably give them 6/10 overall.
For subsidising during covid but didn't all owners do that besides Derby as No one appears to have folded yet!
Buying Roko as our own training ground but that should have been done by previous owners much earlier.
Pumping money into ground improvements but a lot of that was forced by the Council - H&S Committee.
The Academy structure is a disgrace which means we are forced to buy players on the cheap & loans while we should be producing our own by now after 5 years.
On the pitch we have Not been up to scratch getting rid of reasonable players & replacing with worse ones.
We've managed to mess up every Januart transfer window & should hav ebeen promoted 2-3 years ago.
There's a Big Gulf between what Tornante think is acceptable & what the fans demand & deserve.
Basically, it mainly boils down to miss-management of the club as Jackett didn't deserve a contract extension & should have departed a year earlier.
The Cowley's appointment, jury still, out on that one but need to start delivering very soon without excuses all the time.
If we can go on an undefeated run & somehow scrape into the playoffs in 6th position that'll be a major result!
Anything can happen then including more revenue being generated by the club.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - Pompeyg100 - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 05:33 PM)BilltheCat Wrote: "Who were the others lining up to buy us?"
We were not looking for buyers.
Catlin saw the opportunity to make a quick buck and decided to do a massive u-turn declaring that community-ownership was no longer viable.
What's he doing now?
Just because you aren’t looking for buyers doesn’t mean there aren’t people wanting to buy. They weren’t lining up but there is no quick money to be made.
RE: Rating Tornantes ownership so far - DeepBlue - 18-02-2022
(18-02-2022, 05:33 PM)BilltheCat Wrote: "Who were the others lining up to buy us?"
We were not looking for buyers.
Catlin saw the opportunity to make a quick buck and decided to do a massive u-turn declaring that community-ownership was no longer viable.
What's he doing now?
It was the PST that decided further progress was not viable, not Catlin. That's why they sought potential buyers.
And no-one made a quick buck .... no profit was allowed as part of the buy-out provisions.
If Catlin did well personally it was definitely not "a quick buck" - he proved his worth with 4 years good work under Tornante and impressed enough to be offered another job. Well deserved.