IEC

[TRUE BELIEVER]

I understand what Danny is saying in that we have always been regarded as a family club and there has always been a bond between the supporters and the owners, and this was always the case even before DW and Sharpe were involved. It now seems that the current owners wish to stay out of the limelight and are happy to go along behind the scenes doing their business. This is just something we will have to get used to. Darren Royle is the figurehead for IEC at the club and has always kept himself in the background throughout his career as he quietly goes about his business. He has been very successful in this manner and no doubt sees no reason to alter it, and why should he, as long as the club prospers and we see the kind of investment and upgrading of the playing staff that seems to be emerging at present.

Give it time Danny and I am sure you, like the rest of us , will adapt.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

Hang on a minute, they've never ran a football club but the Whelan's are football people!! It doesn't make sense to say that just because they're good at business dealings that the club is better ran or more professional. David sharpe understood the fans it is also important for IEC to open up a little bit more. I don't wanna know everything about them or what they had for dinner but it's sensible to show your face every now and then and be a bit more accessible!

The club as a business has not been most efficently ran though in some regards; getting shirts out early in summer to maximise income of folks buying them befor they go on holiday, limited merchandise and no international shipping for club shop, relaying the pitch time after time on cheap rather than just fixing it, not having a big screen despite the extra add revenue you could make from it, academy not being done when we had the Prem money, a ticketing system that collapses in high demand situations, etc. We've always kind of ran along a bit by the seat of our pants in a lot of ways and it's a good thing IEC are trying to transform us into a slicker operation with fresh ideas and focus on the details off the pitch as well as on it.

Royle does show his face and do interviews every now and again, he did one about 2 or 3 weeks ago on the Latics official site. It's like when IEC took over and everyone complained they hadn't said anything but Melvin and Royle both did an interview on the Latics website, youtube and the Latics Podcast it it was advertised on Twitter and Facebook and snippets were put on Wish FM match day coverage too wasn't Royle even on the Progress with Unity Podcast too - what more can the club do? I think whatever IEC do some people will say it's not enough as they are comparing them to Sharpe, but Sharpe was the exception rathr than the rule for chairman and tbh like his Grandad they loved a bit of the lime light. Royle isn't that type of personality and personally i don't care how much we see of him as long as we are seeing the results of his work behind the scenes.

 

[daleks.at.the.monaco]

I understand what Danny is saying in that we have always been regarded as a family club and there has always been a bond between the supporters and the owners, and this was always the case even before DW and Sharpe were involved. It now seems that the current owners wish to stay out of the limelight and are happy to go along behind the scenes doing their business. This is just something we will have to get used to. Darren Royle is the figurehead for IEC at the club and has always kept himself in the background throughout his career as he quietly goes about his business. He has been very successful in this manner and no doubt sees no reason to alter it, and why should he, as long as the club prospers and we see the kind of investment and upgrading of the playing staff that seems to be emerging at present.

Give it time Danny and I am sure you, like the rest of us , will adapt.

family club ?? surely not when we had Bill Kenyon or Freddie Pye.
Dave Whelan seemed to bring the club back to what it was when Arthur Horrocks ran it in the 1960s. Local businessman owns local club for local people.

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

family club ?? surely not when we had Bill Kenyon or Freddie Pye.
Dave Whelan seemed to bring the club back to what it was when Arthur Horrocks ran it in the 1960s. Local businessman owns local club for local people.

I understand your opposition to Freddie Pye, although even during his reign I always thought of the club as open with the support, but I am somewhat at a loss when it comes to Bill Kenyon.

Although Bill was not a universal choice for chairman and undoubtedly had to undertake some decisions that we as supporters did not appreciate he was very accessible, and having known Bill since his days of cutting hair in Ashton I can assure you he had the best interests of the club at heart. Not only that but he was totally supportive of his managers. I was once at a function with Ray Mathias who told me that Bill was almost in tears the day he had to sack him and understood the reasons for his dismissal all too well. I also spoke with another board member at the time who was telling me how near to bankruptcy the club was after Pye's reign and how it had taken weeks to get the clubs accounts sorted out, indeed having to call in the fraud squad at one point. Through all this Bill took the flak from all sides yet was still decent enough to make himself available to the press. So in my mind even in those days we were a family club.

 

[daleks.at.the.monaco]

I understand your opposition to Freddie Pye, although even during his reign I always thought of the club as open with the support, but I am somewhat at a loss when it comes to Bill Kenyon.

Although Bill was not a universal choice for chairman and undoubtedly had to undertake some decisions that we as supporters did not appreciate he was very accessible, and having known Bill since his days of cutting hair in Ashton I can assure you he had the best interests of the club at heart. Not only that but he was totally supportive of his managers. I was once at a function with Ray Mathias who told me that Bill was almost in tears the day he had to sack him and understood the reasons for his dismissal all too well. I also spoke with another board member at the time who was telling me how near to bankruptcy the club was after Pye's reign and how it had taken weeks to get the clubs accounts sorted out, indeed having to call in the fraud squad at one point. Through all this Bill took the flak from all sides yet was still decent enough to make himself available to the press. So in my mind even in those days we were a family club.

I take your personal experience as fact

He did seem a bit of a rogue from the terraces, that does not preclude him from being human

What about the time when we were owned by southern financiers

 

[Danny_de_Zeeuw16]

The club as a business has not been most efficently ran though in some regards; getting shirts out early in summer to maximise income of folks buying them befor they go on holiday, limited merchandise and no international shipping for club shop, relaying the pitch time after time on cheap rather than just fixing it, not having a big screen despite the extra add revenue you could make from it, academy not being done when we had the Prem money, a ticketing system that collapses in high demand situations, etc. We've always kind of ran along a bit by the seat of our pants in a lot of ways and it's a good thing IEC are trying to transform us into a slicker operation with fresh ideas and focus on the details off the pitch as well as on it.

Royle does show his face and do interviews every now and again, he did one about 2 or 3 weeks ago on the Latics official site. It's like when IEC took over and everyone complained they hadn't said anything but Melvin and Royle both did an interview on the Latics website, youtube and the Latics Podcast it it was advertised on Twitter and Facebook and snippets were put on Wish FM match day coverage too wasn't Royle even on the Progress with Unity Podcast too - what more can the club do? I think whatever IEC do some people will say it's not enough as they are comparing them to Sharpe, but Sharpe was the exception rathr than the rule for chairman and tbh like his Grandad they loved a bit of the lime light. Royle isn't that type of personality and personally i don't care how much we see of him as long as we are seeing the results of his work behind the scenes.

Can’t grumble with any of that, good post KDZ. Hopefully it works out well for us her, certainly have much deeper pockets and as you say some innovative ideas.

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

I take your personal experience as fact

He did seem a bit of a rogue from the terraces, that does not preclude him from being human

What about the time when we were owned by southern financiers

No doubt about the fact that he had a dubious business nature but as I say he was a true Latics man and wholeheartedly supported the club. The board at that time was also filled with local businessmen supporting the theory that there was a local "family" feel to the club, as most of the fans came across these people in their day to day lives.
I cant say much about the southern financiers you mention but I would say that the club has had financial backing from many sources, including Ken Bates in its history, as it has fought to survive. Indeed, that is why many of the supporters of my generation are grateful to DW for the stability brought to the club with his involvement.

 

[hindleymonwafc]

Who was that who used to live at Ashton Cross ?... dim and distant past.

That big bungalow opposite golf course.

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

I understand your opposition to Freddie Pye, although even during his reign I always thought of the club as open with the support, but I am somewhat at a loss when it comes to Bill Kenyon.

Although Bill was not a universal choice for chairman and undoubtedly had to undertake some decisions that we as supporters did not appreciate he was very accessible, and having known Bill since his days of cutting hair in Ashton I can assure you he had the best interests of the club at heart. Not only that but he was totally supportive of his managers. I was once at a function with Ray Mathias who told me that Bill was almost in tears the day he had to sack him and understood the reasons for his dismissal all too well. I also spoke with another board member at the time who was telling me how near to bankruptcy the club was after Pye's reign and how it had taken weeks to get the clubs accounts sorted out, indeed having to call in the fraud squad at one point. Through all this Bill took the flak from all sides yet was still decent enough to make himself available to the press. So in my mind even in those days we were a family club.

I can't argue with your personal experience of Bill Kenyon but this was the same Bill Kenyon who Stephen Gage instigated legal proceedings against for a large sum (I have the figure of £100k in my head but that may well be wrong) that was missing from the club's accounts after they'd gone through the books once they'd taken over
In the interests of fair play, I should point out that Bill Kenyon denied any wrongdoing, but it was settled out of court

 

[Mighty Bongsmon]

I understand your opposition to Freddie Pye, although even during his reign I always thought of the club as open with the support,

Freddie Pye was well before my time as a Latics mon, but I have heard some proper ropey stories about him outside of Latics.
Probably one of the only repeatable ones (as its in a book) is that he gets several mentions in a book on the gangs of Manchester including numerous extraction of information from & punishments to people stories that take place at his scrap yard off Mort Lane in Tyldesley (although its never even hinted at that he was the one doing those things)

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

Who was that who used to live at Ashton Cross ?... dim and distant past.

That big bungalow opposite golf course.

That was indeed Bill Kenyon, although it was a house not a bungalow. The place is a rehab centre now. Bill was also responsible for the nursing home in the centre of the town, the building was converted from the old Evans( British School).

 

[TRUE BELIEVER]

I can't argue with your personal experience of Bill Kenyon but this was the same Bill Kenyon who Stephen Gage instigated legal proceedings against for a large sum (I have the figure of £100k in my head but that may well be wrong) that was missing from the club's accounts after they'd gone through the books once they'd taken over
In the interests of fair play, I should point out that Bill Kenyon denied any wrongdoing, but it was settled out of court

Like yourself I remember the allegations but as you say it was all settled out of court as far and as I know nothing was proven. I certainly cant find anything relating to it on the internet. This still doesn't alter the fact that my original statement was that we have always been known for the open relationship between the board and the fans which Dalek doubted during Pye and Kenyons tenures. What I am merely trying to convey is that we have always had an open relationship with the club until IEC took over and their ways are strange to us. They obviously go about things differently. Darren Royle, as their representative, seems to be more of a "play things close to your chest" type and is not on social media or in the press all the time. He seems to want to shun the limelight and just get on with the business of making the club more efficient both on and off the pitch and we shouldn't see this as a bad thing, just different.

 

[The_Pon]

Given the transfer activity over the past couple of weeks, I think it's safe to say that there's no lack of ambition or investment from the new owners, even though they got off to a bit of a slow start this summer.

What they've invested in the window so far is big money for us, but I'm still happy with the level of spending from a sustainability point of view: the players they've brought in won't be on ludicrous wages (which is the real killer with new signings). They're of the right age that if the worst came to pass we'd recoup a lot of what we've spent, and could make good money on them if they settle in well and excel.

Good business imho. Credit where it's due... IEC (along with the Royles and Jackson) are again showing themselves to be astute owners imho. Only small gripe is that the communication with fans could be better, but I understand why a club our size plays things close to our chest, so I can't complain too much about that. Only time will tell but this window is turning out to be one of the best in recent times at the club in terms of the players we've brought in.

 

[Arthur_Itis]

What they've invested in the window so far is big money for us, but I'm still happy with the level of spending from a sustainability point of view:

Good post Pon, I agree with most of it. However, personally I'm a little uncomfortable with the level of spending and can't see how it is within our means.
Does all of this go as debt against the club ?
How is this spending any different to what the likes of Bolton have done ?
Perhaps it's just my lack of understanding of the financials, please someone enlighten / reassure me

 

[Soccerates]

IECorp have done a lot of restructuring, from before the takeover and throughout, so perhaps that's where some of the money has come from.

The thing about Bolton"s model that wasn't sustainable was bringing players in with no resale value, late on in their careers, making huge losses on players and a habit of letting youngsters go for free, among many other failed non-footballing ventures and land acquisitions led them to where they are now.

Investing into youth is always a speculative business, however the Notlrth West of England has always been a hotbed of talent. We've actually recognised this and the business model (I posted this and a lot of other financial information way back when) lends itself to that. A net transfer spend of £1.95m (taking into account speculation on the undisclosed fees) and a further float investment of around £1m per month into all aspects of the football club is probably commensurate to a club of our stature.

Long term, that will of course need to be recouped - with Brexit, the rules on non-UK players will change, this means clubs like ours, investing and carrying through young players are ahead of the curve; we've already seen Harry Maguire leave Leicester for huge money, that's the tip of the iceberg - players like Gelhardt etc will play their formative years, leave for decent money/sell on percentages and the cycle would of course continue.

I'm quietly confident in the board and the direction of club, something I wasn't towards the end of Dave Whelan's tenure.

 

[king_dezeeuw06]

Good post Pon, I agree with most of it. However, personally I'm a little uncomfortable with the level of spending and can't see how it is within our means.
Does all of this go as debt against the club ?
How is this spending any different to what the likes of Bolton have done ?
Perhaps it's just my lack of understanding of the financials, please someone enlighten / reassure me

The thing is no club at this level can be self sustainabile, make profit and grow without selling players like Brentford. If IEC want to sell players they have to invest in sellable assets that they believe can appreciate in value - this window is effectively the seed money to kick start the process. Speculate to accumulate.

I imagine this level of direct investment won't be repeated every window and future spending will be funded by selling players on at profits. The market has gone mental for top Champ and Prem players but bottom of champ and L1 is still relatively cheap so if you can find those players who can step up you can pick them up for a reasonable fee and sell them on at 4 or 5 times the price - so it's a huge business opportunity.

If the Moore, Lowe, Robinson and Williams who cost about 9m combined have good year and prove themselves at this level it's not hard to think we could sell them collectively for easily over 20m. Even it 2 of them flop but one or two of them excel we'll probably get back more than we paid.

Also worth baring in mind we have the 3-4m from Grigg in the bank, 1m from Yanic promotion bonus, have about 15 players salaries off the wage bill including some of the big earners, a small amount from Pearce promotion bonus plus the millions we tried to but didn't use from last January. So the likelihood is IEC have spent money already committed rather than found a fresh 9m.

 

[The_Pon]

Good post Pon, I agree with most of it. However, personally I'm a little uncomfortable with the level of spending and can't see how it is within our means.
Does all of this go as debt against the club ?
How is this spending any different to what the likes of Bolton have done ?
Perhaps it's just my lack of understanding of the financials, please someone enlighten / reassure me

Whilst I don't disagree in principle, it's generally wages, not fees that are the killer. We have signed younger players who will have sell on value... So long as their wages are sensible.

What killed Bolton was that they were paying megabucks for aging players with no sell on value (Campo, Okocha etc.). Those players were given long contacts for their age, and on big money, so when the club's income dried up, they were still committed to paying huge wages for another 2-3 years for players who had gone past their sell by date but couldn't be moved on because no-one else would pay the kind of wages they were getting at Bolton.

We have a strict wage structure which the Hugill situation highlighted, and it's good that we aren't willing to compromise on it. Can always move players on and get fee money (or a good portion of it) back... Only time that doesn't work is when no-one else will pay their wages so they won't go, or are too old for anyone else to want to buy them... Then you're committed to massive wages for the length of their contract, and that's where Bolton, Portsmouth and their like came unstuck.

IEC are willing to pay fees, which is good so long as that's not dead money. Since they're targeting younger players and being sensible on the wage side, that's not something I'm overly concerned about: speculate to accumulate, with the safety of knowing we can still always sell those players and recoup much of if not all the money we paid if we find ourselves in a position where we have to.

 

[AliLatics]

Fair points all of these.

The Bolton situation has proven to many fans that clubs our size can’t just throw money into the endless pit that is English football. While it’s always a shame to miss out on players (Hugill and probably the loss of Powell), it’s actually encouraging that our club is being firm on wages, fees etc.

Pretty sure Reading are meant to be skint but just splashed 7m on a new striker and are apparently getting a midfielder from Monaco which can’t be cheap wages. Many fans on here wanted joao and he does look an excellent signing but barring a very sudden rise to promenence they certainly won’t get a resale profit.

Don’t wish what happened to Bolton on any club but it’s nice to know our club seems to have a clear and proffesional plan.

My only worry is will they stick with it? We always knew DW would look out for the clubs best interest as best he could but will IEC just get bored if there is no sign of an increasing profit in a few years?

 

[GlasgowLatic]

I'm happy with the recruitment so far. Decent money has been spent. I like that youth is the way forward. I would much rather our young players had a chance than playing a Darron Gibson like player.

 

[Arthur_Itis]

Cheers for the responses Pon, King and Soccerates.
So the general consensus is that we'll be fine as long as enough of our signings progress and therefore increase in value and we make a profit on them. I'd say this is a gamble, but a calculated one and I'd agree that the players appear (on paper) to have that potential, so excellent recruitment.
I guess my other concern is the same as AliLatics, are IEC here for the long haul. Obviously I've no idea, I hope they are, or at least if they aren't, that when they walk away they clear any outstanding debt first and leave us solvent.