Dejphon Chansiri indicates major change in financial direction for Sheffield Wednesday

[sacré bleu]

I don't think that It's that he's suddenly wised up,  he's been forced into this through penalties and threats from the EFL and through spending all of his allowance.

He might want to run a sustainable business but that doesn't mean he has the acumen to do it.

[S36 OWL]

44 minutes ago, Essix Blue said:

He’s skint. 
 

FFS it’s so blindingly obvious - it’s not a change of direction, he simply can’t carry on the way he has been. 

 

Exactly mate. He has blown the lot, but is too stubborn to take a hair cut and sell up and admit he has failed. I see us scrapping around in the lower reaches of league one for years. 

[Philb125]

21 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

There’s only really Iorfa who we’ve signed in the last 3 years who would get in the 2015-17 side. Even Windass who has done well isn’t as good as FF, Fletcher or Hooper when they were fit and interested. The rest of our signings are poor so it’s a case of getting what you pay for

I think that’s correct. Luongo on his day I think is up there too. But you’re correct, you get what you pay for to a degree. Unfortunately paying 3-4x more for a player to challenge for promotion though is the same as paying 3-4x less and coming 18th. 
 

Just one of them gets you bankrupt whilst the other likely allows you to grow sustainably. 

[Sham67]

As it stands he/we don’t have a choice.  The club is being run by the EFL and will be for the foreseeable future.  

[SallyCinnamon]

The last big fee we paid was Van Aken in 2017. 4 years ago. 
 

Since then we have signed players for less than 1m - mostly free transfers. Iorfa is the only player who has improved us since the 2016/17 play off squad. 

 

In that time we’ve only sold Joao and Hunt. We failed to replace both of these players and the money made didn’t go in to the playing squad. Laughably we’ve even re-signed one of them 3 years later. 

 

In the meantime we have let valuable assets like Forestieri, Reach, Westwood, Lees, Rhodes, Fletcher, Fox, Nuhiu - all leave for zero pounds. 

Failure to make money on the above and other players who left at the end of their contract, left us with embargo’s and deductions. We have completely failed to replace good players and we have made no money to do this. The chairman has quite simply ran us into the ground with terrible financial management and decision making - resulting in League One football. Two assets we do finally produce as a club manage to leave for peanuts at the end of their contract.

 

So I ask the question. Is DC running us more sustainably or is this just the result of years of financial management leaving him skint and the club completely devoid of any assets?

 

I think the latter.
 

 

[WalthamOwl]

He’s so full of crap. Chansiri out!

[Philb125]

14 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

Trying to be more sustainable or simply running out of money?

 

Selling Urhoghide and Shaw for a rumoured 500k is NOT good business. Our manager has come out and said this in a round about way. Trusson our ex assistant has said it’s shocking business. Let’s not try and dress it up as some good business, because it simply isn’t. 
 

Better players for far lesser fees? Since we stopped spending we’ve been relegated to League One. I’m fine with spending lesser fees on players, but your recruitment has to be spot on. It’s been poor as is reflected by our relegation.  You only use Iorfa as an example. That’s one signing. And he’s been out injured for almost a year.
 

I’m mildly encouraged by the business Moore has done so far. But we’re still very short from where we need to be to be competitive in League One. 

Let’s put it this way, 2-3 seasons back Shaw and Urhoghide were Sean Clare and Dawson. We had threads debating whether Dawson’s loyalty to his favourite club would sway him from a big money free transfer (compo) to Rangers/Celtic. 
 

We paid to keep one of our prospect here, and two a man we’d snap someone’s hand off for the fee we got for shaw. Now I’m not saying it’s ideal, not in a million years as if shaw progresses he will be worth 10x that. But nothing guarantees that he will, so you’re 100% wrong to say they left for free, they didn’t. 
 

Now back to my main point, The correcting of our mistakes won’t be instant. But I do believe we’ve been trying to fix it for 2-3 seasons and I hope it continues. Well it must continue, we have no other choice. 
 

We need a salary structure. We seemingly have one now albeit it may be imposed by EFL.

 

We need to stop trying to buy success, proven players. We haven’t spent big in 2-3 years so I’d say we’ve stopped that too. 
 

We need to sell players on when they’re stock has risen, Windass situation should showcase if we’ve learnt that lesson. 

 

 

[Philb125]

8 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

The last big fee we paid was Van Aken in 2017. 4 years ago. 
 

Since then we have signed players for less than 1m - mostly free transfers. Iorfa is the only player who has improved us since the 2016/17 play off squad. 

 

In that time we’ve only sold Joao and Hunt. We failed to replace both of these players and the money made didn’t go in to the playing squad. Laughably we’ve even re-signed one of them 3 years later. 

 

In the meantime we have let valuable assets like Forestieri, Reach, Westwood, Lees, Rhodes, Fletcher, Fox, Nuhiu - all leave for zero pounds. 

Failure to make money on the above and other players who left at the end of their contract, left us with embargo’s and deductions. We have completely failed to replace good players and we have made no money to do this. The chairman has quite simply ran us into the ground with terrible financial management and decision making - resulting in League One football. Two assets we do finally produce as a club manage to leave for peanuts at the end of their contract.

 

So I ask the question. Is DC running us more sustainably or is this just the result of years of financial management leaving him skint and the club completely devoid of any assets?

 

I think the latter.
 

 

But you’re saying things that are demonstrably incorrect. 
 

devoid of saleable assets: so there isn’t a fee coming for Borner? So there won’t be a fee for Bannan? So there won’t be a fee for Windass? Clearly there are saleable assets here, some purchased in last 12 months that we likely make a profit on. 
 

There’s scope for room between your two outcomes. Are we sustainable no, are we/have we been trying to be yes. Are we likely to be far more sustainable in future, we simply have to be.
 

 

[SallyCinnamon]

7 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

But you’re saying things that are demonstrably incorrect. 
 

devoid of saleable assets: so there isn’t a fee coming for Borner? So there won’t be a fee for Bannan? So there won’t be a fee for Windass? Clearly there are saleable assets here, some purchased in last 12 months that we likely make a profit on. 
 

There’s scope for room between your two outcomes. Are we sustainable no, are we/have we been trying to be yes. Are we likely to be far more sustainable in future, we simply have to be.
 

 

It remains to be seen if we sell Bannan and Windass. But my point is previously we could have sold players for millions. At most we’ll make 1m on Bannan and probably similar for Windass. 

[wellbeaten-the-owl]

Hopefully there is change on the horizon with the review of football taking place.

 

Football finance is on its knees for most clubs not part of the PL bubble, the anti competition revenue distributions need addressing.

 

How can anyone argue that the parachute payments are funding wages etc when Fulham are splashing £12m on Wilson from Liverpool? 

 

It's not just us it's the whole pyramid that needs to become more sustainable.

[Philb125]

2 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

It remains to be seen if we sell Bannan and Windass. But my point is previously we could have sold players for millions. At most we’ll make 1m on Bannan and probably similar for Windass. 

So you realise we have saleable assets. Cool. 

[SallyCinnamon]

3 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

So you realise we have saleable assets. Cool. 

Will we sell them? Will the money generated be used to reinvest or go to paying the loan against the stadium?

 

 

[WhiteOwl91]

It’s quite simple.

 

Weve not paid players on time in the main for a year.

 

Chansiri now saying about sustainability is FORCED, not a change of strategy to benefit the club.

 

Its blindingly obvious.

[Philb125]

Just now, SallyCinnamon said:

Will we sell them? Will the money generated be used to reinvest or go to paying the loan against the stadium?

 

 

I think we will Sell at least one of them, maybe both and maybe Paterson, Palmer, Iorfa too. The money goes to where it goes. 
 

Being sustainable means paying your bills. Bills need paying, money has to come from somewhere. 
 

[Brommers]

2 hours ago, Manwë said:

Struggling to understand what the point of Chansiri being at Wednesday anymore.

 

I simply don't get why he's still here. He's taken us down a division and only now he's talking about sustainability.

 

What does he get from this?

Probably something to do with not being able to leave until somebody buys the club off him I suspect. 

[JackSWFC]

Really starting to hate this idiot. He’s not learnt a thing since he’s been here, he just blames the fans for his inability to make any sort of good decision. 
He needs to hire someone to run this club, because he can’t even plan a month ahead.

[SallyCinnamon]

4 minutes ago, Philb125 said:

I think we will Sell at least one of them, maybe both and maybe Paterson, Palmer, Iorfa too. The money goes to where it goes. 
 

Being sustainable means paying your bills. Bills need paying, money has to come from somewhere. 
 

And this is exactly what I mean by saying he’s ran us into the ground.

 

Difference in being sustainable and selling players to ensure he can pay bills to keep admin at bay.

 

When it comes to that stage the bloke should really sell up.

[Philb125]

1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

And this is exactly what I mean by saying he’s ran us into the ground.

 

Difference in being sustainable and selling players to ensure he can pay bills to keep admin at bay.

 

When it comes to that stage the bloke should really sell up.

It’s nothing to do with admin though is it. Running a football club has costs, we as a club should be run where those costs are covered by internal revenue streams. One stream is selling players. So if that money is used to pay rent, pay the electric bill, pay for stewards or St Johns ambulance who cares? 

 

As a club I hope we in the future are more sustainable. I hope we stop handing out ridiculous contracts, I hope we stop buying ‘stars’ at the end of their careers, I hope we pay all our bills and use any surplus to reinvest on playing staff, in youth development, in scouting, in buying a stadium back…. 
 

Brentford and Barnsley do it quite well. They are great at selling their players to pay the bills. Not sure our chairman or our fanbase buy into it though. 

[full fathom five]

8 minutes ago, JackSWFC said:

Really starting to hate this idiot. He’s not learnt a thing since he’s been here, he just blames the fans for his inability to make any sort of good decision. 
He needs to hire someone to run this club, because he can’t even plan a month ahead.

His total inability to take ANY responsibility for the failings under HIS tenure is astounding. 

He is delusional beyond belief and our downward spiral will continue under his hand.

[Ian_D]

I read the Star article but didn't find anything new in it.