Life after Steve Gibson

Jonny Ingbar said:
I'm not sure I agree that we're a 'financial mess', what do you base that view on.

We are solvent and sustainable.

Gibson has backed every manager as much as he can, albeit his choices have been met with varied success.
Click to expand...
As an individual Company the business is insolvent. It has negative net shareholder value approaching £100m. It is one of the worst in the country for that.
The only reason it is able to continue is because it is part of the Gibson O'Neill Group to which MFC is indebted to the tune of £116m. Given last season's losses it will be well over £130m of debt. This is not money that GON have invested in the Club, they have loaned it. The club can only trade because GO'N guarantees not to attempt to withdraw the loans within twelve months.

Gibson could not give the club away unless he wrote off most of the debt HE has built up.

I'd rather good leadership than good intentions.
Steve Gibson has neither the financial muscle, intention to invest, ability to lead in football, or willingness to write off debt.
 
indeedido said:
As an individual Company the business is insolvent. It has negative net shareholder value approaching £100m. It is one of the worst in the country for that.
The only reason it is able to continue is because it is part of the Gibson O'Neill Group to which MFC is indebted to the tune of £116m. Given last season's losses it will be well over £130m of debt. This is not money that GON have invested in the Club, they have loaned it. The club can only trade because GO'N guarantees not to attempt to withdraw the loans within twelve months.

Gibson could not give the club away unless he wrote off most of the debt HE has built up.

I'd rather good leadership than good intentions.
Steve Gibson has neither the financial muscle, intention to invest, ability to lead in football, or willingness to write off debt.
Click to expand...

Reading that, it seems like we wouldn’t have a club at all if it wasn‘t for Gibson.

Again.


I don’t think anybody is saying he is above reproach or that he hasn’t made some really poor decisions, but all football clubs suffer from the same, even the huge clubs with huge budgets and huge debts and huge backers…

Would sooner have a local millionaire committed to the club and area than a billionaire from the other side of the planet who has zero attachment to the place or the people and who will likely be long gone in a decade or two, irrespective of what sort of state they leave the club in.
 
FabioPorkpie said:
Reading that, it seems like we wouldn’t have a club at all if it wasn‘t for Gibson.

Again.


I don’t think anybody is saying he is above reproach or that he hasn’t made some really poor decisions, but all football clubs suffer from the same, even the huge clubs with huge budgets and huge debts
Click to expand...
 
FabioPorkpie said:
Reading that, it seems like we wouldn’t have a club at all if it wasn‘t for Gibson.

Again.


I don’t think anybody is saying he is above reproach or that he hasn’t made some really poor decisions, but all football clubs suffer from the same, even the huge clubs with huge budgets and huge debts and huge backers…
Click to expand...
Poor decisions? He's brought in a succession of renowned managers like Warnock, Pulis, Mowbray, Monk and Strachan. He's backed them with money for the transfer market, and he's left the running of the club and its affairs largely to them. None of them have done very well. He bankrolls the losses the club makes to keep it afloat.

Meanwhile when he's tried untested managers like Robson, McLaren and Karanka, they've done well. The exception was Woodgate.

I'm struggling to think of something else that Steve Gibson could do. A succession of experienced managers have let him and the club down pretty badly, and he's being vilified for something that isn't really down to him.

It's all well and good saying that Warnock shouldn't have been appointed, or any of the others, but we only know that through the retrospectoscope. I'm sure Steve Gibson acted entirely on the basis of reputations (and who wouldn't?) but these guys by and large have failed him.

It must drive him nuts that the problems Warnock faced on the day he took over and still manifest today, but that's Warnock's fault and not Steve Gibson's.
 
Soutra said:
Poor decisions? He's brought in a succession of renowned managers like Warnock, Pulis, Mowbray, Monk and Strachan. He's backed them with money for the transfer market, and he's left the running of the club and its affairs largely to them. None of them have done very well. He bankrolls the losses the club makes to keep it afloat.

Meanwhile when he's tried untested managers like Robson, McLaren and Karanka, they've done well. The exception was Woodgate.

I'm struggling to think of something else that Steve Gibson could do. A succession of experienced managers have let him and the club down pretty badly, and he's being vilified for something that isn't really down to him.

It's all well and good saying that Warnock shouldn't have been appointed, or any of the others, but we only know that through the retrospectoscope. I'm sure Steve Gibson acted entirely on the basis of reputations (and who wouldn't?) but these guys by and large have failed him.

It must drive him nuts that the problems Warnock faced on the day he took over and still manifest today, but that's Warnock's fault and not Steve Gibson's.
Click to expand...
This post sums things up.
Whatever happens in this dictatorship is never the dictators fault.
Never ever.
He makes all the big decisions at the club and has done so since Colin Henderson.
 
I think the assumption in the anti-SG posts is

"Investment + good management = success"

In some fields of business, that may be true. However, anyone who follows sport, and football in particular, knows that is a fallacy. It's a chaotic and unpredictable environment.


Putting the money in and making all the best decisions does not guarantee success ever in this sport. Therefore a lack of success can never prove that investment or management was wrong.
 
indeedido said:
For absolute ****'s sake.
Gibson hasn't got a clue what he is doing ,but we will be happy to see his amateur actress pick up the reigns?

Middlesbrough is a very good club, with a good fan base.
The problem is the debt that Gibson has built up will prevent anybody investing in it.
He won't walk away for many reasons.
It totally ***** me off that his absolute inability to run the club is written off, while the debt he builds up will never be.
Stuck with each other.

There are lots of examples of better run and better financed clubs than Boro, but few of similar size that are worse, who owe so much money, have so negative shareholder value and are backed by someone with zero intention of ever investing in the club again.
The club is a financial basket case, but apparently Stevie Gibson is king for some fuckwits.
Click to expand...
Yeah right no other Championship clubs have significant debt...
 
indeedido said:
This post sums things up.
Whatever happens in this dictatorship is never the dictators fault.
Never ever.
He makes all the big decisions at the club and has done so since Colin Henderson.
Click to expand...
He brings in managers with good track records. He backs them with money to buy players - reasonable amounts. He pays the wages, let's them get on with it and, season after season, he's been let down.

I can't see what Steve Gibson could do differently to make it work.
 
Soutra said:
He brings in managers with good track records. He backs them with money to buy players - reasonable amounts. He pays the wages, let's them get on with it and, season after season, he's been let down.

I can't see what Steve Gibson could do differently to make it work.
Click to expand...
He repeatedly hires the wrong people. It’s not every now and again, it’s every time.
Under invested on promotion, idiotic activity on relegation.
Investment + Good decisions may not guarantee success FH, but bad decisions always guarantee failure.
I don’t doubt Gibson wants success and needs it to get anything back from his folly, but good intentions count for **** all when you can’t make a good call to save your life.
 
I don’t think the hiring has been the problem it’s the firing he’s never been good at as we hang on to failing regimes too long.

that’s been our undoing.
 
indeedido said:
He repeatedly hires the wrong people. It’s not every now and again, it’s every time.
Under invested on promotion, idiotic activity on relegation.
Investment + Good decisions may not guarantee success FH, but bad decisions always guarantee failure.
I don’t doubt Gibson wants success and needs it to get anything back from his folly, but good intentions count for **** all when you can’t make a good call to save your life.
Click to expand...
"Our fans are far more tolerant than many other clubs'. There is rarely toxicity, or any chasings".
Yeah apart from you 😆
 
shaun71 said:
Do people think there's a queue of willing investors?
Click to expand...
No.

It's possible that there's someone out there with hundreds of millions burning a hole in their pocket but even if they want to buy a football club in England, there are many more attractive propositions than MFC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top