Topic: New Managing Director Appointed - Christian Purslow

[redmen77]

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. It's annoying with ppl like you just ranting without understanding facts.

For a starter, you pay tax on selling players. So that's a whole bunch of millions gone there.
Second, for each of these renewed contracts, you'll have to add a one time sign-on bonus of surely at least 1M per player.
Third, it's insane how ppl on the boards try to claim that we've sold Crouch twice. The outstanding 10Mish from Crouch was already accounted for. The full 17M fee for Johnson has to be included.
Fourth, you have to consider the sign-on fees and payments to agents, which for the Aqu and Johnson deals are bound to be considerable. Probably in the region of 2-3M per player.
Fifth, we probably had to hand Keane a chunk of money to leave.

There's no doubt what so ever that we have a net spending of 20M when everything is included.
Our spendings are probably about 50M, and we won't have more than 30M left of sales after taxes and other expenses.

You also get tax relief on buying players and the signing on fee is always included as part of the fee, which kind of evens things out, so is a pointless argument.

[incredibleL4ever]

Even if you take him at face value, he is twisting the facts...
He is just looking at the activity this summer, he is ignoring what happened in January. 
This summer we reportedly spent 20m aquilani (rafa says less than this), 17m Johnson and 2m, Kryiagkos.  Thats 39m, so he is saying we spent 11m on signing of fees and increases for 5 players.
We sold Alonso 30m, albeloa 3.5m Leto 2m = 35.5m, which he says is 30m (coz of tax and buy out clauses maybe).

Even if you believe this....
What about the fee for Keane - 11m rising to 15m i understand
What about the wages saved on losing Keane and Pennant off the payroll - 120k per week (I am assuming the wages for Aquliani, Johnson and Kryiagkos equate to those for ALonso, Arbeloa and Hyypia).
Comparing our situation at the end of the transfer window last year, to our current position I would say we have not spent any money, no matter how you add it up.

[TepidT2O]

[quote
My point remains when have you ever heard of a club use extending existing players at the clubs contracts as an excuse for it's lack of activity in the transfer market?


Never.

Arsenal do this don't they?

[Gedo]

This is just an estimate.
Keane 80k a week
Hyppia 40k a week
Alonso 60k a week
Arbeloa 20k a week
Pennant 30k a week
Leto 15k a week
as against.
Acquilani 50k a week
Kyrgiakos 20k a week
Johnson 80k a week,
Your looking at approx 95k a surplus week IF we have that those figures are loosely accurate.
Whose had a new Contract since January,Gerrard,Torres,Kuyt,Agger and El Zahr.

Anyone estimate as to how much those players wages have gone up?
Torres 25k a week ?
Gerrard 25 a week?
Agger 15k a week?
Kuyt 15k a week?
El Zahr a week5k?
These figure are all ESTIMATES,but something to think about.

[HarryLabrador]

This is just an estimate.
Keane 80k a week
Hyppia 40k a week
Alonso 60k a week
Arbeloa 20k a week
Pennant 30k a week
Leto 15k a week
as against.
Acquilani 50k a week
Kyrgiakos 20k a week
Johnson 80k a week,
Your looking at approx 95k a surplus week IF we have that those figures are loosely accurate.
Whose had a new Contract since January,Gerrard,Torres,Kuyt,Agger and El Zahr.

Anyone estimate as to how much those players wages have gone up?
Torres 25k a week ?
Gerrard 25 a week?
Agger 15k a week?
Kuyt 15k a week?
El Zahr a week5k?
These figure are all ESTIMATES,but something to think about.

Hello Gedo! Nice to hear from again....missed you on here.

[Gedo]

Hello Gedo! Nice to hear from again....missed you on here.

Thanks H

[rocco]

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. It's annoying with ppl like you just ranting without understanding facts.

For a starter, you pay tax on selling players. So that's a whole bunch of millions gone there.
Second, for each of these renewed contracts, you'll have to add a one time sign-on bonus of surely at least 1M per player.
Third, it's insane how ppl on the boards try to claim that we've sold Crouch twice. The outstanding 10Mish from Crouch was already accounted for. The full 17M fee for Johnson has to be included.
Fourth, you have to consider the sign-on fees and payments to agents, which for the Aqu and Johnson deals are bound to be considerable. Probably in the region of 2-3M per player.
Fifth, we probably had to hand Keane a chunk of money to leave.

There's no doubt what so ever that we have a net spending of 20M when everything is included.
Our spendings are probably about 50M, and we won't have more than 30M left of sales after taxes and other expenses.

But we seem for the last couple of seasons to be letting more players go than players coming in , so surely the wages saved should cover the wages for the increase and new players ages ? And what about the extra TV money ?
Plus saying we have spent 20million net ... last 2 seasons we have spent 40m net .... so the decrease in net spend and including the increase in TV money is just going to service the yanks debts.

[rocco]

This is just an estimate.
Keane 80k a week
Hyppia 40k a week
Alonso 60k a week
Arbeloa 20k a week
Pennant 30k a week
Leto 15k a week
as against.
Acquilani 50k a week
Kyrgiakos 20k a week
Johnson 80k a week,
Your looking at approx 95k a surplus week IF we have that those figures are loosely accurate.
Whose had a new Contract since January,Gerrard,Torres,Kuyt,Agger and El Zahr.

Anyone estimate as to how much those players wages have gone up?
Torres 25k a week ?
Gerrard 25 a week?
Agger 15k a week?
Kuyt 15k a week?
El Zahr a week5k?
These figure are all ESTIMATES,but something to think about.

exactly the point i have made a few times ...   we seem to be selling more players over the last couple of seasons than we have brought in ... SO imo the wages should be nearly balancing out and the extra TV money  why doesn't that cover the wages increases...plus i thought the last 2 seasons our net spend was £40m  .... so why say our so called £20m net spend is in line with last couple of seasons ?
.


Transfer Expenditure


Financial Year Ending 2008  2007 
Purchases ..........69,966  69,972 
Sales ...............29,740  25,946 
Net Transfer Activity 40,226  44,02

So even if we are to look at it from his point of view , well then our net spend over the last 2 seasons 2008 2007 must be £60m + . so either way   our net spend is way down no matter what way you slice it.

[Gedo]

exactly the point i have made a few times ...   we seem to be selling more players over the last couple of seasons than we have brought in ... SO imo the wages should be nearly balancing out and the extra TV money  why doesn't that cover the wages increases...plus i thought the last 2 seasons our net spend was £40m  .... so why say our so called £20m net spend is in line with last couple of seasons ?

Because Purslow's being Economical with the Truth.

[No666]

All good questions for Purslow and the owners. And if he refuses a meeting posing those questions publicly will draw attention to the fact that they can't justify Purslow's last statement. Frankly he's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't, unless he can back those figures up and prove that other top flight clubs operate in the same way, and that Rafa knew new contracts were coming out of the transfer budget in advance of his offering them.

[rocco]

Because Purslow's being Economical with the Truth.

To put it nicely ......

[bigbear]

Anybody believing what Purslow is saying is just being naive. We are just being led down the garden path.

Whichever way you look at it. Over a given period we will be paying and recieving transfer instalments.

New signings wages and player's extending contracts will be generally offset by getting lads like Pennant/Sami off the books as well as the players we have sold.

Over the last 2 years we have spent ;

Keane (19m), Riera (8m), Dossena (7m), Cavilleri (3.5m), Ngog (1m)   2008 Ins  38.5m

Johnson (17m ** I'll say 17m but I think that includes add ons and incentives), Aquilani (19m), Krygiakos (1.5m)   2009 Ins 37.5m

Crouch (11m), Riise (4.5m) , Guthrie (2.5m)  2008 Ins  18m 

Keane (16m), Leto (3.5m), Arbeloa (3.5m), Hamill/Anderson (1m), Alonso (30m)   2009 Ins   54m


I've probably left somebody out  but by my calcs, despite qualifying and going a long way in the CL every year we have spent a NET 4m pound on transfers over the past 2 years.

I actually think that some of the buys we've made our over-stated (Johnson is probably more like 14 rising to 17m) but anyway, let's take the quoted figures.

4m over 2 years. It's a joke. David Moores was doing better than that.

[Gem]

Pennant was not averse to leaving payslips, passports etc lying around in his ferrari when it had work done to it (usually paint work after being keyed), and my brother in law said he saw a payslip was around 80k but i am not sure when from or if it included one off bonuses etc, but i think he was on a lot more than 30k a week imo.

[Gedo]

Pennant was not averse to leaving payslips, passports etc lying around in his ferrari when it had work done to it (usually paint work after being keyed), and my brother in law said he saw a payslip was around 80k but i am not sure when from or if it included one off bonuses etc, but i think he was on a lot more than 30k a week imo.

I just put a ballpark figure out.

[rocco]

Pennant was not averse to leaving payslips, passports etc lying around in his ferrari when it had work done to it (usually paint work after being keyed), and my brother in law said he saw a payslip was around 80k but i am not sure when from or if it included one off bonuses etc, but i think he was on a lot more than 30k a week imo.

Ive been told he was on 40k a week ....

[rocco]

Anybody believing what Purslow is saying is just being naive. We are just being led down the garden path.

Whichever way you look at it. Over a given period we will be paying and recieving transfer instalments.

New signings wages and player's extending contracts will be generally offset by getting lads like Pennant/Sami off the books as well as the players we have sold.

Over the last 2 years we have spent ;

Keane (19m), Riera (8m), Dossena (7m), Cavilleri (3.5m), Ngog (1m)   2008 Ins  38.5m

Johnson (17m ** I'll say 17m but I think that includes add ons and incentives), Aquilani (19m), Krygiakos (1.5m)   2009 Ins 37.5m

Crouch (11m), Riise (4.5m) , Guthrie (2.5m)  2008 Ins  18m 

Keane (16m), Leto (3.5m), Arbeloa (3.5m), Hamill/Anderson (1m), Alonso (30m)   2009 Ins   54m


I've probably left somebody out  but by my calcs, despite qualifying and going a long way in the CL every year we have spent a NET 4m pound on transfers over the past 2 years.

I actually think that some of the buys we've made our over-stated (Johnson is probably more like 14 rising to 17m) but anyway, let's take the quoted figures.

4m over 2 years. It's a joke. David Moores was doing better than that.

4M over 2 years seems also very far fetched ?


http://www.redandwhitekop.com/forum/index.php?topic=243416.0

Transfer Expenditure

The one area that causes the biggest debate.  Every year we have fans complaining about the amount of money spent on players and every year they get it wrong, massively.  These are the true figures for the last 2 financial years.

(figures in £000s)
Financial Year Ending 2008  2007 
Purchases ................69,966  69,972 
Sales ........................29,740  25,946 
Net Transfer Activity 40,226  44,026 

These values include relevant levies to the premier league, VAT and agents fees.  Signing on fees go straight to the Profit & Loss at time of payment.

Since the year end Albert Riera, Peter Gulasci and Victor Palsson were bought by the club for total transfer fees of £7m (I assume this includes VAT and agents fees, but am not certain)

Since the year end the club sold Robbie Keane and Steve Finnan for a total guaranteed income of £12.8m.  However this amount will increase significantly should certain conditions be met.


My point is Purslow { purse low}saying £20m net spend is in line , is way off compared to the last couple of years is way off .... plus i don't believe his £20m figure anyway.

[bigbear]

Do the levies to the League go on top of or come out of transfer fees ?

What are the levy percentages ?

Re VAT, surely we pay VAT and we receive VAT so that is surely offset.

[rocco]

Do the levies to the League go on top of or come out of transfer fees ?

What are the levy percentages ?

Re VAT, surely we pay VAT and we receive VAT so that is surely offset.

You would have to ask ttnbd RAWK Chief Financial Officer , my point is by his figures over the last 2 years including all fees our average net spend was £42m .... so Pursestringslow saying were in line with £20M is out , unless he meant just the summer transfer net figure or did he include the whole of 2009 including Jan transfer figures ?

 

[redmen77]

Do the levies to the League go on top of or come out of transfer fees ?

What are the levy percentages ?

Re VAT, surely we pay VAT and we receive VAT so that is surely offset.

Its not VAT that you pay its Capital Gains Tax.

[bigbear]

Its not VAT that you pay its Capital Gains Tax.

I'm just responding to Rocco's post above. I wasn't aware we paid VAT on players purchased.

[ttnbd]

I think there is an element of VAT on transfers, but I don't think it's on all transfers.  League levy's are approx 5% then there are agents fees on top which can be as high as 6.5% (this is the fee that rooney's agent earned from his transfer to the mancs, while Van de Sar's agent got 30% commission from the transfer (but that was a low cost transfer).

The treatment of signing on fees has also changed over the last couple of years by the club.  They used to be put through the P&L when they were paid, now however they are spread over the life of the contract.

There will be capital gains tax due on fees received, however rollover relief is available if the funds are re-invested in the purchase of new players.

[bigbear]

I think there is an element of VAT on transfers, but I don't think it's on all transfers.  League levy's are approx 5% then there are agents fees on top which can be as high as 6.5% (this is the fee that rooney's agent earned from his transfer to the mancs, while Van de Sar's agent got 30% commission from the transfer (but that was a low cost transfer).

The treatment of signing on fees has also changed over the last couple of years by the club.  They used to be put through the P&L when they were paid, now however they are spread over the life of the contract.

There will be capital gains tax due on fees received, however rollover relief is available if the funds are re-invested in the purchase of new players.

Presumably there's no VAT on foreign purchases.

[kopite.keith]

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. It's annoying with ppl like you just ranting without understanding facts.

For a starter, you pay tax on selling players. So that's a whole bunch of millions gone there.
Second, for each of these renewed contracts, you'll have to add a one time sign-on bonus of surely at least 1M per player.
Third, it's insane how ppl on the boards try to claim that we've sold Crouch twice. The outstanding 10Mish from Crouch was already accounted for. The full 17M fee for Johnson has to be included.
Fourth, you have to consider the sign-on fees and payments to agents, which for the Aqu and Johnson deals are bound to be considerable. Probably in the region of 2-3M per player.
Fifth, we probably had to hand Keane a chunk of money to leave.

There's no doubt what so ever that we have a net spending of 20M when everything is included.
Our spendings are probably about 50M, and we won't have more than 30M left of sales after taxes and other expenses.

Definitely peddling crap from inside the Yank's camp.

[ttnbd]

Presumably there's no VAT on foreign purchases.

yeah I think that's the exception.  I read something on it ages ago but can't find it.

[redmen77]

yeah I think that's the exception.  I read something on it ages ago but can't find it.

Wouldn't the VAT only apply to the service fees (agents and League)  but not the transfer fee itself?

[ttnbd]

Wouldn't the VAT only apply to the service fees (agents and League)  but not the transfer fee itself?

depends on whether you count having the use of a player as a service provided by the player.  I'm not 100% on the vat issues on transfer fees.  I know there is an on going case between Newcastle and the HMRC with regards to VAT on agents fees, but not sure beyond that.

[liverbnz]

Definitely peddling crap from inside the Yank's camp.

What makes you say that? Is it just because it doesn't suit the vendetta. If you are gonna have an issue with a post at least state why. And if you have indeed got a vendetta against the Yanks, and feel a bit peeved to say the least, just like us all, then you'd be wiser to learn the facts, rather than join the stampede without fully knowing why.

[redprodigal]

I'm sorry, but you're just wrong. It's annoying with ppl like you just ranting without understanding facts.

For a starter, you pay tax on selling players. So that's a whole bunch of millions gone there.
Second, for each of these renewed contracts, you'll have to add a one time sign-on bonus of surely at least 1M per player.
Third, it's insane how ppl on the boards try to claim that we've sold Crouch twice. The outstanding 10Mish from Crouch was already accounted for. The full 17M fee for Johnson has to be included.
Fourth, you have to consider the sign-on fees and payments to agents, which for the Aqu and Johnson deals are bound to be considerable. Probably in the region of 2-3M per player.
Fifth, we probably had to hand Keane a chunk of money to leave.

There's no doubt what so ever that we have a net spending of 20M when everything is included.
Our spendings are probably about 50M, and we won't have more than 30M left of sales after taxes and other expenses.

Ok but the stories going around say that Rafa, like the rest of us, was under the impression that we would get 20m for new players and new players alone, and we didn't.
Tell me something, when other teams spend 20m on transfers, do their owners get their snidey little puppet to come out in the press and  let the whole world know the amount they spend on players contracts, signing on fees, taxes etc etc.?
We've been screwed once again ,mate, face up to it.

[dmn]

I'm sorry but it's annoying that people like you using text speak. I mentioned signing on fees and where has anybody said we've sold Crouch twice?

What you're saying is the same meaning as that we've sold Crouch twice, even if you don't understand that.
The full 17M fee for Johnson belongs to this transfer window while the full fee for Crouch belongs to that window.
That you (and "less educated" journalists) try to mix things up due to payment of the deals has **** all to do with the budget.

My point remains when have you ever heard of a club use extending existing players at the clubs contracts as an excuse for it's lack of activity in the transfer market?

The answer is that it happens all the time. But very rarely in public. In public it's usually translated to "we're happy with our squad".

You want to flame the management for making these public comments? I completely agree that such statements should not be made, so flame away for that.
But your original post was not about that such comments shouldn't be made, you were questioning the figures behind it.

Definitely peddling crap from inside the Yank's camp.

Wow. Yet another "Boy's pen" member out dropping one-liners. What a surprise. I'm truly shocked.

I by no means endorse our owners/management, I despise them in many ways. But I also despise those who claim to be "the best fans in the world", yet spout complete bullshit.

You can argue that:
* The management shouldn't make such public comments.
* A club of our stature should have a net spend of more than 20M.
These are very valid points and by all means we should let the owners hear that.

But when your point isn't none of these two, but instead that the 20M net spend is incorrect, then you're just wrong and bloody stupid and it's a disgrace to see how such uneducated bullshit is accepted as a general opinion among fans.

[Redeye]

Liverpool, since the Champions League participation, have always spent at least £20 million of the profits generated in the transfer market to improve or at least maintain the viability of the squad.

This year they didn't.

Arguments about VAT, agents' fees, service fees etc. are immaterial to this discussion as they've always been there and we've always paid them.

Money for actual transfers have always come out of one budget, whilst funding for improved contracts for existing players have come out of another.

This year it didn't, the budgets have been rolled together. And it's plain to me that this has been the case so as our "custodians" could pay off a small proportion of the debt they've laden on the club. Supporters are no fools.

So I don't buy for one nanosecond Purslow's  spin on events and neither do I buy, for that matter, misguided attempts to justify them on these boards.

[Gedo]

What you're saying is the same meaning as that we've sold Crouch twice, even if you don't understand that.
The full 17M fee for Johnson belongs to this transfer window while the full fee for Crouch belongs to that window.
That you (and "less educated" journalists) try to mix things up due to payment of the deals has **** all to do with the budget.
The answer is that it happens all the time. But very rarely in public. In public it's usually translated to "we're happy with our squad".

You want to flame the management for making these public comments? I completely agree that such statements should not be made, so flame away for that.
But your original post was not about that such comments shouldn't be made, you were questioning the figures behind it.
Wow. Yet another "Boy's pen" member out dropping one-liners. What a surprise. I'm truly shocked.

I by no means endorse our owners/management, I despise them in many ways. But I also despise those who claim to be "the best fans in the world", yet spout complete bullshit.

You can argue that:
* The management shouldn't make such public comments.
* A club of our stature should have a net spend of more than 20M.
These are very valid points and by all means we should let the owners hear that.

But when your point isn't none of these two, but instead that the 20M net spend is incorrect, then you're just wrong and bloody stupid and it's a disgrace to see how such uneducated bullshit is accepted as a general opinion among fans.

Since the Americans took over in February 2007 the NET on Transfers  is approx £25m over a 30 month period,Peanuts if we want to amount a substantial Challenge.

Btw when has the average fan discussed Vat/Agents fees when discussing transfers.

Purslow's done his job already,he's diverted YOU from the Real Issues.

[Alf]

What you're saying is the same meaning as that we've sold Crouch twice, even if you don't understand that.
The full 17M fee for Johnson belongs to this transfer window while the full fee for Crouch belongs to that window.
That you (and "less educated" journalists) try to mix things up due to payment of the deals has **** all to do with the budget.
The answer is that it happens all the time. But very rarely in public. In public it's usually translated to "we're happy with our squad".

You want to flame the management for making these public comments? I completely agree that such statements should not be made, so flame away for that.
But your original post was not about that such comments shouldn't be made, you were questioning the figures behind it.
Wow. Yet another "Boy's pen" member out dropping one-liners. What a surprise. I'm truly shocked.

I by no means endorse our owners/management, I despise them in many ways. But I also despise those who claim to be "the best fans in the world", yet spout complete bullshit.

You can argue that:
* The management shouldn't make such public comments.
* A club of our stature should have a net spend of more than 20M.
These are very valid points and by all means we should let the owners hear that.

But when your point isn't none of these two, but instead that the 20M net spend is incorrect, then you're just wrong and bloody stupid and it's a disgrace to see how such uneducated bullshit is accepted as a general opinion among fans.

I understand that Crouch being sold will be reported in one years accounts and that Johnson being purchased will be in the following one.

“We’ve spent pretty much the same as we’ve spent every year over the past four or five years,” said Purslow.

We might have spent a similar amount in as other summers but we've have brought that money back to the club in sales

''But we’ve spent £20 million and that’s real money. There are lots of costs associated with buying players and extending players that all go into transfer funds”.

So how is this summer different from 2007 when we signed Babel, Benayoun and Torres, We gave Alonso, Carra, Gerrard and Reina new contracts.

Did agents not take a cut of the transfer?
Did players signing new contracts not get a pay rise or a signing on fee ?
Did we sell Xabi Alonso for monopoly money?

Man Utd have just won 3 league titles in a row and Arsenal have a new stadium.

[No666]

Since the Americans took over in February 2007 the NET on Transfers  is approx £25m over a 30 month period,Peanuts if we want to amount a substantial Challenge.

Btw when has the average fan discussed Vat/Agents fees when discussing transfers.

Purslow's done his job already,he's diverted YOU from the Real Issues.

Exactly. By coming up with this sophistry Purse-low has attempted to divert attention from WHY there is no transfer budget. And the answer is, because of the yanks' business model.

[xerxes1]

By coming up with this sophistry Purse-low has attempted to divert attention from WHY there is no transfer budget. And the answer is, because of the yanks' business model.

Too true. The club cannot make enough profits to service the debt and stay competitive on the field. The status quo equals decline.

There are only two escape routes. A sale to a benevolent investor, which is highly unlikley, or a patched together multi-investor new stadium package, which although favourite, will be fraught with problems.

[Dave_the_Red]

Exactly. By coming up with this sophistry Purse-low has attempted to divert attention from WHY there is no transfer budget. And the answer is, because of the yanks' business model.

spot on. The new CEO "part time" is only here to justify h&g ineffective ownership of LFC. Think twat and twat can get a new CEO and change our attitude towards them?

[HarryLabrador]

I came across this Telegraph article which was issued at the time Purslow was appointed. Is it really true he has been a ST holder and good friends with Kenny, who according to this article, recommended him to H&G?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Liverpool appoint Christian Purslow as their new managing director
Liverpool have appointed Christian Purslow, a financier with strong links to Merseyside, as their new managing director.
 
By Paul Kelso, Chief Sports Reporter
Published: 10:19AM BST 22 Jun 2009

Purslow, an Anfield season-ticket holder, will join the board and take over many of the responsibilities of outgoing chief executive Rick Parry, but will step aside when a full-time replacement for Parry is appointed.

Purslow's priorities will be to renegotiate the £350m loan with RBS due to be repaid at the end of July and to work with manager Rafa Benitez on summer transfer targets.
 
Purslow, whose background is in private equity, speaks fluent Spanish and has already struck a relationship with Benitez. He is understood to have played a role in the negotiations surrounding Fernando Torres's new contract.

A friend of club legend Kenny Dalglish, Purslow was recommended to owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett as a potential new board member and has the support of both of them. Crucially this should allow him to bridge the divide that occasionally appears before the American owners.

The new managing director is also said to have decent relations with senior staff at RBS including chief executive Stephen Hester, and club sources said the bank welcomed his appointment.

Talks with RBS will take place imminently, with the owners prospects of satisfying the bank's demands enhanced by Gillett's impending sale of the Montreal Canadiens. With Hicks yet to raise finance from his for sale US assets, it remains to be seen if this affects the delicate equilibrium between the owners.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/liverpool/5600713/Liverpool-appoint-Christian-Purslow-as-their-new-managing-director.html

[Dave_the_Red]

Starting to see why fat arse had such a problem with coco. coco did ensure wages and transfer fees did not come from the one pot.

[OLDIE]

http://www.theroadend.co.uk/home/index.php?p=58&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

That site is shite

[west_london_red]

I came across this Telegraph article which was issued at the time Purslow was appointed. Is it really true he has been a ST holder and good friends with Kenny, who according to this article, recommended him to H&G?

Well the question I asked when he was appointed was is he a normal season ticket holder or a corporate who owns a few seats that he uses to wine and dine his yuppie mates?

While both situations can be argued as being season ticket holders, Id guess (feel free to correct if anyone knows better) hes a corporate fan but the article is making him sound like a man of the people and "one of us" rather then "one of them".

As for being a mate of Kenny's, again the word "friend" could range from best mates to memebers of the same golf club or attending a charity or after dinner event. If you read that sentance in passing, it could be construed as if Kenny's recommended him although the article is not actually saying that. The "," is the key there.

This has PR company written all over it if you ask me, but its my job to be cynical so maybe im reading too much into it.

[No666]

I agree with you WLR. It's designed to stop people asking questions. And it definitely doesn't say Kenny recommended him. I'd be surprised if he did, as that would imply KK is matey with Hicks and Gillett, too.