Colin Garlick

[valeparklife]

12 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

You're not listening.  He gave a long interview with the Senile a couple of weeks ago about the managerial situation.

Fair enough, I stand corrected. 

After reading through his interview, all it alludes to is "we haven't got a clue who to appoint so it will be given to Danny Pugh".

Beyond (not) appointing a proper manager, what else does he do? What else has he done?

[valeparklife]

10 hours ago, Nofinikea said:

Don't be stupid.  If football was like any other business there would only be a handful of professional clubs.  The rest would have gone bust years ago.

Absolute nonsense.

If football clubs were ran like proper businesses then there wouldn't be so many in financial turmoil.

Do you understand what the purpose of a business is? To create wealth for shareholders. Ergo, things have to be run correctly with the best interests of the shareholder in mind.

Football clubs are like the wild west right now with renegade owners making decisions that benefit themselves and no one else. I'm not saying that's us (anymore) but we definitely are not heading in the right direction.

 

[valeparklife]

13 hours ago, Jacko51 said:

We are in a better situation now than we were when Colin Garlick came to the club. 

You do realise we were in League One when Garlick arrived?

[Fosse69]

You do realise we were in League One when Garlick arrived?

How many millions taken out of the club since then?

[CAVALIER]

31 minutes ago, valeparklife said:

Absolute nonsense.

If football clubs were ran like proper businesses then there wouldn't be so many in financial turmoil.

Do you understand what the purpose of a business is? To create wealth for shareholders. Ergo, things have to be run correctly with the best interests of the shareholder in mind.

Football clubs are like the wild west right now with renegade owners making decisions that benefit themselves and no one else. I'm not saying that's us (anymore) but we definitely are not heading in the right direction.

 

Rubbish. They would be much worse off. How many actually make a profit? 
The two can’t be compared as if they were there’d be no football. 
We have only made real money for one person in recent times, and he ran it for himself and ignored his customer base completely, made his money and was literally ran out of town , yet still makes money from us. That happen in real business?
Yes, we were, through little doing of his, in a higher league for a while yet he soon put paid to that. 
Seems to me that it’s Smurf who you want back and not local supporters with the community close to their heart. 
And then you blame Garlick. Get real. 

[valeparklife]

19 minutes ago, Fosse69 said:

54 minutes ago, valeparklife said:

You do realise we were in League One when Garlick arrived?

How many millions taken out of the club since then?

We have better owners yes, that's not even up for debate.

But we were also a L1 club, with L1 players and L1 revenue. To suggest we're in a better place now is absurd.

[valeparklife]

13 minutes ago, CAVALIER said:

Rubbish. They would be much worse off. How many actually make a profit? 
The two can’t be compared as if they were there’d be no football. 
We have only made real money for one person in recent times, and he ran it for himself and ignored his customer base completely, made his money and was literally ran out of town , yet still makes money from us. That happen in real business?
Yes, we were, through little doing of his, in a higher league for a while yet he soon put paid to that. 
Seems to me that it’s Smurf who you want back and not local supporters with the community close to their heart. 
And then you blame Garlick. Get real. 

You've literally backed up my argument in your reply! 

Questions need to be asked of Garlick. What does he do? What has he done to improve us? 

As CEO, that's his JOB. 

[CAVALIER]

9 minutes ago, valeparklife said:

You've literally backed up my argument in your reply! 

Questions need to be asked of Garlick. What does he do? What has he done to improve us? 

As CEO, that's his JOB. 

I’m saying they can’t be compared. Thought that was clear, let’s furlough everyone shall we?

However, if I didn’t make that clear that’s my doing

I’d suggest that if our owners weren’t happy with the CEO then they’d have done something about it and not rely on a few voices on a site which doesn’t represent the fan base

Email them. 

[geoff1]

39 minutes ago, CAVALIER said:

I’m saying they can’t be compared. Thought that was clear, let’s furlough everyone shall we?

However, if I didn’t make that clear that’s my doing

I’d suggest that if our owners weren’t happy with the CEO then they’d have done something about it and not rely on a few voices on a site which doesn’t represent the fan base

Email them. 

not have a word said against colin, we would have been in a worse state if we hadnt got him at the helm.😉

[Fosse69]

We have better owners yes, that's not even up for debate.
But we were also a L1 club, with L1 players and L1 revenue. To suggest we're in a better place now is absurd.

But it was Smurf that got us relegated not Garlick

[valeparklife]

6 minutes ago, geoff1 said:

not have a word said against colin, we would have been in a worse state if we hadnt got him at the helm.😉

I've given him some leeway, as for me, he's the one that first exposed Smurthwaite by claiming that "all of the money that PVFC generates does not stay within PVFC". I felt this was the catalyst for fans to wake up to what Smurthwaite was doing to the club, which ultimately led to the pressure piling on him and forcing him to sell. And I'll ALWAYS be grateful for that.

But that doesn't mean that I'd be happy with him being CEO forever because of it.

If you're not performing, then questions need to be asked. And it's clear we're regressing as a club.

I liked Askey, and will always be grateful that he effectively stabilised us and staved off relegation. But again, for whatever reason, we weren't getting results and the performances were poor, so he was gone.

I feel the same would apply to the CEO of the club?

[Joe B]

The questions about Garlick are nothing to do with him being here for relegation, which is a pointless argument as that was Norman's doing.

The questions reside in the fact that his job remit includes a facet of the football club which is severely underperforming, and to identify underperformance you need to analyse everyone responsible for that facet.

If the answer is 'he doesn't handle that sort of thing', then change his job role and bring in someone who will handle that sort of thing (an experienced manager or otherwise).

Debate's been bogged down in minutiae.

[valeparklife]

2 minutes ago, Fosse69 said:

1 hour ago, valeparklife said:

We have better owners yes, that's not even up for debate.
But we were also a L1 club, with L1 players and L1 revenue. To suggest we're in a better place now is absurd.

But it was Smurf that got us relegated not Garlick

So what's the point of a CEO if the owners make all the decisions?

Seems a waste of a wage.

I agree Smurthwaite got us relegated.

But as CEO, and apparent 'football expert' why was Garlick not fervently arguing that signing a load of French and Dutch lower league players would be suicidal. As we all knew. He went along with it.

If that was me, I'd have resigned. I wouldn't want that decision against my name.

[CAVALIER]

8 minutes ago, valeparklife said:

So what's the point of a CEO if the owners make all the decisions?

Seems a waste of a wage.

I agree Smurthwaite got us relegated.

But as CEO, and apparent 'football expert' why was Garlick not fervently arguing that signing a load of French and Dutch lower league players would be suicidal. As we all knew. He went along with it.

If that was me, I'd have resigned. I wouldn't want that decision against my name.

Really? You’d resign if your boss asked you to do something you didn’t like? Unemployment rates would be worse than ever if everyone did that all the time

[Joe B]

You can't blame Garlick for Norman being daft/dangerous.