]

Actually it is my opinion, which I am entitled to and looking at what the coach said he must be wrong to!

As to carping, its not, any potential investor will want to see everything from on field performances to off field finances. To gauge the task they have if they invest. No potential investor is going to be dissuaded due to a fans forum. They will be dissuaded by the club's debt, its poor attendances, on field performances, lack of recent history etc. etc. etc.

Quality mate

they didn't, Dec 1998 3007 against Mansfield,

I was talking about the similarities in terms of the player's reactions to defeat, not how long he's been at the club.



City's attendances have been all over the place - only the most hard faced blue would try to argue otherwise. Attendances even now are up and down (that's not a dig before anyone starts) which shows that, even with investment and success you're not guaranteed an instant jump in regular weekly crowd numbers. The potential was there mainly because of the new stadium and Manchester already being well known in football terms. I fully understand that the potential for investors is different in football and rugby league, I don't think anyone expects someone with billions to take over at Salford. But the basics are still there, just on a lower scale.



I'm willing to be proven wrong, but I doubt it. Wilkinson has made it known for a number of years that he'd like someone to come in who could take the club forward with the best interests of Salford at heart. Even North West based businessmen won't get involved, why would someone based down south get involved with a small club in a minority sport?



We've already dealt with that particular gem.



Again, Wilky's been asking for people to come forward for years. Where are they? And why the hell would they be based down south? And, even more ridiculously, why on Earth would they be dissuaded by a handful of p*ssed up bellends acting up?

Basically we need to wait For Diavlo to get a few years of his bonus's in then he can come and take over the club

I don't want to prolong this but my point was City maintained their attendances despite a lack of on-field success.I found this 'gem' on Wikipedia - [iEven in the late 1990s, when the club were relegated twice in three seasons and playing in the third tier of English football (then Division Two, now Football League One), home attendances were in the region of 30,000, compared to an average for the division of fewer than 8,000.[60] Research carried out by Manchester City in 2005 estimates a fanbase of 886,000 in the United Kingdom and a total in excess of 2 million worldwide.[/i

reasonably safe to invest when a well stocked club shop and other revenue streams would be well supported.

The guy who invested in a poorly supported club - in comparison - Who I thought made his money in Canada,but I was mistaken,if the link attached is correct.He was born in the place but did not invest until he had made many millions rlLinkrl

My point was that an individual,perhaps born in the north west but making his money/residing elsewhere in the world,may wish to invest.
I am aware,but cannot immediately recollect,of individuals/consortiums who declined to invest in sports clubs,mainly soccer,because of the conduct of some people.I concede that the behaviour was directed at them,but I think the principle still applies.