I totally agree with that. In anything at all in life, there is always something you can do better. I’m not a businessman by any stretch of the imagination but if I was asked to think of 3 things that could improve any area at Walsall F.C I am fairly sure I could think of some good ideas. There are lots of really intelligent Walsall fans and a huge range of skills that would openly be available but it so often just feels like us against them, or them against us whichever way you want to view it. This really gets at me sometimes because working together will always be better. Just look how we all pulled together when the pandemic hit, that made me really proud to be a Walsall supporter.
A company I worked for many years ago had something they called copy plus. Where they would copy other companies ideas which worked well. (They were openly available most of the time believe it or not) and aim to reproduce those ideas but do them better. Just as one example how this could be used is the matchday experience. Take the best bits that other clubs do and see which ones could be implemented at Walsall. I am certain there would be many fans that would be more than happy to collect and pass on their experiences while on their travels.
Despite everything, I believe there is still some goodwill towards Leigh Pomlett. It is running out fast now though because we can’t see any genuine positive change.
But what incentive does he have in the end? I suspect he is still “friendly” with Bonser and has been for many years. Cutting ties would cut the friendship. There is also the question of whether Pomlett would want to be involved in what would be an expensive move, loading up the club with debt and certainly putting the finances in a more short-term precarious position than they are now.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that we shouldn’t look to do this, I’m more making a comment on this current owner. I think he’s a man of limited means and, to a large extent, risk averse, so I doubt he feels the urge to pursue what might be regarded as risky strategies. The danger with that is that football has changed so much that there are plenty of clubs who do pursue risky strategies, overtake us in league position and then, even if it doesn’t work out, the vast majority still thrive in the long run - see Luton, Bournemouth and Rotherham!
Life doesn’t work like that though, does it? I have no idea of the status of his friendship with Bonser. Maybe it has been strained beyond repair by dealings over the club? Or maybe they are best mates.
I think the other point is probably more relevant. Pomlett appears to be even more risk averse than Bonser ever was. I understand, he’s not a rich man and, as far as I am aware, his career in business was always as an employee, never a businessman putting his house and his lifestyle on the line to further his own business.
I absolutely agree. We need radical thinking and action. The current board aren’t built like that. Not their fault by the way - we are all products of our experiences. In some ways it is laudable that I doubt we’d even consider any kind of rent strike. It would go against the grain of our “well run and financially ethical club” brand we have curated for ourselves. On the other hand we are trying to compete in an industry that just doesn’t value those ethics and in some ways rewards the very opposite. Our attempt to swim against the tide harms us.
But a “light on the hill” strategy that had within it a ground move would mean we could collectively look forward instead of backwards. There isn’t much fondness for our current rented accommodation and it stands as a monument to one man and his “era” (which wasn’t all bad by the way - we’ve had some good times down there) which was born of a rather opaque set of transactions that will never sit right with many and has as a legacy which acts as a financial albatross.
There is also a benefit to the landlord. A six year runway gives them time to optimise their own yield.
Oh I agree 100%. You always have a choice. Doesn’t mean you exercise the right one, particularly where friendships are involved. Like I say though, I think the risk-adverse nature of Pomlett is more the issue.
You put it so much more eloquently than me @P.T !!
And I absolutely agree - it isn’t their fault. In my many years working with businesses, I’ve sseen the full spectrum. Some excellent employees who did a fantastic job, but they never put anything on the line for the job. And then some excellent business owners and entrepeneurs, all of whom, at one time or another, had been one event away from bankruptcy, losing their house, losing everything. Different characters, different mindsets, we all sit somewhere on the scale and there’s nothing “wrong” with any position. But you do have to match up your stance with what you’re then prepared to do. If you want to play in the world of modern football, you’d better be on the “risk” side, or risk (see what I did there!) sliding down the pyramid as others who do take risks pass you by.
A lot is encapsulated in the ," well-run club " claim. In a sense ,it wasn’t a lie. If the sole/main purpose of the club is a continuous, virtually risk-free stream into the pension fund of the owner, it was well-run. Pomlett has kept the structures that were put in place to realise this while wanting, or claiming to want anyway, another purpose.
He could make a start, at little cost, by renaming the Bonser Suite after someone more worthy.
Leigh Pomlett has the huge honour and responsibilty of doing what’s best for Walsall Football Club, first and foremost.
Therein lies the main obstacle in the club moving forward. One of the main objectives is to bring new investment/owners to WFC. Who has the drive and real expertise on the current board to achieve this in todays world. This is one of the main reasons I am disappointed that LP hasn’t made any changes at board level to help facilitate this. Too many of the existing board have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
If that’s true, and it could well be, it’s difficult to see how he can move the club on, and away from the Bonser legacy, without jeopardising that friendship. If he’s seen how truly toxic that legacy is ,it’s difficult to understand why he’d want to.
What happens if these structural issues with the ground mean us losing our safety license? Are we on the hook until the lease break with potentially nowhere to play?
So no point in speculation about specifics until then.
But, hypothetically, I wonder what the situation would be under a Tenant Repairing lease? My inclination would be to say that structural issues would be outwith the tenant’s responsibility usually.
Of course, hypothetically again, if it was landlord’s responsibility and they spent a couple of million putting it right, that might be used as justification for a rent increase?
