g13webb Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Well this is a Peterborough thread and as we seem to be an asset charity for other clubs then it's not surprising that there is some bias. I was trying to find out the rules and process to find out how we end up letting our assets go elsewhere but end up with a worse team ourselves? Trouble is that the thread keeps getting hijacked by Lynn and Swindon fans, can't think why? Yeah ..Ok point made. I thought the asset discusion was originally started on Panthers thread by Panther supporters. Wasn't aware other supporters weren't allowed to post an opinions. Thats sad !!! But dont worry, will not bother you again . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagpuss Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Balls to that GRW, you post what you like, whatever the Panthers Police may say They say hijacking, I say discussion, and a pretty interesting and relevant one at that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Balls to that GRW, you post what you like, whatever the Panthers Police may say They say hijacking, I say discussion, and a pretty interesting and relevant one at that. The Panthers Police: never been called that before, do I get a company car? Yeah ..Ok point made. I thought the asset discusion was originally started on Panthers thread by Panther supporters. Wasn't aware other supporters weren't allowed to post an opinions. Thats sad !!! But dont worry, will not bother you again . That's the stevebrum view but unfortunately he doesn't promise not to bother us again. If that's how you feel then so be it, it's your choice! Edited December 6, 2012 by Crump99 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 This asset problem will go on for years until its properly or legally contested and I seriously doubt the BSPA would allow that to happen. Its caused problems for years and only gets worse because of the vast difference between clubs that have lots of assets and those that have bugger all, now that Poole,s basic supply has been cut off its will be interesting to see if home grown talent is brought on but I am not holding my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomo1 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 " Swindon have just bought Morris from Glasgow and I personally think it is a waste of money (although he is a decent rider). What did Glasgow actually do to deserve a 5 figure fee? " They employ a decent accountant!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mudflaps Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Gomolski signs....for Swindon! Crikey! Didn't see that one coming! but I am not holding my breath. I wish you would - for about 10 minutes! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bomo1 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Crikey! Didn't see that one coming! Neither did your little helper!!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Neither did your little helper!!!! Too busy after school with the Christmas job at Tesco's. Does anyone know when Peterborough is going to decide who they will use at No 1 so that other riders and clubs can get contracts for 2013 arranged ? Edited December 6, 2012 by A ORLOV 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Crikey! Didn't see that one coming No surprises there then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Its good that there is some decent debate and conversation on the Peterborough thread...is it a coincidence that one particular poster is absent and most likely serving his/her latest ban? Did you enjoy it while it lasted? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Blachshadow Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) BUT does he have a valid contract? That is the hub of the issue. Rider contracts with British clubs usually expire on October 31 for obvious reasons.... tracks don't want to pay riders during the close season. So, if Niels hasn't got a current contract how can he buy himself out of it? But Horton paid for Puk. What exactly did he pay for if he could just have had a word with him and used him regardless of who's 'asset' he was? Loan fees are paid so there must be something within the sport that states this must happen since I can't see promoters handing money to another promoter for no reason. We see riders 'signing' as assets on centre greens now and again - what are they signing? I also recall reading somewhere that when Horton Mk I took over Peterborough with only Zdenek Tesar and Shane Parker as assets he was told to build up a 'suitable asset base'. That seems to have been overlooked for some teams now. Yes, the whole thing seems to need a revamp but that can't happen whilst there are riders out there that did actually change parent clubs for money. These clubs have to be recompensed if the system is to be scrapped, surely. This is obviously proving a valid discussion, but unfortunately, most opinions are being dictated by the clubs you support instead of arguments for the rights and wrong of the asset system. I think, if we could get rid of this biasness and look at the system in its open mind, I believe a truer assessment will be seen. I do not support a particular club. I rate Peterborough as my favourite racing track and developed a soft spot for them when somebody tried to close them down. My posts have not been that Mr Frost is right and KL are wrong but that Puk was purchased for cash and surely that must give the purchasers some rights. I also don't disagree with your view that the present system should go but can't agree with promoters losing money should they have to relinquish whatever hold they paid to have over those riders. Purchased riders knew they were being purchased and signed paperwork to that effect. Why should they now be able to rip up that agreement? Edited December 6, 2012 by Vincent Blackshadow 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A ORLOV Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) Taking the situation with PUK, it seems that KL want to only pay a loan fee at the moment. Peterborough want to see his "ownership" purchased if KL want to use him again. If KL decide not to purchase, go for another rider and no other club wishes to pay the fees asked, PUK then becomes an "asset" with no value. The rider himself may decide not ride in the UK any more if he cannot ride for KL, again there is an "asset" with no value. Swindon are hopefully looking to use Hans and Troy again in 2013, will they ride on a loan agreement or be asked to purchase. Other riders have been purchased from other clubs and are classed as "assets" but do not now ride in the UK, another "asset" with no value. You are correct Vincent the whole thing does need a revamp. Edited December 6, 2012 by A ORLOV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crump99 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 (edited) No value at that time perhaps but you get first refusal should they return (Lindback a prime example surely) and you're not feathering the nest of your major competitors whilst being at a disadvantage yourself. I do recall that Bratters told Colin Horton to build our asset base (probably told Rick the same) so it's somewhat ironic that almost half Swindon's team are Panthers assets as I'm told that Bratters now resides there - lives in orion's back garden allegedly? Edited December 6, 2012 by Crump99 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noggin Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 I don't know what you're saying tbh you twist and turn like a twisty turny thing and it's very confusing.Rumour was that we wanted Lindback but that nice Mr Ford let us have THJ instead, not that we saw that much of him. Allegedly we had the same agreement with Poole as they had with us with regarding Andersen in 2009 and Rick wised up before he wasted his money signing THJ so that Swindon could use him in 2013. THJ no thanks, once bitten twice shy, you're welcome to him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC2 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 orion's back garden Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pufcfanno1 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 Most riders who race in Britain start out in the Premier League, so surely it would make sense for the riders to remain as assets of the Premier League teams, that way, if they make it at Elite League level and get their averages up to a point where they are too good to ride in the Premier League then they truly do have the choice of where to ride. This would also help Premier LEague teams to build up their asset bases and eventually we could move to a point where promotion and relegation is a real possibility. So, the question is, why do these riders agree to sign as assets for Elite League teams? There must be some kind of financial benefit, maybe a signing on fee or a retainer or something along those lines, otherwise what would they gain out of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PHILIPRISING Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 DON'T think they agree to become assets. It just evolves once they have appeared in a certain number of meetings for the first track they ride for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigcatdiary Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 DON'T think they agree to become assets. It just evolves once they have appeared in a certain number of meetings for the first track they ride for. It used to be 12 meetings, not sure if its still that though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pufcfanno1 Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 What I mean is, they generally start with a PL club, and then if they do well enough the EL clubs start to sniff around, but what incentive do these riders get to then become assets of the EL clubs rather than remain as the PL club's asset and keep their EL options open? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racers and royals Posted December 6, 2012 Report Share Posted December 6, 2012 What I mean is, they generally start with a PL club, and then if they do well enough the EL clubs start to sniff around, but what incentive do these riders get to then become assets of the EL clubs rather than remain as the PL club's asset and keep their EL options open? Cut of the transfer fee(more years higher the %)for one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.