ChezGiven 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I know one player wasn't replaced with three, I was trying to combine two points (that the Carroll money has been spent and that wages need to be considered). Ba, I believe, is on about £25k, but with a substantial appearance bonus. So when that's taken into account, he has probably hit almost £60k a week so far this season. Net transfer spend isn't massively useful for measuring cash flow. We are quite unique in paying for transfers up front and receiving cash up front. Most clubs still pay and receive over a few years, spreading the cash flow. The mackems sold Darren Bent for £24m, but half of this is still outstanding, hence them being liked with a load of Villa players as they're the only club who will accept a credit note in exchange for a player... So it is for us then. In our unique set of circumstances, with a break-even model, fixed wages to revenue ratio, planned revenue growth from EL etc and an insistence on paying and receiving all fees up front, net transfer is a good estimate of disposable income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Nice to see everyone taking a much more grown up attitude to things btw, its not gone un-noticed and is a credit to all involved. Well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46064 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Don't mention it sweet thang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Wages certainly do need to be considered, but you also need to take into account our current position in terms of wages. Obviously we shouldn't be spending simply to match other teams, but if we are to progress it is natural that our wages must take a similar path. To facilitate this the revenue will need to increase at least in line with the wage increases. Over the past season given the success on the pitch my complete lay-person guestimation is that our revenue will have increased markedly over last season. Ticket sales have been up, and our prize money for our league position will be 4 or 5 million more than last season at the least. Our shirt sponsorship deal has been vastly improved and hopefully has some tasty incentives built in for finishing higher on the table. So whilst these alternate revenuee streams continue to increase we can afford to increase wages to both keep players and to attract players of a higher standard. I don't feel that the funds from transfers in and out should be used for wages as they are not a reliable or steady stream. We cannot rely on having players that appeal to other teams, but we can put in place frameworks that make it more likely by bringing in younger players who have not reached the peak of their ability or value. The flipside of this is that if you successful nurture a talent to make them more appealing to other teams you neeed to start the process again yourself. On this front I think it should be a self-funded inititative in that any funds garnered through the sale of players is used to reinvest in new players. Wages should alwasy be constrained by revenue but money from transfers should be excluded. I'd welcome further discussion on this because (quite clearly ) I'm not particularly knowledgeable on this front. I'd welcome people to show me why the above is not feasible. you're more knowledgeable than most I would say, who are just simply deluded if they think the club is going to change its mentality of selling anybody if the right offer comes in for a profit which will not be given back to the manager, yet appear to think the club can "progress" by doing this. Hilarious, but sad too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Just to say that, having been the beneficiary of a full and frank apology, it would be churlish of me to print any pm's, so I won't. I respectfully ask Gemmill to join me in this. another pathetic liar What people looking in will think of this, I can't imagine, dragging the forum down with such dross Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake Bells tits 1 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 The level of maturity displayed by Gemill and Manc Mag by respectfully choosing not to post the numerous grovelling messages from leazesmag are truly admireable. Full credit to you two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catmag 337 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Let me take this opportunity to commend Gemmill, in the face of serious provocation. We all move forward together in a spirit of maturity. You so miss being in court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Thanks LBT and Chez too. Suffice to say it was a little unexpected, but his full apology, (which came with a complete retraction of his numerous flawed predictions for this season) was a gesture that's really gone a long way for me. It's allowed me to draw a line under the whole debacle and join with Leazes in looking forward to the European adventures to come under his man. That's now an end to matters as far as I'm concerned and I'd be happy if we said no more about it. Indeed I'd ask people to respect my wishes on that point. For completeness though I suppose I should just add publically that I accept the apology in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7084 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Amazing turnaround. Well done LeazesMag! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc-mag 1 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 You so miss being in court Knowing me as well as you do Catherine, you'll know this brings me absolutely no pleasure whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9973 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) So it is for us then. In our unique set of circumstances, with a break-even model, fixed wages to revenue ratio, planned revenue growth from EL etc and an insistence on paying and receiving all fees up front, net transfer is a good estimate of disposable income. It could be for us Chez, but I'm not so sure we insist on all money up front on sales (we did with Carroll, - I think it was only £30M of the £35M though - but not certain that's the rule) we do pay up front though. My issue with "net spend" is that for most clubs it's not so clear cut and as it tends to be used as a carte blanche measure of "ambition", in those circumastances it's severely flawed, given nearly all clubs pay an amount up front then the balance of the fee over a period of years. Someone "pays" £30 Mill for someone, they're probably only paying £10m up front then £5m each year for 4 years. If they sell a player for say £10Mill they probably get £6Mill up front then say £2Mill over the next couple of years. Their net spend (in the papers) is £20Mill when in fact it's really only £4Mill in real money terms, canny difference. Which gets even more complicated if the £30Mill player is sold whilst there's still a balance owing (Sunlun still owed Spurs a wedge when they sold Bent, but all that gets "reported" is the price players are bought/sold for in a particular year). There's no carry over, yet that £20Mill net spend is "cast in stone". Only if all fees paid/received were paid 100% up front would Net spend be a "real" measure. Despite the HUGE numbers in any net spend table, virtually all the "succesfull" clubs report profits on player trading. Edited April 27, 2012 by Toonpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 31216 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) I would like to add my congratulations to all concerned for the accord reached here today. This is exactly what it felt like for me when they signed the Good Friday Agreement. Edited April 27, 2012 by ewerk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake Bells tits 1 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Eating your socks in regards to what you have been saying for years is difficult for anyone, I fully understand why this was done in private to the posters Leazesmag feel will understand him the most. Gemill and Manc-Mag have sort of operated as Leazesmags mentors here for a while now, and as such it was only natural... Hat doffed to everyone involved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catmag 337 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Knowing me as well as you do Catherine, you'll know this brings me absolutely no pleasure whatsoever. I think you're being very gracious about the whole situation. Very sensitively handled iyam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Thanks LBT and Chez too. Suffice to say it was a little unexpected, but his full apology, (which came with a complete retraction of his numerous flawed predictions for this season) was a gesture that's really gone a long way for me. It's allowed me to draw a line under the whole debacle and join with Leazes in looking forward to the European adventures to come under his man. That's now an end to matters as far as I'm concerned and I'd be happy if we said no more about it. Indeed I'd ask people to respect my wishes on that point. For completeness though I suppose I should just add publically that I accept the apology in full. oh well, at least your private apology to me for spouting dross for years and admitting you have been totally wrong, and admitting that you really can't resist responding to me even though you have publicly said you are ignoring me, won't be put out on the open forum. I wouldn't like to expose a man with your pedigree for being a hypocrite and lacking in balls Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmill 46064 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Licking balls?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Licking balls?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lake Bells tits 1 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 about as credible as an italian pocket thief there Leazes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 (edited) about as credible as an italian pocket thief there Leazes Credibility from who ? The lack of a mature response from Gemmill and mancmag [2 people who never go to games too] to my post from weeks ago summarising exactly what they think is "rubbish" despite numerous requests leaves me completely vindicated. Edited April 27, 2012 by LeazesMag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7492 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Sorry to bring this back to the original off topic discussion but with our current operational model we are suited to utilise all revenue from player sales on player purchases. At the end of the day this is a football club, it would be nice to think that the board's objective is to get the best possible results on the pitch through self-sustaining measures. In our current situation one fact that can't be forgotten is that Mike Ashley has every right to pay himself back with any profits. This, along with the documented deception from the board will hang over the sale of any players for the foreseeable future. The precise location of every penny of Carroll's fee could no doubt be explained away many times but the reality is that the initial statements by the club about that sale were misleading in the least and that, rather than the sale itself, is what brought the most ire. Retrospectively the sale has been absolutely brilliant for us, not only has it played a part in our signing of Ba and Cisse but it has also provided countless instances of comedy through both Liverpool and Chelsea - two teams that find themselves lower than us on the table (let's forget for the moment that one is in the Champion's League final and the other is in the FA Cup final). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9973 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 Sorry to bring this back to the original off topic discussion but with our current operational model we are suited to utilise all revenue from player sales on player purchases. At the end of the day this is a football club, it would be nice to think that the board's objective is to get the best possible results on the pitch through self-sustaining measures. In our current situation one fact that can't be forgotten is that Mike Ashley has every right to pay himself back with any profits. This, along with the documented deception from the board will hang over the sale of any players for the foreseeable future. The precise location of every penny of Carroll's fee could no doubt be explained away many times but the reality is that the initial statements by the club about that sale were misleading in the least and that, rather than the sale itself, is what brought the most ire. Retrospectively the sale has been absolutely brilliant for us, not only has it played a part in our signing of Ba and Cisse but it has also provided countless instances of comedy through both Liverpool and Chelsea - two teams that find themselves lower than us on the table (let's forget for the moment that one is in the Champion's League final and the other is in the FA Cup final). That is very true, but as yet he hasn't and I would add he would have the right to charge interest on his loans, he doesn't do that either. I was wrong last summer, I thought the club would spend or he'd recoup, he didn't do either, the money stayed in the club and has been progressively spent. He may change his approach, but rather than recover his losses as a lump, I would have thought he'd charge interest on the loans, also no sign of that happening. Regarding your statement: "it would be nice to think that the board's objective is to get the best possible results on the pitch through self-sustaining measures. " My post above would suggest that is indeed the case (I do believe that is exactly the strategy). I also take issue with your "documented deception of the board", WTF is that about in relation to the financial strategy ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OTF 7492 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 I also take issue with your "documented deception of the board", WTF is that about in relation to the financial strategy ??? The findings from Keegangate. In terms of the impact on the financial strategy my point was that it affects the perception of their intentions. If they were up front I would find it much more acceptable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meenzer 15731 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 A heartwarming example of a racially integrated society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9973 Posted April 27, 2012 Share Posted April 27, 2012 The findings from Keegangate. In terms of the impact on the financial strategy my point was that it affects the perception of their intentions. If they were up front I would find it much more acceptable. Keegangate best not discuss, overblown IMO. Second sentence, (this is not a pop at you) they were up front and have been since Keegangate. If you read that old statement from Lambias without the "whole things negative" LM glasses on: Paraphrased (and LM I know you are dim so by paraphrased I don't mean "Geronimo") Aim is 10th or above year on year Club will spend what it can afford Ashley hasn't taken a penny out etc etc Their intentions as stated have been backed up by real evidence IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now