Rayvin 5176 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 Fair answer mate. Not for a second jumping to defend them, losing Rafa will be entirely of their own making and such a shame for the club. I'm just trying to look at where we are and am wondering if, realistically, they actually have any more than £50m to stump up. That might well be the full extent of it, even if it includes wages and agent fees. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howay 12496 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 Just now, Rayvin said: Fair answer mate. Not for a second jumping to defend them, losing Rafa will be entirely of their own making and such a shame for the club. I'm just trying to look at where we are and am wondering if, realistically, they actually have any more than £50m to stump up. That might well be the full extent of it, even if it includes wages and agent fees. Aye I don’t think anyone here would defend them (well maybe that toonraider2 bloke). It may well be all they have to hand, I just do have my doubts with all the years we’ve had in the PL while penny pinching the entire time (is it like £2m total net spend or something since he took over?) that it’s all the club can afford. I get your point that you just want to be realistic and clear, they’ve muddied the water for this exact reason imo as it’s nigh on impossible to figure it out really (unless you take the accounts as complete truth of course). I also find it extremely weird that they go on about wanting to be financially savvy yet they sell players with payments stretched over years while only opting to pay 100% up front for purchases. Literally the first thing a financial class teaches is time value of money they’re doing basically the opposite of what you should be aiming to do! Of course it’s yet another excuse in their locker as to why we don’t have more at hand to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34846 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 6 hours ago, Sonatine said: Barry Moat was about as much of a realistic buyer as Amanda Stavely and Kenyon were. And Raoul Moat was 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 6 hours ago, Howay said: Aye I don’t think anyone here would defend them (well maybe that toonraider2 bloke). It may well be all they have to hand, I just do have my doubts with all the years we’ve had in the PL while penny pinching the entire time (is it like £2m total net spend or something since he took over?) that it’s all the club can afford. I get your point that you just want to be realistic and clear, they’ve muddied the water for this exact reason imo as it’s nigh on impossible to figure it out really (unless you take the accounts as complete truth of course). I also find it extremely weird that they go on about wanting to be financially savvy yet they sell players with payments stretched over years while only opting to pay 100% up front for purchases. Literally the first thing a financial class teaches is time value of money they’re doing basically the opposite of what you should be aiming to do! Of course it’s yet another excuse in their locker as to why we don’t have more at hand to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 With reference to your second paragraph, so Charnley says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
essembeeofsunderland 811 Posted April 21, 2019 Share Posted April 21, 2019 6 hours ago, Howay said: Aye I don’t think anyone here would defend them (well maybe that toonraider2 bloke). It may well be all they have to hand, I just do have my doubts with all the years we’ve had in the PL while penny pinching the entire time (is it like £2m total net spend or something since he took over?) that it’s all the club can afford. I get your point that you just want to be realistic and clear, they’ve muddied the water for this exact reason imo as it’s nigh on impossible to figure it out really (unless you take the accounts as complete truth of course). I also find it extremely weird that they go on about wanting to be financially savvy yet they sell players with payments stretched over years while only opting to pay 100% up front for purchases. Literally the first thing a financial class teaches is time value of money they’re doing basically the opposite of what you should be aiming to do! Of course it’s yet another excuse in their locker as to why we don’t have more at hand to spend. With reference to your second paragraph, so Charnley says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trooper 940 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) . Edited April 22, 2019 by trooper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t00nraider2 41 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 (edited) The club don't always pay up front for players, they do occasionally pay via installments (currently £28mil outstanding to pay for players bought). It depends on the deal options which are in the best interests of the club financially. If you had the option of selling a player for £30mil over 3 years or receiving £20mil up front, which option would you choose? or buying a player for £10mil upfront or £20mil over 2 years? I'd get your money back from the finance classes. Edited April 22, 2019 by t00nraider2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34846 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 If you say so, Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 42065 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 7 minutes ago, t00nraider2 said: The club don't always pay up front for players, they do occasionally pay via installments (currently £28mil outstanding to pay for players bought). It depends on the deal options which are in the best interests of the club financially. If you had the option of selling a player for £30mil over 3 years or receiving £20mil up front, which option would you choose? or buying a player for £10mil upfront or £20mil over 2 years? I'd get your money back from the finance classes. What’s the nightlife like in Peterborough tonight, then? Many Schoolies out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howay 12496 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 That’s completely different to what I said. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34846 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 To be fair, he’s on his 8th pint of blue pop 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeys Fist 42065 Posted April 22, 2019 Share Posted April 22, 2019 Lock up his daughters… 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonatine 11307 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Whole thread is worth a read 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex 34846 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 As ever, the appalling commercial revenue figures show the ‘running a club like a business’ bollocks is precisely that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
t00nraider2 41 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 On 21/04/2019 at 15:04, trooper said: If SD had paid for their advertising over Ashleys tenure the loan or best part of it should have been cleared by now. How much do you think would have been a fair payment amount from the start to date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3809 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 38 minutes ago, t00nraider2 said: How much do you think would have been a fair payment amount from the start to date? With the amount of advertising they have in the stadium £10 million a year is not unreasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rayvin 5176 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 1 hour ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said: With the amount of advertising they have in the stadium £10 million a year is not unreasonable. Very true. The debt should effectively be cancelled on that basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30266 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 £10m is a bit optimistic. West Ham were selling the stadium naming rights for less than £3.5m a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3809 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 34 minutes ago, ewerk said: £10m is a bit optimistic. West Ham were selling the stadium naming rights for less than £3.5m a year. https://sway.ie/pitchsideledadvertising/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9733 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 (edited) 54 minutes ago, ewerk said: £10m is a bit optimistic. West Ham were selling the stadium naming rights for less than £3.5m a year. I agree. But if you consider the length of Ashley‘s tenure, the fact he changed the stadium name for a considerable time and the amount of advertising not only in the stadium but also on sold clothes and the commercial rights going along with running the club shop I do think that the the lost income could have paid for a good part of the debt or been invested in the playing staff and the facilities. So far the free advertising only paid of for sports direct and it is criminal to me that the exploitation of the club hasn’t been given the fair amount of criticism so far whenever the benevolent nature of Ashley‘s handling of the club has been raised by his stooges in the media. Edited April 23, 2019 by Isegrim 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9733 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30266 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 51 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said: https://sway.ie/pitchsideledadvertising/ I don't get the point of that link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3809 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 (edited) 30 minutes ago, ewerk said: I don't get the point of that link. Sorry wrong link https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/worldsoccertalk.com/2008/01/04/the-cost-to-advertise-during-a-premier-league-match/amp/ I looked at the cost per minute of a single advert for Middlesbrough and west ham and just extrapolated from there. Edited April 23, 2019 by Kevin Carr's Gloves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30266 Posted April 23, 2019 Share Posted April 23, 2019 I think you might want to check your figures They seem to be based on us playing every game at home. Also, the figure of £3000 was for a peak time Sky TV fixture, obviously we don’t get too many of them at home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.403f4a475ac3bb53997c2626c09ef800.png)
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