Jump to content

Transfers, 2024-25 season


trophyshy
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, wykikitoon said:

If we splash no cash this window, pull it out to get Bowen on a free in summer. 

 

You slag

 

Given that he's got a contract until 2030 we'd be doing very well to get him on a free.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think its just a stand off with Phillips at the moment. They want rid of him and want a big loan fee. Hopefully our plummet down the league might persuade them to do us favour and swerve the loan fee. Plus, if he plays well then it might put in the shop window.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Dazzler said:

As well he should. Hayden makes him look like a moderately gifted amateur at best when it comes to the art of sliding tackles.

Donald Trump GIF by reactionseditor

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/01/2024 at 02:10, Nefilim said:

Man City started this FFP selling home grown players becuase they were good at it.

Chelsea did it for a long time, and are fast approaching their next hit like a junky  'Gallagher for FFP'

 

Talk of selling Bruno for extra FFP - it's so sad. We're not allowed nice things etc.

 

Staveley/Howe have built a spine before Ashworth came in - (Pope > Botman > Bruno > Isak)

 

No, no, no we didn't start FFP. Granted it was introduced to stop new money clubs, like us, from threatening the establishment. 

Whilst we've always had an academy, we rebuilt our academy AFTER the introduction of FFP. 

As an aside City voted against the introduction of FFP, Newcastle voted in favour of it (probably Ashley trying to avoid spending). 

Fulham, West Brom, Manchester City, Aston Villa, Swansea and Southampton all voted against FFP whilst Reading abstained, Had Reading or one other club (such as you guys) voted against it, it wouldn't have had enough votes.

But that's history now.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ewerk said:

Aye but we'd still have UEFA's FFP rules so it would still be there for anyone at the top end of the table.

 

that's a really interesting point.

 

although it might be awkward if you spent a £10billion in one window to win the premier league causing you to fail UEFA's FFP.

 

or worse, all four clubs at the top of the premier league being banned form europe for failing ffp 🙃

 

originally the rules were meant to be to protect clubs against themselves. overspending and going into administration etc. keep that aspect as it still allows for free owner investment.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, LondonBlue said:

 

No, no, no we didn't start FFP. Granted it was introduced to stop new money clubs, like us, from threatening the establishment. 

Whilst we've always had an academy, we rebuilt our academy AFTER the introduction of FFP. 

As an aside City voted against the introduction of FFP, Newcastle voted in favour of it (probably Ashley trying to avoid spending). 

Fulham, West Brom, Manchester City, Aston Villa, Swansea and Southampton all voted against FFP whilst Reading abstained, Had Reading or one other club (such as you guys) voted against it, it wouldn't have had enough votes.

But that's history now.

 

 

 

 

I wonder which clubs would vote to change it to a more meritocratic version? I can't see Liverpool, Man Utd, Arsenal or Spurs being in favour of opening up the valve any more than it is. 

 

I honestly think the PSR rules should take into account 2 things; 1 prevent megarich clubs from simply spending what they like, and (more importantly) ensuring bad owners aren't mortgaging the club's future on a whim. 

 

Debt should be taken into account, as should revenue obviously, but the capital available from the owner should be considered too. Us, yourselves and others could comfortably afford to make losses greater than £100m over a 3yr period without risking the future of the club, by virtue of having owners who can cover that loss by checking the back of the sofa. The rule as it stands is basically, you can get better, but only by a little bit every season. Of course that means the established elite can keep accelerating at faster pace. 

 

No club, regardless of their revenue stream should have £1bn owed in debt.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, The Fish said:

 

I wonder which clubs would vote to change it to a more meritocratic version? I can't see Liverpool, Man Utd, Arsenal or Spurs being in favour of opening up the valve any more than it is. 

 

I honestly think the PSR rules should take into account 2 things; 1 prevent megarich clubs from simply spending what they like, and (more importantly) ensuring bad owners aren't mortgaging the club's future on a whim. 

 

Debt should be taken into account, as should revenue obviously, but the capital available from the owner should be considered too. Us, yourselves and others could comfortably afford to make losses greater than £100m over a 3yr period without risking the future of the club, by virtue of having owners who can cover that loss by checking the back of the sofa. The rule as it stands is basically, you can get better, but only by a little bit every season. Of course that means the established elite can keep accelerating at faster pace. 

 

No club, regardless of their revenue stream should have £1bn owed in debt.

 

i agree with your first point, but i have a different view on debt.

 

debt should indeed be taken into account. restricting the losses over a 3 year period would be okay if they allowed owner investment (gifts not loans).

 

the larger your debt the less you should be able to spend. i'm thinking of man uniteds massive debts.  maybe allowable debt should be linked with revenue, not sure.

 

this whole thing about new owners being allowed to spend what they like is bollocks. maybe our owners should sell our clubs to each other for £1, then sell them back again so we can invest.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, LondonBlue said:

 

i agree with your first point, but i have a different view on debt.

 

debt should indeed be taken into account. restricting the losses over a 3 year period would be okay if they allowed owner investment (gifts not loans).

 

the larger your debt the less you should be able to spend. i'm thinking of man uniteds massive debts.  maybe allowable debt should be linked with revenue, not sure.

 

this whole thing about new owners being allowed to spend what they like is bollocks. maybe our owners should sell our clubs to each other for £1, then sell them back again so we can invest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah, I'm not financial expert but surely "gifts" should be allowed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£7mil loan fee + wages for 17 PL games is mental tbf. We paid less for Cabaye 
 

I don't think the obligation to buy is unreasonable though. We've got ambitions to challenge Man City for the title. They aren't going to do us any favours 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kid Dynamite said:

£7mil loan fee + wages for 17 PL games is mental tbf. We paid less for Cabaye 
 

I don't think the obligation to buy is unreasonable though. We've got ambitions to challenge Man City for the title. They aren't going to do us any favours 

 

I genuinely don't think they are concerned by us as title challengers. They just want to recoup some money and get him off the wage bill.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kid Dynamite said:

£7mil loan fee + wages for 17 PL games is mental tbf. We paid less for Cabaye 
 

I don't think the obligation to buy is unreasonable though. We've got ambitions to challenge Man City for the title. They aren't going to do us any favours 

 

 

if there's an obligation to buy then its the loan fee + the purchase fee that matters. i think a higher loan fee normally suggests no obligation but i'm no expert.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Meenzer changed the title to Transfers, 2024-25 season

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.