Schooling our very own maffff along the way too.biff wrote:https://twitter.com/uglygame/status/1141232038474858496
Succinct thread from the brilliant Martin Calladine. We're not looking too healthy.
Schooling our very own maffff along the way too.biff wrote:https://twitter.com/uglygame/status/1141232038474858496
Succinct thread from the brilliant Martin Calladine. We're not looking too healthy.
We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the seasonElm Park Kid wrote:Would anyone like to make a guess of where we are with FFP after the 'splurging' of the last couple of weeks?
I think 'wreckless' should become the new 'confimred' / 'escapegoat'! Classic. As in: 'I'm a total wreck, after being too wreckless recently'.Nameless wrote:We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the seasonElm Park Kid wrote:Would anyone like to make a guess of where we are with FFP after the 'splurging' of the last couple of weeks?
I’d blame spellchecker had I not ac tually stopped and thought about the W beforetyping !Royalwaster wrote:I think 'wreckless' should become the new 'confimred' / 'escapegoat'! Classic. As in: 'I'm a total wreck, after being too wreckless recently'.Nameless wrote:We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the seasonElm Park Kid wrote:Would anyone like to make a guess of where we are with FFP after the 'splurging' of the last couple of weeks?
Despite Maffff being a complete Gimp of late, I wouldn't say he was 'Schooled' on that thread. Calladine just disagreed with Maffff's opinion on the severity of the situation. Maffff rightly pointed out the reason our players had a late pay packet that we all found out pretty quickly too. Maybe Calladine should have looked into our situation more before generalising and lumping us in with other struggling clubs. Situations are rarely identical.Snowflake Royal wrote:Schooling our very own maffff along the way too.biff wrote:https://twitter.com/uglygame/status/1141232038474858496
Succinct thread from the brilliant Martin Calladine. We're not looking too healthy.
These days it seems as though salaries are a bigger burden than transfer fees. Even the average fans now understands that a 'free' transfer is far from free.Nameless wrote:We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the seasonElm Park Kid wrote:Would anyone like to make a guess of where we are with FFP after the 'splurging' of the last couple of weeks?
Puscas on reported salary of £18k per week, which is not obscene at this level. I'd guess most Gourlay contracts where at least in that ball park, with many higher. So when you consider the players offloaded, Bod money, sell on fees for Stacey and Hector, maybe there was just more to play around with for fees than we thought, so long as our overall wage expense is much lower.Nameless wrote:We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the seasonElm Park Kid wrote:Would anyone like to make a guess of where we are with FFP after the 'splurging' of the last couple of weeks?
To add aswell Mcshane and the other out of contract players wages, 750k for Bodvarson and wages, Kellys wages and a sell on fee to help us in the future. Meylers wages. I would not be suprised if they are rolling the dice a little bit on Mannone and Aluko becoming permenant at there respective loan clubs.WestYorksRoyal wrote:Puscas on reported salary of £18k per week, which is not obscene at this level. I'd guess most Gourlay contracts where at least in that ball park, with many higher. So when you consider the players offloaded, Bod money, sell on fees for Stacey and Hector, maybe there was just more to play around with for fees than we thought, so long as our overall wage expense is much lower.Nameless wrote:We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the seasonElm Park Kid wrote:Would anyone like to make a guess of where we are with FFP after the 'splurging' of the last couple of weeks?
...one of those factors rumored to be us being in Prem League? And we all know the windfall there.linkenholtroyal wrote:InWestYorksRoyal wrote:Puscas on reported salary of £18k per week, which is not obscene at this level. I'd guess most Gourlay contracts where at least in that ball park, with many higher. So when you consider the players offloaded, Bod money, sell on fees for Stacey and Hector, maybe there was just more to play around with for fees than we thought, so long as our overall wage expense is much lower.Nameless wrote:
We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the season
Lucas Joao 2 million up front reported rising to 7 million dependant on many factors knowing Howe 15-20k in wages probably
oh that's a headshot.This is the reality of fans' demands that clubs show ambition. A stream of inexperienced owners of unclear financial means, impatience with managers, rising debts and a slow drift down the Championship towards the relegation zone. And the only plan? Somehow get back into the PL.
I doubt the rules could prevent a club selling an asset. Where it could be an issue if it was for a grossly inflated price. It would need to be ‘realistic’.Elm Park Kid wrote:I saw on another thread that we've done the current trick of selling assets (training ground) to the owner to generate revenue. It's a one off injection - but it could potentially be worth multiple millions.
Surprised that the rules allow it, but so be it.
There's actually fairly little downside to the club from this.
You're not rong in what you said though.Nameless wrote:I’d blame spellchecker had I not ac tually stopped and thought about the W beforetyping !Royalwaster wrote:I think 'wreckless' should become the new 'confimred' / 'escapegoat'! Classic. As in: 'I'm a total wreck, after being too wreckless recently'.Nameless wrote:
We’ve paid one transfer fee so far and that seems to have involved little or no real outlay. If Puscas joins that pushes it a bit, but hard to imagine we’ve gone from a self imposed embargo to being wreckless. I think we’re going to be within the limits come the end of the season
disagree with the last bitElm Park Kid wrote:I saw on another thread that we've done the current trick of selling assets (training ground) to the owner to generate revenue. It's a one off injection - but it could potentially be worth multiple millions.
Surprised that the rules allow it, but so be it.
There's actually fairly little downside to the club from this.
Actually, I think it would be fairly easy to introduce rules that say you're not allowed to sell your ground or training ground without EFL approval - which is only given if you are moving to new locations.Nameless wrote:I doubt the rules could prevent a club selling an asset. Where it could be an issue if it was for a grossly inflated price. It would need to be ‘realistic’.Elm Park Kid wrote:I saw on another thread that we've done the current trick of selling assets (training ground) to the owner to generate revenue. It's a one off injection - but it could potentially be worth multiple millions.
Surprised that the rules allow it, but so be it.
There's actually fairly little downside to the club from this.
I agree the downside is limited, but it depends on having an owner with the long term interests of the club at heart. If your ground and training ground are owned by someone else and they decide they don’t want you using then the next you have a problem. Also depends on how the asset has been set up. Pompey got in a horrible situation because different people owned different bits of their ground. The ground owner couldn’t develop the land because someone else owned the car park and access. Our situation where the ground is owned by Dai and the carpark / REP is owned by the Thai’s is a slight worry but I think it is inevitable that Dai will buy that back at some point.
For downside of not owning stadium, see Coventry City.Elm Park Kid wrote:I saw on another thread that we've done the current trick of selling assets (training ground) to the owner to generate revenue. It's a one off injection - but it could potentially be worth multiple millions.
Surprised that the rules allow it, but so be it.
There's actually fairly little downside to the club from this.
What the owner can do will depend on the terms of the lease. We may have a 999 year lease on the ground or a covenant which means it can only be a football stadium. Coventry was a very different situation and mostly down to the Coventry owners being absolute crooks.Greatwesternline wrote:For downside of not owning stadium, see Coventry City.Elm Park Kid wrote:I saw on another thread that we've done the current trick of selling assets (training ground) to the owner to generate revenue. It's a one off injection - but it could potentially be worth multiple millions.
Surprised that the rules allow it, but so be it.
There's actually fairly little downside to the club from this.
If the owner of the stadium thinks he can make more money turning the Madejski stadium into a Rugby Club stadium, they can do that. And then we could have a nice little ground share with Reading Town FC, or slighlty more delicious....Oxford United.
Also, clearly, you can only sell your ground once. So if selling your ground in order to buy 2 strikers that may turn out to be duff doesnt work out, next time you want to splurge the cash, you have one less method of financing that splurge.
Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], Baidu [Spider], Google [Bot] and 6 guests