Teasy

The loss mentioned for the Championship season will have been cushioned by the sale of players and wages will have increased several million this season. But like people are saying its all too much of a guesstimate to base any solid conclusions on, lets wait until we see the accounts for this current season.

We paid around £1m for Best and even if we had paid more that wouldn't necessarily make him worth the price. Why is Gyan worth £12m in your opinion??

Where the fuck do you get £3m for Best like? As far as I remember we paid about £4m (or was it slightly less?) for Best, Routledge, Simpson and Williamson according to the club accounts. Best probably cost £1m.

They haven't spent much at all recently though have they? Seems to me the owner has decided enough is enough after the crazy spending when he first came in. Given their revenue they're probably already in the shit. EDIT: Looking at this summer they've sold players for about £14m-15m and spent about £3m, so if Gyan is £12m they'll have broken even.

How many times will that be for Keane moving between Liverpool and the Spuds? 15 times is it?

Just seen that on SSN, perhaps that'll mean Keane here?

Doesn't really matter to them, they've enough money to pay over the odds for average players. Don't think so, they had to sell Jones to bring in Gyan, not sure they've ended up with a better player their either.

Not really sure what Gudjohnsen is like now, he doesn't seem to have been much of a success anywhere for a while and he's 32. Didn't do much at the Spuds last season either.

It makes no sense what so ever, totally spastic logic Not to mention Man City have probably been paying a portion of his wage while he's been on loan so they can't even claim a profit on the club accounts.

What the fuck is this idiot on Sky Sports News going on about re Robinho? He keeps saying that if he goes to AC Milan for £23m Man City will have made a profit on Robinho because they've saved money on his wages when he was out on loan

Difference is they can't score a goal without Bent.

You should wait until you see the accounts where we break even before you say that. I mean I don't think you'll be far off if we look at revenue vs running costs for the season but that doesn't necessarily mean we'll break even. Also the losses in the last few years could have created any debt we now have (that's certainly the case with the clubs overdraft for instance). Plus there's the fact that we owed large sums of money for players when Ashley arrived. Apparently we've moved to paying all transfer fees up front but who knows when past transfers will finally be paid off. By the way, I can't remember so this is a genuine question here, have the club actually said anything about a plan to break even five years from now? Or was this the plan they put in place when Ashley arrived?

They're trying to crack his head open to get to the lucky charms.

We weren't flying high when he took over tbf. Plus looking at the accounts then w'd have had to either have a massive firesale at somepoint in the next couple of seasons or be in administration. Very likely. Although there are still some who think everything would have been alright if the previous regime had stayed in charge I cannot see how. When you consider that in the summer of 2007 the credit crunch was about a year away, the club had just racked up a loss of £30 million and all our debt was owed to external lenders a takeover was a godsend. Ashley bought a club that was technically insolvent with a team that had limped to 14th place in the league. That he subsequently grossly mismanaged his asset can't really be disputed - but then so had the previous regime. Most football club owners/boards of directors are unpopular. Their mistakes are never forgotten and they don't do what the fans want most of the time. Ashley probably won't ever be truly liked or trusted by the majority. Shepherd was regarded with contempt by most fans even during the good years of SBR, its the way of the world. He paid £135m for a club you tell us was technically insolvent. An idiotic move for which we’ve been paying the price ever since. Sort of - but some of what the club has been paying for has been a direct result of poor decisions by Ashley and/or his posse since the takeover. The initial sale was a very bad deal for Ashley and a fantastic deal for the previous owners - other possible buyers had been in and had a good look at it (one of them even completed due diligence) but no one bit presumably because they did not like what they saw. There was no one else around who seemed to want to buy it until Ashley did so without having much of an idea of what he was buying. But the question remains as to how the club could have financed itself out of the mess it was in without a new owner who could pay for past errors (as well as those of his own making). And it’s a question that can never be answered. However, if Ashley had done his homework and paid a sensible sum for the club (say £35m) he could have used the other £100m to clear the debts at the time of purchase. Thereby achieving in a stroke what we are now apparently hoping to achieve in about four years time. The scale and impact of Ashley rash purchase can’t be underestimated. It was the mother of all fuck ups. Paying off all the debts immediately wouldn't have allowed us to break even, not sure why you think it would have. Our debt interest payments were only a fraction of the amount we lost in that first season.

Can you take of this ugly thing from your signature?? Can you take off that ugly thing from you avatar??

Owen and Viduka would have gone even if we'd stayed up, Bassong and Beye might not have though.

This has been discussed a hundred times, some good came from it, but overall no it wasn't a good thing, certainly not financially.

Maybe you should wait until we actually have someone better before you wish him away, at the moment he's an important player for us, despite his faults so there's absolutely no need to replace him at the moment. IMO having Ben Arfa in the side will bring the best out of Gutierrez, teams can no longer double up on him.

What a total wanker

He could be on his way to any club to be honest, or he could be injured. If it's truen then how come we can pay a fee of 6m Euro's for him but we won't pay the same fee to sign Ben Arfa outright this season? If you have, say £10m, and need 3 players with one being available on loan your not going to them pay 6m for the player that's available for loan are you.. Not that we really have this money, we'll see I suppose.

I hate to do this but.. Oh and Ben Arfa can play on the wings.

Great, thanks for joining the discussion..

I agree this season, but unfortunately they'll keep pumping money in until they do.

The money was borrowed by the club not SJH, the debt was left on the club not SJH. Again the club borrowed money and took a risk, the fact that we're now skint is due to those risks. If you still think the only difference between us mid ninties and Man City is the amount of money spent then obviously I'm not going to get through to you.

We had at least six players missing, with 3 or 4 of them being player that could have started the game if fit. Of course we shouldn't use it as a pointer for the future though, it was just one of those games.