LRD Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 A decade... We actually had 10 years of shit under Mike Ashley already... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Who else have Brighton signed? don't recall reading them sign anyone else other than the 16m lad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Who else have Brighton signed? don't recall reading them sign anyone else other than the 16m lad. Couple of Germans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSC26 Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Promoted teams this summer; Spent Brighton £43m Huddersfield £39m NUFC £33m Net spent Brighton £43m Huddersfield £39m NUFC £15m Unbelievable! Ian Wright said on The Debate the other night that is "embarrassing" and he's not wrong, for once. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heake Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 All you pussies will be clambering over each other to laud the stewardship of Big Mike when he smashes the transfer record by landing a 50m goal machine on deadline day. #inmikewetrust Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 All you pussies will be clambering over each other to laud the stewardship of Big Mike when he smashes the transfer record by landing a 50m goal machine on deadline day. #inmikewetrust Ameobi. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Someone said it right though. Huddersfield have spent a good chunk of money on buying what they already had (loans deals turning into full transfers), and Brighton haven't set the works alight with their signings. Us on the other hand spent last summer buying a few Premier League players, and kept a decent squad when we went down. Brighton and Huddersfield have a lot of catching up to do to be Premier League ready. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete shit from a footballing sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanji Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Or they could have other cash means like loans or something to help get deals done early. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League and the retention of one of its key assets in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. You'd be better of spending 70m now on the right players than having 75m to spend in twelve months time. Alas, these simple economics are beyond Ashley's comprehension and have been for a decade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. I really doubt that makes a difference, it's just an excuse. We'll hear the same crap next summer imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Figures 1-0 Football Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. It is for Ashley, as I posted the other day - his investment in NUFC is safe as prices in football continue to rise astronomically. He can continue to invest nothing, spend nothing and gain from free advertisements for his tat shop whilst knowing he could sell us at any stage for the same (if not more) than he has put in. The difference of us finishing 5th - 17th means fuck all to Ashley and he'll continue to try and run us as a club that does the bare minimum to survive. It's no surprise that the only time he has ever put his hand in his pocket is to get us back into the TV gravy train of the PL. He'll also be confident that even if we do go down, we'll always come straight back up. Also indicates why in January, when he thought we were comfortably back up - he refused to sign anyone else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Course it makes a difference man. You think many newly promoted teams spend huge, have a 25 man squad, then continue to pay £10-15m a season on players not even registered? Have a word man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. I really doubt that makes a difference, it's just an excuse. We'll hear the same crap next summer imo. Exactly. Buy cheap players based on the hope their value increases to sell them for a profit and for every Cabaye there will be a handful of duds on long term deals. So what do we end up with? A squad containing a few good players put in the shop window and dozens of dead wood. Apart from a very short period under Pardew it hasn't worked, and it's really not hard to see why. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
louistoon Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. I don't really buy the wages excuse, our wages to turnover ratio when we went down was good in comparison to other PL teams, and since then we've lost Anita, Taylor, Colo, Wijnaldum, Sissoko, Thauvin, Tiote and Gouffran. I doubt anyone we signed last year is on wages comparable to those lot, with the possible exception of Ritchie and Diame. If we gave long expensive contracts out to hanley and the like then that's stupid decisions on our part because they wern't worth that. It is a very difficult window for clubs like us, but pissing around with someone like Perez, for £13.4 mill in this market shouldn't be happening. I'll judge it at the end of the window, but we need to step up our game. I'm not in the Ashley is a complete scrote and won't spend anything ever cause all he wants is 17th camp either. I am still hopeful that this is just trying to get our money to go as far as possible, as I cant fathom why anyone, even Ashley, would led Steve McClaren spend 75 million and then give fuck all to Benitez. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Course it makes a difference man. You think many newly promoted teams spend huge, have a 25 man squad, then continue to pay £10-15m a season on players not even registered? Have a word man. Mike Ashley is the owner, just don't be surprised if we are complaining about the same shit next summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. It is for Ashley, as I posted the other day - his investment in NUFC is safe as prices in football continue to rise astronomically. He can continue to invest nothing, spend nothing and gain from free advertisements for his tat shop whilst knowing he could sell us at any stage for the same (if not more) than he has put in. The difference of us finishing 5th - 17th means f*** all to Ashley and he'll continue to try and run us as a club that does the bare minimum to survive. It's not surprise that the only time he has ever put his hand in his pocket is to get us back into the TV gravy train of the PL. He'll also be confident that even if we do go down, we'll always come straight back up. Also indicates why in January, when he thought we were comfortably back up - he refused to sign anyone else. This is sadly true. However with a bit of sensible investment his asset could be worth much, much more. If he'd spend 20m a year of his own money over the past decade he arguably would have recouped it in TV revenue and could have been sitting on a club like Spurs rather than one like West Brom or Stoke in terms of profile and value. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shearergol Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Someone said it right though. Huddersfield have spent a good chunk of money on buying what they already had (loans deals turning into full transfers), and Brighton haven't set the works alight with their signings. Us on the other hand spent last summer buying a few Premier League players, and kept a decent squad when we went down. Brighton and Huddersfield have a lot of catching up to do to be Premier League ready. Did we though? Who are the decent squad players we kept when we went down? Mitro, Perez, Dummett, Chancel? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 Why are those figures surprising though. They had no one to sell, didn't have big wages to try and shift when they came up, so they can go and spend a chunk of the TV money. Do they get the TV money at the start of the season, unlike us? Obviously not, but they are spending money they don't currently have. Ashley's policy is to never do that, which is why we are where we are. Excellent from a business sense, complete s*** from a footballing sense. It's not excellent from a business sense when it puts the club's future in the Premier League in jeopardy and in a transfer market where prices are only going one way from one window to the next. It is for Ashley, as I posted the other day - his investment in NUFC is safe as prices in football continue to rise astronomically. He can continue to invest nothing, spend nothing and gain from free advertisements for his tat shop whilst knowing he could sell us at any stage for the same (if not more) than he has put in. The difference of us finishing 5th - 17th means f*** all to Ashley and he'll continue to try and run us as a club that does the bare minimum to survive. It's not surprise that the only time he has ever put his hand in his pocket is to get us back into the TV gravy train of the PL. He'll also be confident that even if we do go down, we'll always come straight back up. Also indicates why in January, when he thought we were comfortably back up - he refused to sign anyone else. This is sadly true. However with a bit of sensible investment his asset could be worth much, much more. If he'd spend 20m a year of his own money over the past decade he arguably would have recouped it in TV revenue and could have been sitting on a club like Spurs rather than one like West Brom or Stoke in terms of profile and value. But then he'd be risking his own money. This way he never loses and only gains. If we go down the losses are always going to go against the club, not him personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elliottman Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 They're also not spending £200k a week on players they need shifting. I really doubt that makes a difference, it's just an excuse. We'll hear the same crap next summer imo. An excuse? Its nearly £10million quid a year Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted August 10, 2017 Share Posted August 10, 2017 You can choose to believe the excuses of Mike Ashley if you want, i choose to believe he's full of shit and the same thing will happen next summer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts