Other clubs' transfers

[Froggy]

Just now, Sima said:

 

I'm not acting like the rules don't apply to you, more that they are near infinitely less-impactful than they are to you and clubs that have already entrenched themselves at the top of the tree by their own design.

 

Us, Aston Villa, Everton, Nottiingham Forest and any other potential usurper has to be near-perfect in their recruitment, their salary structure and performance of the team as a result to come anywhere near breaking the stranglehold created.  And if we do get our recruitment right, a legion of media shills are waiting in the wings to link our best players away at every turn to the beloved six in an attempt to unsettle them and ultimately tempt them to leave, again making us have to back to our near-perfect recruitment strategy again in an attempt to catch up to teams who have taken those players away.

 

Since PIF took over you can count the number of duds we have signed for £10m+ on less than Dan Burn's right hand, whereas let's put Man Utd and Chelsea's transfers up in the same period for comparison.  The list of failures would be legion.

 

Aye there's no impact on us at all. Just ask the hundreds of people losing their jobs and the extreme cuts right across the club. The club is on it's knees at the minute while we try and get the financials right, and that's mainly because of the transfer mismanagement. 

[GeordieDazzler]

If a team like us had consistently made the mistakes Man U have we’d be in the Championship or lower. 

[Mattoon]

You only have to look at Villa, who didn't finish in the bottom 5 by the way, but just missed out on CL football so will have to sell because they took a risk and it didn't quite pull off

[KingArthur]

9 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Aye there's no impact on us at all. Just ask the hundreds of people losing their jobs and the extreme cuts right across the club. The club is on it's knees at the minute while we try and get the financials right, and that's mainly because of the transfer mismanagement. 

Your problem is cash, not PSR if people are losing their jobs.

edit. Bruno is not going to saudi it seems.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 07:19 by KingArthur

[Froggy]

6 minutes ago, GeordieDazzler said:

If a team like us had consistently made the mistakes Man U have we’d be in the Championship or lower. 

 

We weren't far away from that, and our starting point was lightyears higher than yours.

[Sima]

10 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Aye there's no impact on us at all. Just ask the hundreds of people losing their jobs and the extreme cuts right across the club. The club is on it's knees at the minute while we try and get the financials right, and that's mainly because of the transfer mismanagement. 

 

300 employees on (generously) £30K a year is £9m, yet you're lashing out £130m on two more speculative signings. There'll probably be another £150m+ spent next summer too.

Don't give me that shite, it's those at the bottom that have to pay the consequences for performative penny pinching.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 07:21 by Sima

[Froggy]

Just now, Sima said:

300 employees on (generously) £30K a year is £9m, yet you're lashing out £130m on two more speculative signings, there'll be another £150m spent next summer too.

Don't give me that shite.

 

Again, you're ignoring amortisation, you're ignoring sales to PSR assets. You're just suiting your own argument or else you just don't know.

 

The average UK salary is £37k as well, so not sure how £30k a year is generous. 

 

The reports have suggested that cuts have saved £40-50m annually so far.

 

3 minutes ago, KingArthur said:

Your problem is cash, not PSR if people are losing their jobs.

 

PSR significantly affects cash flow.

[Froggy]

Bruno has rejected Al Hilal. 

[KingArthur]

1 minute ago, Froggy said:

PSR significantly affects cash flow.

Yea, but when you have workers on low wages and trying to negotiate Cunha's payments to 4-5 payments instead of 3, that means you have cash problem. PSR/FFP problems are solved in a different way.

[Sima]

6 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Again, you're ignoring amortisation, you're ignoring sales to PSR assets. You're just suiting your own argument or else you just don't know.

 

The average UK salary is £37k as well, so not sure how £30k a year is generous. 

 

The reports have suggested that cuts have saved £40-50m annually so far.

 

 

PSR significantly affects cash flow.

 

I'm not ignoring anything, I know you have sold a chunk of youngsters over the years but you still have a transfer deficit of around £550m over the last four seasons. That's without going into your wage bill which is extortionate.

 

Your point about average salary, I'll admit I don't have the breakdown of how many of those layoffs were full-time workers (and their skillset). Do you have it to hand? Either way, it's £11.1m which is still less than 10% of the money you have spent on the transfer fees two employees in the last few days. When you factor wages in it will be nearer 5%.  Maximum you can amortise that is 5 years, that still gives you a 75% deficit in the trade-off.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 07:30 by Sima

[Froggy]

12 minutes ago, Sima said:

I'm not ignoring anything, I know you have sold a chunk of youngsters over the years but you still have a transfer deficit of around £550m over the last four seasons. That's without going into your wage bill which is extortionate.

 

Yeah, but... look at us.  How can you say we're not paying for this? 

 

We're quite clearly trying to fix the wage bill and transfer situation as well. 

[Adam P]

Froggy if the Glazers cost you 2bn, then the best comparison to that for NUFC under Ashley would be the cumulative difference in revenue between NUFC and THFC over the Ashley period, i.e. money left on the table, to give it its proper name. When Ashley took over, we were the same financial size. Using the difference between the two club's trajectories shows that over 14 years of Ashley, we left much more than a billion.

 

I rough calculated and for the 4 seasons from 2018/19 to 21/22, the difference is about a billion. Given what has happened under strict PSR rules since PIF have come in, shows that the trajectory by THFC was at least 'on the table'. Given relative circumstances, you could argue that a slightly lower total overall financial impact for us was multiple times more damaging.

[gbandit]

42 minutes ago, Froggy said:

Bruno has rejected Al Hilal. 

Wonder who Jim’s going to fire today to make himself feel better about this 

[Sima]

36 minutes ago, Froggy said:

 

Yeah, but... look at us.  How can you say we're not paying for this? 

 

We're quite clearly trying to fix the wage bill and transfer situation as well. 

 

Yep, by adding another liability of roughly £230m onto the books (based on both players being on £200K p/w).

We'll take Bruno Fernanj off your hands, mind.  Not for the laughable figures banded about.  

 

[Decky]

16 hours ago, PauloGeordio said:

Tino stays! 

 

He's a left back isn't he?

[PauloGeordio]

Just now, Decky said:

 

He's a left back isn't he?

[Fak]

Liverpool in for Cherki. If they get Frimpong, Kerkez, Wirtz & Cherki they haven't half made up for their last few barren windows.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 09:22 by Fak

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, Adam P said:

Froggy if the Glazers cost you 2bn, then the best comparison to that for NUFC under Ashley would be the cumulative difference in revenue between NUFC and THFC over the Ashley period, i.e. money left on the table, to give it its proper name. When Ashley took over, we were the same financial size. Using the difference between the two club's trajectories shows that over 14 years of Ashley, we left much more than a billion.

 

I rough calculated and for the 4 seasons from 2018/19 to 21/22, the difference is about a billion. Given what has happened under strict PSR rules since PIF have come in, shows that the trajectory by THFC was at least 'on the table'. Given relative circumstances, you could argue that a slightly lower total overall financial impact for us was multiple times more damaging.

 

The Glazers have cost us a lot, lot more than £2b. That's what they've essentially withdrawn from the club. 

[Kid Icarus]

Sancho heading back to Man United after Chelsea talks broke down. 

[Froggy]

1 hour ago, Sima said:

Yep, by adding another liability of roughly £230m onto the books (based on both players being on £200K p/w).

 

£230m over five years. 

 

The wages of Rashford and Sancho amount to around £140-150m in the same period. Their almost certain transfer fees add probably another £60m+ on top of that. Lindelof, Eriksen, Evans all gone. That's another £25m in wages over five years. That's five players that don't even play for us anymore and they offset Mbeumo and Cunha's entire cost.

 

That's not including the potential sales of Antony, Hojlund, Garnacho, Malacia etc.

 

You're being obtuse. Only looking at incomings and have no care for any outgoings.

 

I think it's pretty clear we're trying to trim the squad and not fire out £300,000 contracts to youngsters anymore.

[Froggy]

4 minutes ago, Kid Icarus said:

Sancho heading back to Man United after Chelsea talks broke down. 

 

 Freedom fighter returning home. Wonder how that makes him feel that a club would rather pay £5m to get rid of you than pay £25m to keep you.

[Nucasol]

1 minute ago, Kid Icarus said:

Sancho heading back to Man United after Chelsea talks broke down. 

£5m to Man Utd. However, leaves them with no transfer fee and £350k a week (minus of course @Froggy’s favourite 20% CL failure reduction) for the next two years. Just the £29m in wages to cough up for poor, hard done by, £200m package Mbeumo and Cunha signing, Man Utd.

[PRL]

So that’s £120m net potential inflows gone in a few hours, with another £120m in outflows either agreed or close to agreed in a similar period. Any club in their right mind would hold off on any offers for Manc players even for just the rest of the month to make them sweat and potentially force hand on a deal. 
 

 

[JT24]

In before somebody suggests we make a move for Sancho.

 

Don't do it.

[Adam P]

So your revenues would be stratospherically higher than Real Madrid's if it hadnt been for the Glazers? The club's financial performance has remained dynamic, vibrant, growth focused, delivering year on year increases. This should have been 'billions' better had Uncle Fester not taken out 20m USD? Not sure about that.

 

Anyway, the 2 bn the Glazers took out is about exactly the same amount that Ashley left on the table. The damage done i think goes much heavier towards Ashley due to the relative impact of similar damage. If you punch a pro boxer on the chin, they probably wont even feel it. If you punch a basement dwelling forum lurker in the face they may never get up off the floor again. Not that we come out of that particular analogy looking any good.