Other clubs' transfers

[JT24]

Oof. 

[Stuy_O]

We really do need to get our finger out.

[KennyUtd]

We're gonna get left behind if we're not careful and get our transfers wrong again. 

[duo]

3 hours ago, NE27 said:

 

"Studying more options"

 

 

[r0cafella]

Squad cost is terrible for none cartel clubs as I wrote when the plans were first announced. 

 

Anchoring would have put a cap on how big the gap could have possibly been, but it didn't pass because of course. 

 

 

Edited 51 minutes ago by r0cafella

[JT24]

Just now, r0cafella said:

Squad cost is terrible for none cartel clubs as I wrote when the plans were first announced. 

 

Anchoring would have put a cap on how the gap could have possible been but it didn't pass because of course. 

That’s okay because the club are doing their utmost to massively increase their revenues. 

[duo]

Wasn't this the RB we were after?

 

 

[r0cafella]

Just now, JT24 said:

That’s okay because the club are doing their utmost to massively increase their revenues. 

It's getting on my tits, because it keeps been parroted but it's removed interest from the cost of clubs who owe massive amounts of money whilst removing the ability for owner financing at all. 

 

All this under the guise of aligning with European rules which is something we've never cared about, when the justification is so flimsy you know it's bullshit. 

 

I know this is all unpleasant and deemed negative but again, our owners have massive questions to answer, why are we taking less money from our main sponsor if we are going to be number 1?

 

Hilarious that instead of asking this rather pertinent question, our so called critical journalists are patting the club on the back and spinning it to be a success by bundling the amount with the training ground sponsor

[JT24]

2 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

It's getting on my tits, because it keeps been parroted but it's removed interest from the cost of clubs who owe massive amounts of money whilst removing the ability for owner financing at all. 

 

All this under the guise of aligning with European rules which is something we've never cared about, when the justification is so flimsy you know it's bullshit. 

 

I know this is all unpleasant and deemed negative but again, our owners have massive questions to answer, why are we taking less money from our main sponsor if we are going to be number 1?

 

Hilarious that instead of asking this rather pertinent question, our so called critical journalists are patting the club on the back and spinning it to be a success by bundling the amount with the training ground sponsor

A serious sportswashing ownership does whatever it takes to have their brand new airline plastered all over the FOS. 

[Vaj]

4 minutes ago, duo said:

Wasn't this the RB we were after?

 

 

I think we would have been after him if Tino went. Doubt anyone will go near him now with his injury record so I assume we will get a cheap backup RB instead 

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, JT24 said:

A serious sportswashing ownership does whatever it takes to have their brand new airline plastered all over the FOS. 

Thar aspect of this set up is dead. If you remember the first new shirt under them has massive adverts all of Riyadh. 

 

I wonder if this one does

[SAK]

6 minutes ago, Vaj said:

I think we would have been after him if Tino went. Doubt anyone will go near him now with his injury record so I assume we will get a cheap backup RB instead 

Our resident Milan fan said he only wants Inter and wants to stay in Italy for a couple more years. Would have been a non starter.

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by SAK

[AngelofTheFourth]

If spurs dont get ucl next season then they are screwed. They will be paying high fees mixed with high wages.

[r0cafella]

1 minute ago, AngelofTheFourth said:

If spurs dont get ucl next season then they are screwed. They will be paying high fees mixed with high wages.

They aren't. 

 

They have very high revenue champions league or not. 

[TRC]

15 minutes ago, r0cafella said:

They aren't. 

 

They have very high revenue champions league or not. 

They have the most expensive season tickets in the world don’t they?

[toon25]

We had a chance to flush Spurs. Fuck sake.

[r0cafella]

Just now, TRC said:

They have the most expensive season tickets in the world don’t they?

Probably, massive new stadium packed full of facilities and mad prices for a pint. Not to mention the revenue from concerts etc. 

 

They are almost double us revenue wise when we have CL and they don't

[r0cafella]

Just now, toon25 said:

We had a chance to flush Spurs. Fuck sake.

Both us and Villa

 

Strategic thinking obviously not strong points 

[alexf]

 

1 hour ago, JT24 said:

Oof. 

 

Finding it weirdly annoying this need to keep saying things like "driven by Roberto De Zerbi" Seen it mentioned a lot. 

[TheBrownBottle]

52 minutes ago, AngelofTheFourth said:

If spurs dont get ucl next season then they are screwed. They will be paying high fees mixed with high wages.

They’ve got massive headroom available - their income dwarves Chelsea’s and they currently have a low SCR.  They could spend half a billion this summer and enjoy another splurge next season if it goes wrong. 

[The College Dropout]

Levy has left them loads of headroom and low wages. 
 

 

Thankfully they’ll waste a load of this summer by the looks of it. 

[r0cafella]

5 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Levy has left them loads of headroom and low wages. 
 

 

Thankfully they’ll waste a load of this summer by the looks of it. 

They will get it right eventually, they won't ever be a winning force because they dont have it in them as an organisation but they get back on the European gravy train for sure. 

 

Spurs are in a very good position in the long term. If enic run out of money they are ripe to be invested in as they have everything and don't need massive infrastructure spend. If you look at us and Chelsea we probably both need 1.5b of capital investment on infrastructure alone.