Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7

[Rafalove]

9 minutes ago, Skeletor said:

Tierney and Maddison seem pretty nailed on. After that who knows. Can see Kephrem Thuram as well. Wish we'd go all out for MacAllister.

 

 

Not sure Maddison is nailed in especially with this Hungarian lad being scouted. Not sure about Tierney with his injury record.

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, STM said:

 

That's not what is being suggested and you know it...

 

They are suggesting a 100m outlay on transfer fees. I'd be shocked if its below 150m.

 

No, I don't know it. That's how I've always looked at the budgets, because that's how they work.

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

I’ve recently been rewatching the interviews of Ashworth and Darren Eales, and I have absolutely full faith in whatever strategy the club takes this summer.
 

So impressed whenever I hear them talk about their vision for the club.

[Ikon]

 

Not in response to you Oddyssey 

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by Ikon

[Matt1892]

I don’t think Maddison is fully fit and hasn’t been since his knee injury away at the World Cup, kind of like Bruno with us that he is too important to leave out for Leicester. Rodger’s highlighted his ongoing knee issues in the months after the World Cup.

 

When he is fully fit he is a class player, he was that good earlier in the season that Southgate was forced to pick him.

[Miggys First Goal]

Quote

 

The Premier League has confirmed that the 2023 summer transfer window will officially open on Wednesday, June 14.

 

However, English clubs will only be allowed to sign players from domestic leagues until July 1 when international deals are then permitted.

 

The window will slam shut again at 11pm on Friday, September 1.

 

Top-flight bosses have also confirmed dates for the 2024 winter transfer window which will open on Monday, January 1 before closing at 11pm on Thursday, February 1.

 

 

[nemtizz]

Remember when Puke said we were only going to spend 50m in the summer

[SUPERTOON]

3 minutes ago, nemtizz said:

Remember when Puke said we were only going to spend 50m in the summer

He said the original plan this summer was 20 million 

[cubaricho]

37 minutes ago, Dr Jinx said:

I think 35-40 million gets Maddison done now, maybe less. Although to be honest I’d rather we look elsewhere.

 

He looks a shell of a person after that season.

For 30-35 Maddison is a steal of the century. Even if we can’t always find a place for him in the system. He offers something none of our other players have. 

[Matt1892]

A £100 million net spend sounds about right. Add in the sale of Wood and a couple of others should push to pot up.

[nemtizz]

2 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

He said the original plan this summer was 20 million 

 

I meant last summer, but did he?

[SUPERTOON]

Just now, nemtizz said:

 

I meant last summer, but did he?

Yeah in his article a few weeks back where he said we will spend big, he said originally we only planned to have a budget of 20 million this coming summer 

[McCormick]

22 minutes ago, Alberto2005 said:

I can't see how we don't spend at least £150m, £100m gets you nothing these days.

I said just less than 150m. Not really getting 3 CL quality players for 100m, let alone 4-5.

[STM]

8 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

No, I don't know it. That's how I've always looked at the budgets, because that's how they work.

 

Well im telling you that's what's being suggested.

 

When a journalist puts a figure out, whether it be 50m, 100m or whatever, they are talking about transfer fees, not amortisation or any other magical bollocks.

 

I understand how that stuff works (kind of) but that's not what's being discussed here.

[SUPERTOON]

One or two top quality free transfers would be game changers for us in terms of ffp.

[Holloway]

180 mill and we're good to go

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, STM said:

 

Well im telling you that's what's being suggested.

 

When a journalist puts a figure out, whether it be 50m, 100m or whatever, they are talking about transfer fees, not amortisation or any other magical bollocks.

 

I understand how that stuff works (kind of) but that's not what's being discussed here.

 

How can you be so sure that's what they are suggesting out of interest?

 

Also, it's nothing magical. Most transfer fees paid for players are spread out over a number of years, rather than the selling team getting the full money upfront, and so say we buy a £50 million player this summer, it may well be just an initial £15 million we pay from this year's budget, with the remainder split over another three years or whatever.

[TheInfiniteOdyssey]

3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

One or two top quality free transfers would be game changers for us in terms of ffp.

 Not that many I can think of. Asensio, Thuram, Rabiot, Ndicka and Zaha perhaps.

 

Wage demands all likely in excess of what we’d pay though.

[Ikon]

4 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

How can you be so sure that's what they are suggesting out of interest?

 

Also, it's nothing magical. Most transfer fees paid for players are spread out over a number of years, rather than the selling team getting the full money upfront, and so say we buy a £50 million player this summer, it may well be just an initial £15 million we pay from this year's budget, with the remainder split over another three years or whatever.

 

Dont make it so complicated for no reason whatsoever. It’s clear as a day what STM is saying and that 99% understands exactly what it means if its being said that a budget is 100m. 

[STM]

4 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

How can you be so sure that's what they are suggesting out of interest?

 

Also, it's nothing magical. Most transfer fees paid for players are spread out over a number of years, rather than the selling team getting the full money upfront, and so say we buy a £50 million player this summer, it may well be just an initial £15 million we pay from this year's budget, with the remainder split over another three years or whatever.

 

Just to clear, I'm not disputing the method of payments for transfers.

 

What I'm saying is that NOBODY when talking about a transfer budget, especially when it comes to the press, talks about transfer budgets in this way.

 

For example we signed Pope for 12m over 4 payments (if I remember correctly) but for the purpose of "transfer budget speculation/talk" nobody says we spent 3m on Pope last summer.

 

When a journalist says "a budget of x million" they mean a budget of x million, not a budget of x million in first installments.

 

I'm talking football transfer parlance here.

[STM]

1 minute ago, Ikon said:

 

Dont make it so complicated for no reason whatsoever. It’s clear as a day what STM is saying and that 99% understands exactly what it means if its being said that a budget is 100m. 

 

Right? I feel like I'm being gaslighted or someshit.

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, STM said:

 

Just to clear, I'm not disputing the method of payments for transfers.

 

What I'm saying is that NOBODY when talking about a transfer budget, especially when it comes to the press, talks about transfer budgets in this way.

 

For example we signed Pope for 12m over 4 payments (if I remember correctly) but for the purpose of "transfer budget speculation/talk" nobody says we spent 3m on Pope last summer.

 

When a journalist says "a budget of x million" they mean a budget of x million, not a budget of x million in first installments.

 

I'm talking football transfer parlance here.

 

That's interesting man. Every time budgets are mentioned I've never looked at it as taking total fees into account, because the figures always seemed too small then.

 

I mean they wouldn't even make sense if that was the case. And so if that's what the press are actually doing then it's pretty bizarre.

[SteV]

1 minute ago, KaKa said:

 

That's interesting man. Every time budgets are mentioned I've never looked at it as taking total fees into account, because the figures always seemed too small then.

 

I mean they wouldn't even make sense if that was the case. And so if that's what the press are actually doing then it's pretty bizarre.

If anyone is quoting our budget in terms instalment payments, they’d have factor in what we already owe for previous signings. 
 

So if they were saying £100m, about £20/£25m would already be accounted for.

[STM]

5 minutes ago, KaKa said:

 

That's interesting man. Every time budgets are mentioned I've never looked at it as taking total fees into account, because the figures always seemed too small then.

 

I mean they wouldn't even make sense if that was the case. And so if that's what the press are actually doing then it's pretty bizarre.

 

It has been utterly bizarre. Edwards saying 50m budget last summer or whatever.

 

I think it's pure guesswork.

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, SteV said:

If anyone is quoting our budget in terms instalment payments, they’d have factor in what we already owe for previous signings. 
 

So if they were saying £100m, about £20/£25m would already be accounted for.

 

I think typically what is still owed each year, is taken into account before then determining the transfer budget for that year.

 

So for example, before the club would have set this summer's budget, they would have already determined and taken into account what we need to pay out this year from previous deals first.