Now That's What I Call Transfer Rumours! 7

[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.

 

 

[KaKa]

2 minutes ago, STM said:

 

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

 

I think it's pure guesswork.

 

Yeah, seems I've been giving them way too much credit by assuming they were quoting those figures based on the actual outlay we'd be shelling out upfront.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by KaKa

[WilliamPS]

People are getting confused between cashflow and income/expenditure 

 

When you buy a pair of trainers on klarna or PayPal instalments the money leaves your account in 3 monthly instalments but it doesn’t change what you pay overall or how much the shoes cost, it only changes when the money leaves your account. Same with transfer fees - the exception being any performance related payments.

 

For FFP afaik the payments schedule has zero impact, so the outstanding balance on any transfers probably won’t impact the transfer budget at all

[rebelrouser]

1 hour ago, Dr Jinx said:

I think 35-40 million gets Maddison done now, maybe less.

Other teams will drive the price up.  Also, we get £37M for fourth place finish and a rumored £25M for the new shirt sponsor. The estimates of our budget are never accurate. They started out to be ridiculously high and then went ridiculously low. I think the club likes the really low guesses. 

[STM]

I'd be phoning up Leicester on Monday morning. I'd ask about Barnes too while I'm at it.

 

Dunno why but I can see Barnes at West Ham or Villa.

[TRon]

14 minutes ago, STM said:

I'd be phoning up Leicester on Monday morning. I'd ask about Barnes too while I'm at it.

 

Dunno why but I can see Barnes at West Ham or Villa.

 

That will only be because we have higher value targets in our sights now.

[Alberto2005]

Where is Barnes going to play? We've already got ASM, Gordon, Joelinton, even Isak who can play wide left.

You don't buy Gordon and Barnes, we need to back Gordon now and hope a full pre-season helps him show his qualities.

We need more quality on the right, Almiron and Murphy isn't good enough.

[Keegans Export]

1 hour ago, McCormick said:

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

Trippier, Botman & Bruno cost less than £150m tbf

 

Obviously I'm quibbling over semantics but the truth is that our ongoing success is going to depend on finding players that are (or can quickly become) CL quality without paying CL-quality money. Especially as the CL money is only guaranteed for this coming season, while the FFP impacts will continue.

[Dr.Spaceman]

Who gives a shite what anyone thinks our budget might be? Nobody has any idea what we've got to play with. Anyone saying we've got X, Y or Z is plucking ball-park figures out of thin air based on pure guesswork.

 

Just save yourself the hassle and enjoy the summer 

[Numbers]

Not sure I like the banter of "the big clubs will dwarf us" like. Even its true i dont need to hear that shit

[Cronky]

I'm inclined to believe Eddie when he says two or three signings from a limited pool of possible targets. Obviously they have to be better than who we've got, but not so good that they will have the interest of the big six, who I think will still out-compete us in terms of wages as well as transfer fees.

 

£40m for Maddison would be a steal because he's approaching his peak, but unless we're the only club he'd consider, I'm sure Leicester will be able to drive the price up via an auction.

 

Left back is our weakest area, but I'm not convinced that any of the big six will sell to us, so that would rule out Tierney. Augusto from Monza has impressed me, but there's got to be quite a few LBs who are better than Burn or Targett, so I'm confident we'll get someone.

 

Kim Min-jae looks good, but is he too good to be within our reach right now, I wonder. Likewise Jonathan David. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Surely we can compete with the “big six” now? I don’t even know who they are now.