Tielemans

[AjcW]

35 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

We wont pay £40m for Tielemans. Not that I think we will even get him anyway. 

I think that's sensible to be honest. As well as he has done, the last couple of games point to recurring issues with match fitness for me. Something i'm sure he can work on, but also something that should be used as a bargaining tool to get him for less then £40m.

 

It would be a shame if we didn't even try though...

[st albans fox]

3 hours ago, Babylon said:

Welcome... 

 

Losing a few players salaries doesn't suddenly make £100m appear. We made a profit of £1m in the last accounts, we still owe huge amounts on previous transfers, and we've had to secure loans to fund all the infrastructure. Whether it falls in FFP is irrelevant, the club and not the owners are paying for it. It's not a Man City scenario whereby we'll just find a way of the owners pumping money in, the money has to come out of what we earn moving forwards. Cash in the bank fell between the previous accounts and the current one, wages up, we've spent more cash.  There is absolutely nothing in the accounts to suggest we are capable of spending £40-50m nett, let alone £70/80/90/100m

 

We've only come close to a £40m net spend twice and they were in exceptional seasons. 

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m 

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m

 

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m   PROFIT 2M

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m   PROFIT 92M

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m   PROFIT: 16M

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m   PROFIT: 26M

 

looks like the profit is roughly in line with the nett spend over the five year cycle. (corp tax payments will dent that proft which is re investable).  the question i would ask is should the owners be prepared to put money into the club? after all, they are owners of an asset worth hundreds of millions - if it is to remain worth that kind of sum, they cannot expect it to operate without investment over and above the profit it generates.  the squad is worth a fortune - if i was Top i would be happy to stick 50m+ into the club to try and make that next step up under BR). investing in players like youri seems like a no brainer as his value will surely increase given his age.  if we end up stagnating in mid table despite the additional investment, then we have decent assets like maguire and chilwell who can be "cashed in' to generate a nett spend surplus.

 

the next few months will be quite revealing.  

[MGLCFC]

13 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

After winning the league and having Champions league money to offset the expenditure.

And the money we receive now is far greater under the new Sky deal than it was 3 seasons ago. All I am suggesting is if we are serious about being a top 6 side, this is the kind of money and player we need to be investing in. Tielemans at £40 mil is a far better purchase than either Slimani at £29 mil or Nacho at £25mil.

[HankMarvin]

Just now, MGLCFC said:

And the money we receive now is far greater under the new Sky deal than it was 3 seasons ago. All I am suggesting is if we are serious about being a top 6 side, this is the kind of money and player we need to be investing in. Tielemans at £40 mil is a far better purchase than either Slimani at £29 mil or Nacho at £25mil.

Swings and round abouts

The wage bill is far greater than it was 3 years ago also.

i guess it will all depend on Who gets sold and how many targets BR has,

[North Leeds Fox]

The good thing I guess is that there are loads of decent CMs about that we could target - weigl, cabellos, mendez, joao Mario, milner, mcgregor, mcginn just off top of my head that won't cost anything over 25m you would have thought and play similar position. Hope we already have somebody lined up. 

[MGLCFC]

5 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Swings and round abouts

The wage bill is far greater than it was 3 years ago also.

i guess it will all depend on Who gets sold and how many targets BR has,

And so is the going rate for a decent player. 3 years ago a £10 mil player is now going for £25 mil. So paying £40 mil for Tielemans now, is like paying £20 mil for him 3 years ago. Like I said, how ambitious are we? I'd rather we spent £40 mil on Tielemans than 3 £15 mi players who have no impact. It's equivalent  of signing 3 Rondon's.

Edited 17 May 2019 by MGLCFC

[Ric Flair]

58 minutes ago, themightyfin said:

We wont pay £40m for Tielemans. Not that I think we will even get him anyway. 

Very silly of us if that's the case.

[Ric Flair]

2 minutes ago, MGLCFC said:

And so is the going rate for a decent player. 3 years ago a £10 mil player is now going for £25 mil. So paying £40 mil for Tielemans now, is like paying £20 mil for him 3 years ago. Like I said, how ambitious are we? I'd rather we spent £40 mil on Tielemans than 3 £15 mi players who have no impact. It's equivalent  of signing 3 Rondon's.

LOUDER

[Nicolo Barella]

4 minutes ago, MGLCFC said:

And so is the going rate for a decent player. 3 years ago a £10 mil player is now going for £25 mil. So paying £40 mil for Tielemans now, is like paying £20 mil for him 3 years ago. Like I said, how ambitious are we? I'd rather we spent £40 mil on Tielemans than 3 £15 mi players who have no impact. It's equivalent  of signing 3 Rondon's.

I'd love us to sign Rondon to be honest. 

[weller54]

8 minutes ago, North Leeds Fox said:

The good thing I guess is that there are loads of decent CMs about that we could target - weigl, cabellos, mendez, joao Mario, milner, mcgregor, mcginn just off top of my head that won't cost anything over 25m you would have thought and play similar position. Hope we already have somebody lined up. 

We have.... 

Matty James! 

[matty98]

Given the amount of money we've wasted on awful players, I'd much rather us pay slightly over the odds for a player we know is quality.

[mazarron fox]

17 minutes ago, MGLCFC said:

And so is the going rate for a decent player. 3 years ago a £10 mil player is now going for £25 mil. So paying £40 mil for Tielemans now, is like paying £20 mil for him 3 years ago. Like I said, how ambitious are we? I'd rather we spent £40 mil on Tielemans than 3 £15 mi players who have no impact. It's equivalent  of signing 3 Rondon's.

3 Rondons bags you 30 goals and top 6

[lcfcbluearmy]

4 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Welcome!

 

Yes infrastructure is exempt from FFP if the owners are willing to fund it themselves or via other methods. However, the fact we have taken out two loans in excess of £100m that have been guaranteed against the Mahrez transfer money and PL TV rights would suggest that we might not be going down the route of Top and his family chuffing up the whole lot from their empire. Even if we don't include how that is going to be paid for and our wage bill is reduced by the loss of Iborra, Simpson, Okazaki and a few others that still probably only accounts for around £10m in wages which will be replaced if not added to by the arrival of a top drawer central midfielder like Tielemans, another striker, a winger and possibly a back up right back. Our wages will still account for the majority of our revenue so to go and spend £60-100m this summer has to revolve around us selling off one of our main assets like Maguire.

Maybe the fact that we took those loans out was so they can then afford to both build the training ground and slash out on players in the same year. The loans are just there as a cash flow help. I don’t know just speculating but I think this is more likely than us not having money to spend and having to sell someone like Maguire to pay for it. I think the owners are cleverer than that.

[Clarkey123]

22 minutes ago, mazarron fox said:

3 Rondons bags you 30 goals and top 6

Thankyou! Been arguing this point that signing a striker with double figures a season and prem experience isn’t a gamble at 16mil

[Kopfkino]

5 hours ago, Ric Flair said:

Welcome!

 

Yes infrastructure is exempt from FFP if the owners are willing to fund it themselves or via other methods. However, the fact we have taken out two loans in excess of £100m that have been guaranteed against the Mahrez transfer money and PL TV rights would suggest that we might not be going down the route of Top and his family chuffing up the whole lot from their empire. Even if we don't include how that is going to be paid for and our wage bill is reduced by the loss of Iborra, Simpson, Okazaki and a few others that still probably only accounts for around £10m in wages which will be replaced if not added to by the arrival of a top drawer central midfielder like Tielemans, another striker, a winger and possibly a back up right back. Our wages will still account for the majority of our revenue so to go and spend £60-100m this summer has to revolve around us selling off one of our main assets like Maguire.

 

No we haven't. The most recent accounts clearly state short-term borrowing for 18/19 of 55m with the aim to secure long-term funding from either banks or the owners to finance infra projects. Just because the loans are secured against Central Funds/Mahrez doesn't mean the loans are for the full amounts.

[TJB-fox]

Re Rondon

 

1. We don’t suit target man football, totally against what we’ve been trying to build past 2 years, it will just be a Slimani situation all over again. 

2. Rodgers has stated he doesn’t like using a target man and we won’t be buying one.

 

so why does the obsession with this big lump continuously grow on here? If I see ‘oh good option to bring off the bench to hoof it forward to’ one more time I’ll bleach my eyes

[UniFox21]

1 hour ago, hackneyfox said:

We weren't willing to pay £40m for Sigurdsson.

28 year old Sigurdsson or 21 year old Tielemans. 

 

One coming into his latter stages, one who has basically all of his development left.

Sign Tielemans, if he continues on his development, he'd be worth double that in a few years. 

[Babylon]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

 

2018-2019 - Net Spend £18,80m

2017-2018 - Net Spend £39,95m   PROFIT 2M

2016-2017 - Net Spend £25,55m   PROFIT 92M

2015-2016 - Net Spend £40,45m   PROFIT: 16M

2014-2015 - Net Spend £22,86m   PROFIT: 26M

 

looks like the profit is roughly in line with the nett spend over the five year cycle. (corp tax payments will dent that proft which is re investable).  the question i would ask is should the owners be prepared to put money into the club? after all, they are owners of an asset worth hundreds of millions - if it is to remain worth that kind of sum, they cannot expect it to operate without investment over and above the profit it generates.  the squad is worth a fortune - if i was Top i would be happy to stick 50m+ into the club to try and make that next step up under BR). investing in players like youri seems like a no brainer as his value will surely increase given his age.  if we end up stagnating in mid table despite the additional investment, then we have decent assets like maguire and chilwell who can be "cashed in' to generate a nett spend surplus.

 

the next few months will be quite revealing.  

"Sustainable" is the word they use over and over and over again, so I'd suggest no they aren't prepared to put their own money into the club. I'm sure they've seen that £50m can go in the blink of an eye in football if you buy crap. 

[Gerard]

7 minutes ago, Babylon said:

"Sustainable" is the word they use over and over and over again, so I'd suggest no they aren't prepared to put their own money into the club. I'm sure they've seen that £50m can go in the blink of an eye in football if you buy crap. 

 

If they haven't then they weren't paying attention on our business after winning the title. 

[Finnegan]

20 minutes ago, TJB-fox said:

Re Rondon

 

1. We don’t suit target man football, totally against what we’ve been trying to build past 2 years, it will just be a Slimani situation all over again. 

2. Rodgers has stated he doesn’t like using a target man and we won’t be buying one.

 

so why does the obsession with this big lump continuously grow on here? If I see ‘oh good option to bring off the bench to hoof it forward to’ one more time I’ll bleach my eyes

 

BuT wE nEeD a PlAn B

[Guest SO1]

39 minutes ago, Clarkey123 said:

Thankyou! Been arguing this point that signing a striker with double figures a season and prem experience isn’t a gamble at 16mil

Ask Brendan about Mario Balotelli. What's that about money being a fungible asset.

[Lambert09]

Add silva to the deal, then give them Slimani & diabate & anyone else they might like for free... but we continue to play their wages. Promise them we will make a statue of Ghezzal... take on any one else they want off their books. 

 

Give them it alll. Rudkin just make this happen!!!!!!!!!

[lgfualol]

**** sake if we don't cough up the 40m for Tielemans we are absolute nobbers. He is ****ing awesome and will be worth loads more than that in 1 year. 

 

Watch him sign for Spurs or something while we sign a CM for 10m less that is so bad Matty James comes into the team.

[frany104]

NO just NO to Rondon. hes never been considered as prolific or mobile. We need to be looking for strikers who will replace Vardy long term. We need to stop shelling out on Plan B or back up strikers. 

[murphy]

£40m seems at worst, the going rate for Tielemans and probably a snip.

 

He has 5 assists and 3 goals in 10 games.  Expand that over a season and we have a player that gives you 19 assists and 11 goals.

 

His value is only going to go up.