The Money Pot

[North Leeds Fox]

10 minutes ago, Bluearmyfox28 said:

I think we will see one personally just to accommodate other spending. Likely to be Sturridge or a back up right back I would imagine. 

Yeah the Nantes rb is out of contract this summer and looks like he would be a good back up. Personally, wouldn't be adverse to Milner or Mata, if it meant extra money for the likes of youri, sarr and a striker. 

[Bluearmyfox28]

17 minutes ago, North Leeds Fox said:

Yeah the Nantes rb is out of contract this summer and looks like he would be a good back up. Personally, wouldn't be adverse to Milner or Mata, if it meant extra money for the likes of youri, sarr and a striker. 

I think Milner will end up at Leeds truth be told, if Biesla is to leave gives them the wages to spend on Milner. Mata I think will go back to Spain personally.

[North Leeds Fox]

10 minutes ago, Bluearmyfox28 said:

I think Milner will end up at Leeds truth be told, if Biesla is to leave gives them the wages to spend on Milner. Mata I think will go back to Spain personally.

I agree with both. Both are good personalities so think they will be an asset to any club they end up at

[Xen]

2 hours ago, Bluearmyfox28 said:

I think we will see one personally just to accommodate other spending. Likely to be Sturridge or a back up right back I would imagine. 

Can't see us signing a RB. Amartey was starting to look pretty good there before his injury so Rodgers will hopefully want to take a look at what he can do, and in a pinch Albrighton is able to deputise.

 

I'm warming to the idea of Sturridge if he's content with being second-choice behind Vardy, as he'd be a definite improvement on what Iheanacho has offered us (so far). Milner would be great to have at the club as I can see him being a great influence on some of the younger players although I'm not sure where he'd fit in, particularly with Fuchs staying for another year. 

Edited 23 May 2019 by Xen

[moore_94]

 

 

[KingsX]

3 hours ago, moore_94 said:

 

 

1.9 million pounds for each place in the table and 1.2 million for each domestic live broadcast.

 

If we're around the top six in the second half of the season, that's likely to be several more TV appearances.  Or if a sexy name (say, that Capt. Picard lookalike) can attract eyeballs.

 

Fully understand the complaints about away trips on Friday night, we're crap on Sundays, etc., but that is real money.  Four more TV games would pay a Robben-level wage.

[Nicolo Barella]

On 21/05/2019 at 12:51, Rusko187 said:

The problem you have here is usually when an ITK posts info and it doesn't come to fruition the mob essentially drive them off with heckles and abuse, so perhaps they are thinking what's the point.

 

However, an educated guess is unless we can increase our commercial revenue than we're currently running to the limits of our wage bill in terms of FFP. If we want to sign any big name players then we either have to offload high earners or just not bother at all.

So we should just eat up what any ITK says? Regardless of how good they are at actually being, you know, ITK? There's hundreds of idiots on the internet (case in point, Sean from Enderby) who live off of fooling people. There's no point having ITKs anymore if we can't tell them apart from trolls. Tell me right now, is there any ITK on this forum who we know is beyond reproach, who is not making things up? No? Then we as a forum absolutely should call them out when they tell porkies. 

[Rusko187]

1 minute ago, Nicolo Barella said:

So we should just eat up what any ITK says? Regardless of how good they are at actually being, you know, ITK? There's hundreds of idiots on the internet (case in point, Sean from Enderby) who live off of fooling people. There's no point having ITKs anymore if we can't tell them apart from trolls. Tell me right now, is there any ITK on this forum who we know is beyond reproach, who is not making things up? No? Then we as a forum absolutely should call them out when they tell porkies. 

Perhaps a bit heavy-handed.

 

An ITK will share information they've heard/been told and is purely speculative, if people treat it as fact that is their problem. What you get is a situation where people take that information as gospel and IS happening but when it doesn't they are then questioned and in some cases abused.

This in turn usually puts those, who have previously contributed, off from sharing any further information. So instead of "calling them out when they tell porkies", treat said information you receive with a pinch of salt. If it occurs you know they're trustworthy, if it does not then choose to ignore the information.

[Nicolo Barella]

3 minutes ago, Rusko187 said:

Perhaps a bit heavy-handed.

 

An ITK will share information they've heard/been told and is purely speculative, if people treat it as fact that is their problem. What you get is a situation where people take that information as gospel and IS happening but when it doesn't they are then questioned and in some cases abused.

This in turn usually puts those, who have previously contributed, off from sharing any further information. So instead of "calling them out when they tell porkies", treat said information you receive with a pinch of salt. If it occurs you know they're trustworthy, if it does not then choose to ignore the information.

I can respect your overall principle of just leave them alone if you don't believe them, except that it's unfair for each newcomer to the forum to fall for the same ITKs - sort of like if no-one of us talked about how Sean from Enderby is full of shite, new people might fall for him. 

 

Also, just if they get something right, it doesn't mean anything. For example, that Ramladimmadome guy just posted in the development squad thread a week or so ago with a cryptic statement like "one down". He can hardly go wrong with that statement can he? Any number of rings could prove him right

[Rusko187]

5 minutes ago, Nicolo Barella said:

I can respect your overall principle of just leave them alone if you don't believe them, except that it's unfair for each newcomer to the forum to fall for the same ITKs - sort of like if no-one of us talked about how Sean from Enderby is full of shite, new people might fall for him. 

 

Also, just if they get something right, it doesn't mean anything. For example, that Ramladimmadome guy just posted in the development squad thread a week or so ago with a cryptic statement like "one down". He can hardly go wrong with that statement can he? Any number of rings could prove him right

Whoa whoa whoa... let me stop you there, Seans actually had a few correct recently 

 

For me, it's probably best for new people to decide upon themselves who is/isn't trustworthy, not particularly fair that people who may have got a lot of things right to actually be heckled on the back of 1 wrong tip-off.

And speaking of Ramadaone, again, treat the information as speculative. It's likely he cannot tell you more at this stage, nor knows the full details... he has shared that something is happening and it's all you need to know. Whether people lump money on that information or go around shouting it around is on them.

[Nicolo Barella]

2 hours ago, Rusko187 said:

Whoa whoa whoa... let me stop you there, Seans actually had a few correct recently 

 

For me, it's probably best for new people to decide upon themselves who is/isn't trustworthy, not particularly fair that people who may have got a lot of things right to actually be heckled on the back of 1 wrong tip-off.

And speaking of Ramadaone, again, treat the information as speculative. It's likely he cannot tell you more at this stage, nor knows the full details... he has shared that something is happening and it's all you need to know. Whether people lump money on that information or go around shouting it around is on them.

Fair enough. I think we'll have to agree to disagree, but I can respect your opinion

[blue blood]

On 20/05/2019 at 23:46, Costock_Fox said:

True, you would think our business model points to buy young and sell 1 for big money each year to fund 2/3 incomings. If it needs to happen then Maguire is the one to go this summer for me.

I can see this being the case.  It can be possible as we got a couple of CB's in last summer. 

 

If this is the model going forwards who do we foresee being the big money sale next summer? Ricardo? Maddison? Chilwell? and what contingency do we put in place this summer to transition the aforementioned sale?  

[Dahnsouff]

3 minutes ago, blue blood said:

I can see this being the case.  It can be possible as we got a couple of CB's in last summer. 

 

If this is the model going forwards who do we foresee being the big money sale next summer? Ricardo? Maddison? Chilwell? and what contingency do we put in place this summer to transition the aforementioned sale?  

I would have thought a highly rated young incoming would indicate the potential outgoing next time, as it may well be for the same position? (If such a model is indeed being followed)

[blue blood]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

I would have thought a highly rated young incoming would indicate the potential outgoing next time, as it may well be for the same position? (If such a model is indeed being followed)

Tielemans for Maddison? Could this be seen as a means to justify spending more money on Tielemans? 

Surely if Ricardo carry's on he will be sought after?  But that will mean bringing in an attacking right back.

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, blue blood said:

Tielemans for Maddison? Could this be seen as a means to justify spending more money on Tielemans? 

Surely if Ricardo carry's on he will be sought after?  But that will mean bringing in an attacking right back.

Interesting thought, so get Tielemans against expected return from next seasons Maddison sale?

Or maybe we'll try for someone like Bradley Dack as a future Maddison (For when he is sold)

Ricardo - well if he has another season like this, its hard to see offers not arriving.

[blue blood]

6 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

Interesting thought, so get Tielemans against expected return from next seasons Maddison sale?

Or maybe we'll try for someone like Bradley Dack as a future Maddison (For when he is sold)

Ricardo - well if he has another season like this, its hard to see offers not arriving.

How would this sit with potential suitors, Knowing we will only sell a prize asset once a season max, will they be forced to pay fair money? 

 

As for future players fringe, they can come in to replace current fringe players that don't or haven't improved.  If we show we are developing youth coupled with the pending training facility could give us a whip hand.

 

And as for FFP slack for running at a profit (just), is it not better to save that kitty for a Jan window during a season we need the extra push to get us into a top 6 finish? 

Edited 24 May 2019 by blue blood

[Dahnsouff]

1 minute ago, blue blood said:

How would this sit with potential suitors, Knowing we will only sell a prize asset once a season max, will they be forced to pay fair money? 

 

As for future players, they can come in to replace fringe players.  If we show we are developing youth coupled with the pending training facility could give us a whip hand.

 

And as for FFP slack for running at a profit (just), is it not better to save that kitty for a Jan window during a season we need the extra push to get us into a top 6 finish? 

No idea  

Just theorising. Who'd be a Director of Football eh?

(If it is their job that is!)

[blue blood]

6 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

No idea  

Just theorising. Who'd be a Director of Football eh?

(If it is their job that is!)

If this is a model of choice it needs to be sustainable for 3-4 seasons at which point there needs to be another shift towards academy players stepping up, coming through the new system.  That could be realistic based on the expansion in this area.  Only realistic if we are bringing in best of the crop teenagers in bulk already.

Edited 24 May 2019 by blue blood

[Bluearmyfox28]

I know the talk of FFP has died down on here the past few weeks, but thought this would help some who struggle to understand what our limit is on FFP.

 

Premier League clubs can make a loss of up to £105m over three seasons. (£35m per season) and can generally spend only £7m more on wages than they did in the previous window.

 

So basically with the club making £1.8m profit in 2018 & 92.5m profit in 2017, equalling 94.3m in profit across the previous 2 seasons meaning the club can afford to make a loss of £199.3m this season & still meet FFP.

 

I may be wrong & reading this incorrectly but that’s what I’ve taken from this?

[Dahnsouff]

For those that haven`t seen this yet, relevant for the upcoming season as it relates to changes to FFP for this season (Specifically the abolition of STCC)

 

https://www.fourfourtwo.com/features/new-financial-fair-play-rule-change-will-completely-change-how-next-seasons-premier-league

 

[jeffschlupp]

1 hour ago, Bluearmyfox28 said:

I know the talk of FFP has died down on here the past few weeks, but thought this would help some who struggle to understand what our limit is on FFP.

 

Premier League clubs can make a loss of up to £105m over three seasons. (£35m per season) and can generally spend only £7m more on wages than they did in the previous window.

 

So basically with the club making £1.8m profit in 2018 & 92.5m profit in 2017, equalling 94.3m in profit across the previous 2 seasons meaning the club can afford to make a loss of £199.3m this season & still meet FFP.

 

I may be wrong & reading this incorrectly but that’s what I’ve taken from this?

I believe it works over a set three-year period, one of which has just ended (2016-19) and a new three-year FFP period begins as of 1 July this year (2019-22). That's different to what you're suggesting which is 'every 3 years' or 'the last 3 years' we must comply.

 

While yes, we could make a loss of £105m, any loss over £15m has to be guaranteed by the club's owners.

 

But as Dahnsouff's article above says, the change for this period of FFP monitoring is the abolition of STCC, so the wage budget limit of £7m extra per season is no more. 

[Bluearmyfox28]

58 minutes ago, jeffschlupp said:

I believe it works over a set three-year period, one of which has just ended (2016-19) and a new three-year FFP period begins as of 1 July this year (2019-22). That's different to what you're suggesting which is 'every 3 years' or 'the last 3 years' we must comply.

 

While yes, we could make a loss of £105m, any loss over £15m has to be guaranteed by the club's owners.

 

But as Dahnsouff's article above says, the change for this period of FFP monitoring is the abolition of STCC, so the wage budget limit of £7m extra per season is no more. 

Right okay, it’s such a sticky subject I’m trying to read up on it to build my understanding on it but it’s such a complicated area I can see why even the top lawyers/accountants make mistakes.

[Chrysalis]

3 hours ago, Bluearmyfox28 said:

I know the talk of FFP has died down on here the past few weeks, but thought this would help some who struggle to understand what our limit is on FFP.

 

Premier League clubs can make a loss of up to £105m over three seasons. (£35m per season) and can generally spend only £7m more on wages than they did in the previous window.

 

So basically with the club making £1.8m profit in 2018 & 92.5m profit in 2017, equalling 94.3m in profit across the previous 2 seasons meaning the club can afford to make a loss of £199.3m this season & still meet FFP.

 

I may be wrong & reading this incorrectly but that’s what I’ve taken from this?

the 7m wages rule has been dropped.

 

The 105m over 3 seasons still stands., and yes its an averaged rule.  So a season with extreme results can be mitigated by other seasons results.

Edited 15 July 2019 by Chrysalis

[UniFox21]

 Stringer makes a great point here, from around £23million investment we've potentially made £176.5million in profit.

 

That's some incredible scouting and buying from us. That could further increase over the next few years.

[mozartfox]

33 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

 Stringer makes a great point here, from around £23million investment we've potentially made £176.5million in profit.

 

That's some incredible scouting and buying from us. That could further increase over the next few years.

How much have potentially peed down the drain on Slimani/Silva/Musa and Kelechi?