Lovejoy Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Having a £30k p/w cap on wages will mean we won't have a Zigic situation for a start. Whilst we spent close to £20m on transfers (+ whatever agent fees come with that) we haven't broken the bank. I would imagine the club would be on a decent footing, obviously can't clarify that though. Parachute payments being done over a number of years will help and I'd hope the club won't spend heavily if we do go down (we will of course need to replace inevitable departures).
Benjani Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Having a £30k p/w cap on wages will mean we won't have a Zigic situation for a start. Whilst we spent close to £20m on transfers (+ whatever agent fees come with that) we haven't broken the bank. I would imagine the club would be on a decent footing, obviously can't clarify that though. Parachute payments being done over a number of years will help and I'd hope the club won't spend heavily if we do go down (we will of course need to replace inevitable departures). If you think Cambiasso is on 30k a week you're having a laugh.
DB11 Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Depends if we keep Pearson. If we do, we'll be fine. If we replace him then a new manager will overhaul the club to implement his identity and that will destroy LCFC
st albans fox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 If you think Cambiasso is on 30k a week you're having a laugh. But he isn't here next year ?
Soar Fox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 If you think Cambiasso is on 30k a week you're having a laugh. Good job he only signed a 1 year deal then.
NewburyFox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 I imagine the players with new contracts and the new signings will all have relegation wage drops in them - we'd be pretty stupid not to. Then you have players who are out of contract and will leave (GTF, Knockaert, Gallagher, probably Cambiasso) so we should be looking at around £80k-100k a week less, and you have player sales (Mahrez, Kramaric, maybe Kasper too) which should rake in £15-£20m. On top of this we have the huge parachute payments, a concept which I disagree with massively but it's nice that it will benefit us. If we go down we should be in an incredibly healthy position to make the necessary improvements for a promotion push.
Benjani Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Good job he only signed a 1 year deal then. Okay. You think kramaric is on 30k a week?
filbertway Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 One of the one things you can guarantee about this club under Pearson, we will be comfortable financially. Okay. You think kramaric is on 30k a week? 28k a week isn't it?
Benjani Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 One of the one things you can guarantee about this club under Pearson, we will be comfortable financially. 28k a week isn't it? Oh yeah like he is going to sign a 3 year deal on that when he could have signed for chelsea
Dan Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Okay. You think kramaric is on 30k a week? Possibly even less. I bet he was on about £2k a week at Rijeka. Oh yeah like he is going to sign a 3 year deal on that when he could have signed for Chelsea So you're saying we outbid them on wages? Not a chance. They didn't even have a bid accepted.
cc_star Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Hes joining chelsea in the summer anyway. Who have 4 bajillion players out on loan at any one time
Soar Fox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Hes joining chelsea in the summer anyway. Why didn't he join them in January?
Benjani Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Why didn't he join them in January? To bypass a rule. He's essentially on loan to us.
jonthefox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Another point is our support. Sure attendances will drop, but not to dangerously low levels.
Soar Fox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 To bypass a rule. He's essentially on loan to us. A 3 year loan deal.
cc_star Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 To bypass a rule. He's essentially on loan to us. even better for FFP then (which is the point of this thread), thanks to amortisation whereby a player's fee is spread across their entire contract, but when sold ends up as an instant lump of money on your annual accounts
Benjani Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Chelsea were signing him and wanted to loan him to vitesse. Player refused to go on loan there and wanted to play regularly in England. You can't sign a player and then loan him to another prem team in the same transfer window. We have 'signed him' but chelsea will sign him in summer.
ealingfox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Sure we'll be fine. Parachute payments, transfer fees for Mahrez, Krammy and perhaps several others. I'd feel particularly assured about our finances if we keep Pearson into next season.
Deucalion Posted 11 February 2015 Author Posted 11 February 2015 So the consensus is we will be in a strong position financially should we be relegated. It seems that way to me too. The next question then, is what lessons should we learn from this season? What should be our recruitment policy in the Championship? If we are promoted again, What should our transfer policy be and what should we do differently?
kingcarr21 Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Chelsea were signing him and wanted to loan him to vitesse. Player refused to go on loan there and wanted to play regularly in England. You can't sign a player and then loan him to another prem team in the same transfer window. We have 'signed him' but chelsea will sign him in summer. Surely if we get relegated then that would suggest Kramaric hasnt been good enough. Even if he had looked good but our team around him was poor if Chelsea were to sign him then they would still want to send him out on loan and they would be back to square one. Unless im missing something
Happy Fox Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Surely if we get relegated then that would suggest Kramaric hasnt been good enough. Even if he had looked good but our team around him was poor if Chelsea were to sign him then they would still want to send him out on loan and they would be back to square one. Unless im missing something Kramaric was going to be Drogba's replacement at Chelsea so essentially 4th choice.
kingcarr21 Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 Kramaric was going to be Drogba's replacement at Chelsea so essentially 4th choice. I guess that makes sense. Be interesting to see if Chelsea really see Kramaric as a fourth choice striker. There supposedly looking at Icardi at Inter. So Chelsea may not even go for Kramaric if we get relegated. I guess we wont know until the end of the season.
RedSoxUK Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 I think Kram stays, and if we fail to win promotion on first attempt - he goes. I'm assuming he has a relegation clause of at least 10m so anyone can pick him up.
Haydos Posted 11 February 2015 Posted 11 February 2015 To bypass a rule. He's essentially on loan to us. Aren't we Mr Cheery Chops. Life must be fun.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.