Where does the Chairman stand in this situation

ksrclaret · Post by **ksrclaret** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:27 pm

Mala591 wrote:If Jay Rod was so keen to come then why didn't he hand in a transfer request ?

It was widely accepted on here that Jay wanted to show loyalty to WBA who has stood by him through the Bong incident.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:27 pm

I think its fairly common knowledge that Jay didn't want to do anything to force a move because of the support he had over the Bong thing.

Which is full credit to him

Hapag Lloyd · Post by **Hapag Lloyd** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:28 pm

theroyaldyche wrote:Your delusional if you think that garlick has backed us to the best of his ability

Were the only team whos gone backwards

I wasn’t saying that I thought Garlick had backed us to the best of his ability, I don’t know if he has or he hasn’t, I was just pointing out the irony of you calling him a prick.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:30 pm

Mala591 wrote:If Jay Rod was so keen to come then why didn't he hand in a transfer request ?

Why does he need to ?
All that does is alienate himself from the West Brom fans. He will have known that there was a good chance the deal may not happen because of the fee so he’s done the right thing not handing in a transfer request as that would have had zero impact on the fee they wanted.

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:33 pm

And, without wanting to sound cynical, he would have lost a percentage signing on fee had he asked for a transfer

Whilst i believe he was (like everyone else) due to take a wage cut at WBA following relegation,the deal between himself and Burnley was well below what he had been earning at WBA in the Prem

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:37 pm

Deal at West Brom was £70k a week apparently and we were offering him £50k.
I believe his wages were halved after relegation so it’s irrelevant what he was earning in Premier League as they are not in it !
The deal fell through because of the transfer fee.

joey13 · Post by **joey13** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:42 pm

TVC15 wrote:Deal at West Brom was £70k a week apparently and we were offering him £50k.
I believe his wages were halved after relegation so it’s irrelevant what he was earning in Premier League as they are not in it !
The deal fell through because of the transfer fee.

The extra million WBA wanted being to much so I’m lead to believe

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:43 pm

theroyaldyche wrote:Hes a pr***

Jesus wept man..... based on what you numpty

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 2:53 pm

Just to widen the subject of transfer fees paid/received,
Whilst not to the exact penny, we have spent approx £65m over the last 2 full seasons and this summer
Of course wages are not included, but an average of £22m doesn't go far

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:06 pm

joey13 wrote:The extra million WBA wanted being to much so I’m lead to believe

Personally I don’t think the deal fell through because of £1m difference as that should have been easy to resolve by both parties - eg meet in the middle and for the sake of £0.5m I can’t see why either club would let the deal fall through.
I suspect it was more than this or possibly the way West Brom do their business and going back on something they had already agreed on with Burnley - which may have been asking for an extra million when we had already agreed the amount.
Their is a point in negotiations when you need to walk away - especially if the other party is constantly moving the goal posts

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:07 pm

jojomk1 wrote:Just to widen the subject of transfer fees paid/received,
Whilst not to the exact penny, we have spent approx £65m over the last 2 full seasons and this summer
Of course wages are not included, but an average of £22m doesn't go far

Is that net spend though ?
We have brought in upwards of £50m for Keane and Gray.

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:08 pm

TVC15 wrote:Is that net spend though ?
We have brought in upwards of £50m for Keane and Gray.

Yes

joey13 · Post by **joey13** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:09 pm

TVC15 wrote:Personally I don’t think the deal fell through because of £1m difference as that should have been easy to resolve by both parties - eg meet in the middle and for the sake of £0.5m I can’t see why either club would let the deal fall through.
I suspect it was more than this or possibly the way West Brom do their business and going back on something they had already agreed on with Burnley - which may have been asking for an extra million when we had already agreed the amount.
Their is a point in negotiations when you need to walk away - especially if the other party is constantly moving the goal posts

I agree and WBA have been notorious for being difficult to deal with

TsarBomba · Post by **TsarBomba** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:10 pm

We’re posting huge profits year on year, with the idea of doing what with the money? Because we’re sure not spending what we should on the playing squad.

I get that we have no rich benefactor to support us when we go down, but it’s well documented that we have finance in place should we be relegated, and clauses have been inserted in players contracts to reduce their wages.

This isn’t Garlick’s or any of the other board members money. We’re paid handsomely by the PL to contribute to the brand, and quite frankly, we’re not doing that.

I would hope that the board have the humility to ask themselves, each year, whether they are best placed to take us forward, and if they’re not, then they should be looking at outside investment. I just wonder whether some of our lesser board members enjoy the perks and kudos a little too much, and are reluctant to let it go.

It’s a hard league to stay in for us, but we’re making it a damn sight harder with our overly cautious approach. No-one wants or is expecting us to bet the ranch, but jeez, let’s give it a ******* go.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 3:13 pm

TVC15 wrote:Personally I don’t think the deal fell through because of £1m difference as that should have been easy to resolve by both parties - eg meet in the middle and for the sake of £0.5m I can’t see why either club would let the deal fall through.
I suspect it was more than this or possibly the way West Brom do their business and going back on something they had already agreed on with Burnley - which may have been asking for an extra million when we had already agreed the amount.
Their is a point in negotiations when you need to walk away - especially if the other party is constantly moving the goal posts

Goes back to the Polish Winger that finished up at Hull... Garlick doesnt like being treated for an idiot... and to raise the price when one has been agreed makes him walk away....

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:06 pm

theroyaldyche wrote:They wanted jay rod and dawson but woildnt pay

Id have shelvey or mouy in meself and another striker

Shelvey is overrated.

It's called having a budget set in mind ref Dawson and Jay, something many of you clearly struggle with.

You'd probably be one of the first to whine if both players flopped with us.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:09 pm

Whilst it's certainly true that we need more investment it is also true that our current methods have delivered more success than most other clubs could ever dream of..

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:34 pm

Spijed wrote:Whilst it's certainly true that we need more investment it is also true that our current methods have delivered more success than most other clubs could ever dream of..

I always laugh at the "we should be spending £100's of Millions" brigade....

99% of these haven't got a clue about finances and how they operate.... & probably have 3 or 4 Credit /Store cards maxed out etc.....

Bolton
Leeds
Bast@rds
Portsmouth Etc Etc Etc
Ffs the list is long and should tell them someting....

IT ONLY WORKS IF YOU HAVE A MULTIBILLIONAIRE OR CONGLOMERATE IN CHARGE....

We don't ... our Board are comparatively (rich compared to us) rich men but not that bloody rich.

Bordeauxclaret · Post by **Bordeauxclaret** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:45 pm

joey13 wrote:I agree and WBA have been notorious for being difficult to deal with

I wonder what they’d say about us.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:46 pm

Bosscat wrote:I always laugh at the "we should be spending £100's of Millions" brigade....

99% of these haven't got a clue about finances and how they operate.... & probably have 3 or 4 Credit /Store cards maxed out etc.....

Bolton
Leeds
Bast@rds
Portsmouth Etc Etc Etc
Ffs the list is long and should tell them someting....

IT ONLY WORKS IF YOU HAVE A MULTIBILLIONAIRE OR CONGLOMERATE IN CHARGE....

We don't ... our Board (yes are comparativley to us) are rich men but not that bloody rich.

I agree with that to an extent but i am not someone who struggles to comprehend how a clubs finances work. In fact it’s quite the opposite I have been involved in reviewing the finances of football clubs for many a year with some big clubs being my previous customers.

My view is that the club is being overly cautious - not by as much as some would believe but there is definitely room for investment without putting the club at risk and without having to find a big new benefactor.

Would I rather the club be cautious than wreckless and go the way of Portsmouth, Bolton, Leeds and many other ? Yes of course....but actually my first choice would be for us to find the right balance and invest more now whilst we have a chance to stay up. It might be a long time before we get another opportunity and the odds seem to suggest that it is easier to stay up from where we are now than to go down and get promoted from the Championship.

And before anyone points to the last 2 promotions we defied the odds and the experiences of most of the clubs relegated in the last 10 years.

TsarBomba · Post by **TsarBomba** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:46 pm

Bosscat wrote:I always laugh at the "we should be spending £100's of Millions" brigade....

99% of these haven't got a clue about finances and how they operate.... & probably have 3 or 4 Credit /Store cards maxed out etc.....

Bolton
Leeds
Bast@rds
Portsmouth Etc Etc Etc
Ffs the list is long and should tell them someting....

IT ONLY WORKS IF YOU HAVE A MULTIBILLIONAIRE OR CONGLOMERATE IN CHARGE....

We don't ... our Board are comparatively (rich compared to us) rich men but not that bloody rich.

You are using examples of clubs that got into financial difficulty nigh on twenty years ago. Portsmouth getting on for 10 years.

No one is suggesting we go out and spend hundreds of millions. But there’s a middle ground between being overly cautious and betting the ranch, which you are failing to grasp.

Edit- we have been having this argument on here for the majority, if not all of, Dyche’s tenure. This isn’t just one poor window we’re talking about. There has been a consistent approach by the Board not to spend.

LoveCurryPies · Post by **LoveCurryPies** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:48 pm

theroyaldyche wrote:Thats why hes a prick

Not taking q gamble and splashing cash where needed. We had opps to buy players but wouldnt pay their asking

Would that be gambling the future stability of the Club? Wow, that would be clever. I’m guessing you also voted for Brexit

MRG · Post by **MRG** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 4:50 pm

Bosscat wrote:I always laugh at the "we should be spending £100's of Millions" brigade....

99% of these haven't got a clue about finances and how they operate.... & probably have 3 or 4 Credit /Store cards maxed out etc.....

Bolton
Leeds
Bast@rds
Portsmouth Etc Etc Etc
Ffs the list is long and should tell them someting....

IT ONLY WORKS IF YOU HAVE A MULTIBILLIONAIRE OR CONGLOMERATE IN CHARGE....

We don't ... our Board are comparatively (rich compared to us) rich men but not that bloody rich.

Haha here it is, the Bolton, Leeds, Rovers, Portsmouth post. No mention of the Southampton, Bournemouth, Leicester’s though which always surprises me

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:02 pm

Have I actually just read on this thread Leicester being quoted as an example of what can " go wrong " if a couple of expensive signings dont work ?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:04 pm

randomclaret2 wrote:Have I actually just read on this thread Leicester being quoted as an example of what can " go wrong " if a couple of expensive signings dont work ?

Leicester went into League one and very nearly went bust. That's what can go wrong.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:05 pm

Spijed wrote:Leicester went into League one and very nearly went bust. That's what can go wrong.

What happened after that?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:08 pm

ClaretAndJew wrote:What happened after that?

Paid bugger all debt back and got a free ground!

Helps quite a lot, don't you think?

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:13 pm

Link:

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... ebts-mount" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tall Paul · Post by **Tall Paul** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:14 pm

MRG wrote:Haha here it is, the Bolton, Leeds, Rovers, Portsmouth post. No mention of the Southampton, Bournemouth, Leicester’s though which always surprises me

Probably because they all have wealthy backers.

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:18 pm

Spijed wrote:Link:

https://www.skysports.com/football/news ... ebts-mount" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The date on that article reads 01/01/70 for me.

ksrclaret · Post by **ksrclaret** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:23 pm

ClaretAndJew wrote:The date on that article reads 01/01/70 for me.

Things must be bad for Leicester if they're still paying off the fee for Dennis Wise in 52 years.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:24 pm

The failure to sign Jay Rodriguez is entirely the fault of the Chairman, who was responsible for the entire shambles, at a time when we were just a couple of million apart.

He has wrecked the entire season, when you add the Joe Hart signing, which has caused keeper/squad disruption.
We should point at him, not the manager.

joey13 · Post by **joey13** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:27 pm

Tall Paul wrote:Probably because they all have wealthy backers.

So did Bolton and Blackburn

joey13 · Post by **joey13** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:29 pm

Bordeauxclaret wrote:I wonder what they’d say about us.

We are not dealing with that Mickey Mouse outfit would be my guess

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:32 pm

IanMcL wrote:The failure to sign Jay Rodriguez is entirely the fault of the Chairman, who was responsible for the entire shambles, at a time when we were just a couple of million apart.

He has wrecked the entire season, when you add the Joe Hart signing, which has caused keeper/squad disruption.
We should point at him, not the manager.

To be fair you do not know whether that’s true or not. Seems a little unfair to be blaming an individual when you do not know what actually happened to cause the deal to fail or how far the clubs were apart.

Spijed · Post by **Spijed** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:43 pm

ClaretAndJew wrote:The date on that article reads 01/01/70 for me.

This article sums up what Leicester did. Easy when you don't have to pay off your debts:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footb ... ytale.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

CombatClaret · Post by **CombatClaret** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:49 pm

theroyaldyche wrote:Yes. Spend 100m on quality and make it back by staying up

Wev already proven a majorly championship side can finish 7th.

This idea we get 100million a season in TV money so can spend 100million solely on transfer fees is the new 350mil to the NHS Bus.
Its utter bl8ll8cks

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 5:50 pm

IanMcL wrote:The failure to sign Jay Rodriguez is entirely the fault of the Chairman, who was responsible for the entire shambles, at a time when we were just a couple of million apart.

He has wrecked the entire season, when you add the Joe Hart signing, which has caused keeper/squad disruption.
We should point at him, not the manager.

to a degree, but the Chairman doesn't make us play aimless hoofball

MRG · Post by **MRG** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:11 pm

CombatClaret wrote:This idea we get 100million a season in TV money so can spend 100million solely on transfer fees is the new 350mil to the NHS Bus.
Its utter bl8ll8cks

I think a lot of people are suggesting that we spend the £100m that we received for Keane and Andre

Hapag Lloyd · Post by **Hapag Lloyd** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:15 pm

MRG wrote:I think a lot of people are suggesting that we spend the £100m that we received for Keane and Andre

£100m ??

MRG · Post by **MRG** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:16 pm

Hapag Lloyd wrote:£100m ??

Remember we must include their wages

Long Time Lurker · Post by **Long Time Lurker** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:19 pm

IanMcL wrote:The failure to sign Jay Rodriguez is entirely the fault of the Chairman, who was responsible for the entire shambles, at a time when we were just a couple of million apart.

He has wrecked the entire season, when you add the Joe Hart signing, which has caused keeper/squad disruption.
We should point at him, not the manager.

I don't think not signing Jay is responsible for wrecking our season, because it ignores a lot of other factors. Like the impact of our European adventure and leaking goals like a sieve. The combination of those two things has played a greater part than a lack of goals scored. We aren't that far off what we were scoring last season.

The truth is that we walked away from paying £20m for a striker who is struggling to distance himself from Nahki who cost us £5.5m. Removing Jays 4 penalty goals, because they are soft goals and we don't get penalties, he has scored 1 goal every 252 minutes from open play.

Nahki has scored 1 goal every 255 minutes from open play, despite not being match sharp when he joined QPR and the fact that he has had to adjust to a new environment and a new team. It could also be argued that Jay has an easier time of it because he is surrounded by better players than Nahki.

Signing Jay would have made no difference to the position we are currently in. Had we signed him we would have simply paid an astronomical price for him that is far in excess of what he is realistically worth. If Garlick made the decision to walk away then he did well.

If the argument is that we should have walked away much earlier and chasing after Jay for so long, instead of switching to other targets, is the reason we had a bad transfer window you might be right. Hopefully we have learned our lesson from that mistake and we won't be repeating it in the next window.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:25 pm

CombatClaret wrote:This idea we get 100million a season in TV money so can spend 100million solely on transfer fees is the new 350mil to the NHS Bus.
Its utter bl8ll8cks

You're wrong on both accounts.

We could put an extra £350m into the NHS if the acting government so wished. Any other politicians for either side of Brexit couldn't.

We could spend £100m on one of the windows if we wished, especially as transfers are paid over a players contract (generally 3 to 4 years) but it would come with a risk.
The thing to do is buy players you could sell on if things didn't work out, I mean most players values have gone up, up and up.

PutTheWheelieBinsOut · Post by **PutTheWheelieBinsOut** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:32 pm

Garlick has bought shares from a number of directors to become the majority shareholder. If you buy shares from one person to another and the club are not directly involved in that transaction and/or don't gain a financial reward for it, is that really investment in the club?

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:36 pm

MRG wrote:I think a lot of people are suggesting that we spend the £100m that we received for Keane and Andre

surely, it's closer to £200 million now - with all the add-ons etc, etc, etc....

I love transfer window threads, all the same, all why don't "we" invest - "we" being the club's owners, not the club's fans.

Then at another time in the year we will have the "we don't need to expand t'Turf capacity. I'm OK, I've had my seat for X seasons....." thread...

UTC

Leisure · Post by **Leisure** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:39 pm

IanMcL wrote:The failure to sign Jay Rodriguez is entirely the fault of the Chairman, who was responsible for the entire shambles, at a time when we were just a couple of million apart.

He has wrecked the entire season, when you add the Joe Hart signing, which has caused keeper/squad disruption.
We should point at him, not the manager.

Not sure how Jay would have prevented us conceeding goals for fun!

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:40 pm

PutTheWheelieBinsOut wrote:Garlick has bought shares from a number of directors to become the majority shareholder. If you buy shares from one person to another and the club are not directly involved in that transaction and/or don't gain a financial reward for it, is that really investment in the club?

No, share transfers are not investments in the club, just change in ownership.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 7:59 pm

TsarBomba wrote:You are using examples of clubs that got into financial difficulty nigh on twenty years ago. Portsmouth getting on for 10 years.

No one is suggesting we go out and spend hundreds of millions. But there’s a middle ground between being overly cautious and betting the ranch, which you are failing to grasp.

Edit- we have been having this argument on here for the majority, if not all of, Dyche’s tenure. This isn’t just one poor window we’re talking about. There has been a consistent approach by the Board not to spend.

Sunderland, in the last couple of years then if that helps.
Bolton still struggling/circling the drain.
Rovers reliant on Venkys money or they'd be down the drain by now.

Portsmouth are still in league 2 aren't they??
It took Leeds a bloody long time to recover financially and even now I'm not convinced they're ok without someone else's cash to keep them ticking over.

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:04 pm

MRG wrote:Remember we must include their wages

We don't recoup their wages though.
We got £40-50 million for the pair.

Wages have to be taken into consideration for incoming transfers in the main.
You can take into account players who've gone out, but it's hard enough getting people on here to think about wages for incoming players, nevermind balancing the wage bill with those leaving.

MRG · Post by **MRG** » Fri Dec 28, 2018 8:10 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:We don't recoup their wages though.
We got £40-50 million for the pair.

Wages have to be taken into consideration for incoming transfers in the main.
You can take into account players who've gone out, but it's hard enough getting people on here to think about wages for incoming players, nevermind balancing the wage bill with those leaving.

But there are wages that we are no longer paying. We can’t have it both ways.