BFC TRANSFER NEWS (MUST CONTAIN LINK)

Reecey1987 · Post by **Reecey1987** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:09 pm

Mattster wrote:When they can't even get his position right I'm not sure I'd take their word on it.

Never heard of him if im being honest .

Mattster · Post by **Mattster** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:30 pm

Reecey1987 wrote:Never heard of him if im being honest .

He's a striker, not a winger. Good goalscoring record last season, definitely has the physical attributes to play in the Premiership but would be a real step up in terms of the defences he'd be up against.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 5:59 pm

Why this transfer window will be challenging:

from Sunday Times:
The rules making it easier to spend

● From midnight, a tweak to Premier League Financial Fair Play rules takes effect — increasing the scope for clubs to buy players. Since 2013, clubs have been limited by Short Term Cost Control (STCC) regulations that meant any 12-month increase in player wages of above £7m had to be funded by new commercial deals.

● The Premier League’s next three-year financial window begins tomorrow, with STCC removed - leaving clubs having to merely adhere to existing FFP strictures by which they must limit any losses to £105m over three years. A summer transfer splurge is now possible without having to worry about a short-term revenue uplift to cover it.

So, on one side, Burnley can now increase player wages by more than £7m a season - and, so can all other clubs.

But, how many of us would be comfortable if Burnley were to run up losses of £105m over 3 years?

And, how many other clubs in the "lower 14" of the Premier League do we expect to also maintain a long term view of their clubs finances?

EDIT: Yes, I know we also have the "Magic Money Tree" thread. I'm not sure how many posting about transfers and the "market" in this transfer window have made the connections - even though football now seems to be throwing even higher player valuations around.

UTC

rob63 · Post by **rob63** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:13 pm

burnley007 wrote:It's written as fact. But it's speculation. How does this happen all the time??

It's the same publication that said we were close to signing Harold Moukoudi from Le Havre last year...... he's just gone on a free to St Etienne so we couldn't be that interested. Salt & pinch maybe?

rob63 · Post by **rob63** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:19 pm

Mattster wrote:He's a striker, not a winger. Good goalscoring record last season, definitely has the physical attributes to play in the Premiership but would be a real step up in terms of the defences he'd be up against.

Quite right, he's a left-sided striker when I've seen him, but knows where the goal is.
He might be a good acquisition & was talked about as a target for English clubs last year but there were rumoured visa problems if I recall. Might have been resolved by now tho......

Long Time Lurker · Post by **Long Time Lurker** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:42 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Why this transfer window will be challenging

Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

WestMidsClaret · Post by **WestMidsClaret** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 7:44 pm

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 9:57 pm

Long Time Lurker wrote:Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

Some interesting points, Long Time. I see some things a little differently. The changes to FFP mean clubs can now have a loss of £100 (or whatever the figure) over 3 seasons - and no longer have the restraint on player wages increase season-to-season. Of course, player wages plus new transfer spend are both part of a club's financial results. I believe some are gambling their futures spending money that they may never have - football isn't a sport where "everyone can win prizes." I'm talking about the "bottom 14" (bar the few of these that have extremely generous owners). This extra money is being gambled on higher transfer fees - and probably higher wages for the new players. It is possible that "the market" now is way ahead of where the market was last summer - and in the Jan transfer window. OK, I get the selling club asking for as much as they can get - but, it seems as though some of the buying clubs are also willing to pay. I've got my doubts about the medium/long-term ability of any club to sell their "best" players for today's transfer fees and be able to find ready replacements that don't either, weaken their team - and thus head for relegation - or can only replace by spending all of the transfer fee(s) they rec'd plus additional wages. Thus the transfer out doesn't create the funds to extend financial soundness. I also feel that there isn't an "escape" by buying overseas. There's no logic why all the European clubs aren't fully aware of the deals being done in the Premier League, or by Juventus, PSG, Barca, Real Madrid and more.

I love the idea of 7 loos. Why 7? Is this the number of loos we'd expect in a Premier League footballer's "mansion?" or, is it 4 or 5 in the main house and the others in a guest annexe or the "servants quarters."

Long Time Lurker · Post by **Long Time Lurker** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:31 pm

Paul Waine wrote: I love the idea of 7 loos. Why 7?

1 for each of the cardinal directions ( N,S,E and W ) and three of the inter cardinal directions. It has something to do with Feng Shui and the potential for bad smells blowing back depending on the wind direction.

Thats why you should stop at 7, leaving one direction free for fresh air to circulate.

If you push it to 8 you open up a world of problems.

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Sun Jun 30, 2019 11:25 pm

Long Time Lurker wrote:Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

I'll be honest, I didn't read any of that.

triadclaret · Post by **triadclaret** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:23 am

I'll be honest BEST most thought out post EVER on this site Thank you LongTimeLucker.. everybody read and quit with trying to show how effing smart you are

UpTheClaretsFCBK · Post by **UpTheClaretsFCBK** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:43 am

Our tactics are clear. Keep a small group of players that are reasonably good quality, but more likely higher end Championship players and bank on three big spending clubs not doing the business each season. It’s worked so far.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 2:01 am

Long Time Lurker wrote:Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

I know I need my glasses, pipe, slippers and a glass of wine to read your posts but you are spot on here, top post !

jojomk1 · Post by **jojomk1** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 7:35 am

Long Time Lurker wrote:Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

So, have we signed anyone yet ?

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 8:20 am

The gulf between the top clubs and the rest has been massive for a long time now.
Yes the absolute value may be a lot bigger now - ie several hundred million difference but the multiple of the top clubs generating revenue of x or y percentage more than the other clubs has been there for a long time.

Of course as our revenue has gone up our wage bill has increased significantly....but we have still recorded a number of years of good bottom line profit. We have generated more profit in the last 5 or 6 years than the rest of our entire history put together...and we have invested some of these profits into the infrastructure and facilities of the club which will leave a legacy for decades. As a club we also employ more local people than we have ever done before - another important bi product of the money / recent success. We have also had positive recognition around the world for what we have done. It’s all been good - and whilst their are aspects of the Premier League and all the money in football we all dislike a lot on the whole I find it hard to believe that the last decade hasn’t been anything other than one of the best / most positive periods for our football club and our town.

As for the point about championship clubs yes the likes of Wolves, Villa etc have been promoted with big benefactors. And I know lots of other clubs are owned by very rich people - but Burnley got promoted spending little money and other clubs have achieved this too. Cardiff had a team on paper that should have been relegated from the championship never mind promoted - look at where they got the likes of Hoilett, Mendez-Laing etc. Norwich and Sheff United have both had to sell their best players and both got promoted with very little spend on their teams....to be fair to Leeds they again had to sell their best players (Wood, Taylor, Lewis Cook, etc) and spent only a fraction of this on new players (until they bought Bamford).
The top 6 clubs will always dwarf everyone else. But there has been around 45 other teams who have spent time in the Premier League. I never thought we would be one of them to be honest - to spend as long as we have in the league and get to watch the players we have been able to for Burnley and the opposition teams has been pretty special.

Bullabill · Post by **Bullabill** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:52 am

Reecey1987 » Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:31 pm .........
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/foo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... ssion=true

What? Samatta?

Reecey1987 · Post by **Reecey1987** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:53 am

Bullabill wrote:Reecey1987 » Sun Jun 30, 2019 10:31 pm .........
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/foo" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... ssion=true

What? Samatta?

Looks like the links been removed but yes it was him

Bertiebeehead · Post by **Bertiebeehead** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:55 am

Long Time Lurker wrote:Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

Care to elaborate?

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:39 am

Long Time Lurker wrote:The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

I'd agree with that, the big clubs are already pushing for (and to an extent have got) an ever greater share of TV momney.

Long Time Lurker wrote:When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

This isn't the case though. There may be an occasional club once every few seasons that has been relegated and is gambling on going up again (e.g. Newcastle with their £100m+ wage bill in the Championship) but we can pretty much outspend anyone in the Championship without even straining ourselves.

Fees for players are going up as the Premier League clubs, even lower down the table are getting more money than ever before. Most clubs can break even with ~ £100m wage bills and not much in the way of player trading so they're a lot less desperate for money than they used to be which means they don't have the same need to sell as in times gone by, with the reaction that prices are put up.

This has trickled down into the championship in that the view is that "if X is worth £50m then Y must be worth £25m" but, in the main, they don't have the financial backing to enforce that so I think most will struggle to hold out for such high fees in the long term.

Quickenthetempo · Post by **Quickenthetempo** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 12:34 pm

Che Adams officially signed for Southampton so we can put that one to bed.

rob63 · Post by **rob63** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 3:34 pm

Long Time Lurker wrote:Reasonable point and the follow on applies.

The gap between the richest clubs and the poorest is widening at a ridiculous rate, but I doubt it will stop the rich clubs demanding an even greater slice of the financial pie until the whole system comes crashing down. Revolution is usually what happens when the divide between the rich and the poor becomes too excessive for the greater majority of people to tolerate.

There is a mistaken notion that every club in the Premier League is tripping over the mountain of money bags they have amassed and their only problem is what to spend it on. I think we all know that only applies to the top six and a couple of the other larger clubs.

When you take into account our increased wage bill and the cost of required improvements to our infrastructure we are probably no richer than the most affluent Championship clubs.

Starved of income the majority of the Championships and those below are fighting a losing battle for survival, with little hope of making it to the top table unless a wealthy benefactor steps in to provide them with an unfair leg up.

The only thing that could make a big difference to the fortunes of a lot of clubs is player transfers. If they can sell a player for multi millions it could set them up for a few years, allow them to bring in better players and/or restock their development ranks with the aim of repeating their windfall.

In the past these clubs have had to watch as the players they've sold have gone on to be successful for the buying clubs, which has been accompnied by a startling rise in value. Granted, they've received their small percentages, and some players have failed to live up to expectations, but in a lot of cases the buying clubs have earned far more from the trade.

I think in this window the prices clubs beneath us on the financial ladder are asking for their players has suddenly sky rocketed. The prices being quoted don't just reflect a premium for a player who has just had a successful season in a lower league, they seem more in tune with what might be expected for a player who has stepped up to the Premiership and already experienced a good first season.

It isn't an all out revolution, but it does have the hallmarks of " if you want him then we are going to try and squeeze every last penny out of you". We need it and you can afford to pay it so cough up and be quick about it. The sterile academic theories like quantitative easing with their trickle-down effect idealism never work, because they don't factor in the unquantifiable nature of human greed.

If a person has seven toilets, when they can only crap in one at once, it isn't a foregone conclusion that they will be happy and content. In a lot of cases they will want even more toilets or they will want to gold plate all of their toilets.

Striving for more is good, but there should come a point when a person or company realises that they have enough to live a comfortable existence. Without that the striving becomes a sickness with negative connotations for everyone. In the case of football that could mean clubs going to the wall, teams buying their way to success, leagues collapsing, competition decreasing and everyone associated with the game suffering in one way or another.

So while I think the prices being asked for players by the less affluent clubs are ridiculous I can't help but feel supportive for their financial "rage against the machine". The rich clubs currently have too much and the poorer clubs have far too little. It is unfair and very hurtful to the state of football in our country.

It's a very big mess and if we based our projected player costs on the basis of the prices evident last season, when we put together our target list for this season, then we could be as much as 50% out in relation to our spending estimations.

This was all very predictable and one of the reasons that we should have had an oversees target list for this window. If we formed a target list based on the best domestic players available in relation to our maximum spend, instead of working to a lesser figure with plenty of head room for prices rises, we might have just wasted six months of time and effort.

Even if we weren't so foolish the higher prices could slow down the market during this window as the first one to blink game of chicken with the Championship clubs plays out. If a player is on a long contract it won't hurt a selling club to hold out for an astronomical price. The worst that could happen is that they don't sell immediately, the player is a bit grumpy, or they have them for another season. Naturally, it is an entirely different story if a player is in the last year of their contract, because the selling club is running the risk of ending up with nothing.

It's not only the Championship clubs that are getting cute with their transfer fees though, foreign clubs have hiked their prices too, seeing the Premiership as a pot of gold. French, Belgian & Dutch clubs now ask more for their players if they're selling to English & German clubs and Spanish & Portuguese clubs have developed a habit of inserting a prohibitive buy-out clause into players contracts when they renew..... a sort of make-an-offer-if-you-dare!
I fear the time of cheap deals is past in Western Europe now & the only value for money deals will be in youth players or in Eastern Europe, which both carry an increased risk of failure in the white heat of the Premier League.

Longsider · Post by **Longsider** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 6:57 pm

Lucas Ocampos
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2019/07/01/b ... s-ocampos/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dougcollins · Post by **dougcollins** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 9:58 pm

'Lucas Ocampos'

clap clap clap clap clap

LawsCanalJump · Post by **LawsCanalJump** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 10:16 pm

Ocampos would be a great signing
Step up in quality and cheap! I'd get it done quick

rob63 · Post by **rob63** » Mon Jul 01, 2019 11:57 pm

Longsider wrote:Lucas Ocampos
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2019/07/01/b ... s-ocampos/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Good player, Marseilles must be really struggling for cash........

AshevilleNCClaret · Post by **AshevilleNCClaret** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 2:04 am

UpTheClaretsFCBK wrote:Our tactics are clear. Keep a small group of players that are reasonably good quality, but more likely higher end Championship players and bank on three big spending clubs not doing the business each season. It’s worked so far.

+1....Winner winner chicken dinner.
You would think this plan would fail but it might work out for us again next year.
Palace losing bissaka and probably zaha.
Newcastle losing benitez.
Bha firing houghton.
Southhampton is doing the slow circle down the toilet bowl of relegation.
All 3 promoted teams will struggle.

can we bank on this every year? No but other teams are certainly making our job easier.

kaptin1 · Post by **kaptin1** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:34 am

Longsider wrote:Lucas Ocampos
https://www.hitc.com/en-gb/2019/07/01/b ... s-ocampos/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hip Hip ...

Grumps · Post by **Grumps** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 7:06 am

LawsCanalJump wrote:Ocampos would be a great signing
Step up in quality and cheap! I'd get it done quick

He's going to seville

Reecey1987 · Post by **Reecey1987** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 3:47 pm

Peter Crouch receives lucrative offer from China to continue playing career | @johncrossmirror https://t.co/XXN9Ak8fMq" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:15 pm

Reecey1987 wrote:Peter Crouch receives lucrative offer from China to continue playing career | @johncrossmirror https://t.co/XXN9Ak8fMq" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

At last some good news.

dermotdermot · Post by **dermotdermot** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:25 pm

summitclaret wrote:At last some good news.

Not all good. The article also states that we are keen to offer him a one year contract. God forbid!

randomclaret2 · Post by **randomclaret2** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:25 pm

" Burnley are keen to sign Crouch on a one year contract "

Turfytop · Post by **Turfytop** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:29 pm

Anyone else heard Phil jagielka set to sign

summitclaret · Post by **summitclaret** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:32 pm

Turfytop wrote:Anyone else heard Phil jagielka set to sign

No but would not surprise me of him or Cahill did or Phil Jones and Gibson left. Here's hoping Tarks is staying.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:32 pm

Crouch
Jagielka

Lets go for the hat trick and get Compo in from Last of the Summer Wine.

TVC15 · Post by **TVC15** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:33 pm

summitclaret wrote:No but would not surprise me of him or Cahill did or Phil Jones and Gibson left. Here's hoping Tarks is staying.

United gave Phil Jones a new contract
Yes...I know - wow !!

elwaclaret · Post by **elwaclaret** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:37 pm

TVC15 wrote:United gave Phil Jones a new contract
Yes...I know - wow !!

Now that does surprise me

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:40 pm

Turfytop wrote:Anyone else heard Phil jagielka set to sign

Only a couple of Twitter mentions with one saying he'll be signing tomorrow.

rob63 · Post by **rob63** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:41 pm

TVC15 wrote:United gave Phil Jones a new contract
Yes...I know - wow !!

I wonder how much he'll be paying them?

Hedontplayforyou · Post by **Hedontplayforyou** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 4:47 pm

Step backwards if we sign Jagielka and sell Gibson. For me Gibson has to stay for the club to move forward, it will only take one injury or suspension or some bad form to enable him to get in the side and as we know if you hold your own you tend not to leave that position for the foreseeable ! Ben Mee had a bad start to the season along with the side as a whole, we can’t afford that kind of start again this time round.

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:06 pm

Crikey not, Jagielka he is 37 next month, Cahill a spring chicken by comparison at 33.5 years of age

Blackrod · Post by **Blackrod** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:13 pm

Maybe this is the annual past it but good bants for the lads in the dressing room signing. Not sure who is more athletic out of him and Crouch.

Longsider · Post by **Longsider** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:14 pm

Wells. Not a transfer link but just his thoughts.

http://mobile.royalgazette.com/soccer/a ... =mobileart" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Longside4evr · Post by **Longside4evr** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:30 pm

Can't understand this obsession with central defence it's our strongest area
Left back is where we need to shore up
Unless there's been on going negotiations of one of our players definitely leaving.
But Jagielka isn't the answer we need to be bring young blood in not relics

nyclaret · Post by **nyclaret** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:33 pm

Imagine the scenes when we lose Tarks and Gibson and replace one with Jagielka.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 5:42 pm

Paul Waine wrote: " I'm talking about the "bottom 14"

I love the idea of 7 loos. Why 7?

You need a minimum of 7, as the top 6 loos are always occupied by the same 6.

7th is the first chance of getting the odd use.

However, if you wish to cater for the 'bottom 14', then more loos would be needed.

The current ideal number is 17 loos for 20 users.
Once occupied, one can pull the chain and let the 3 drop!

Steddyman · Post by **Steddyman** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:07 pm

Wait, so Marseille need to sell their highest earning players due to not making the Champions League and the natural club to link him too is Burnley? Somebody's having a laugh.

Long Time Lurker · Post by **Long Time Lurker** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 6:25 pm

Forget Jagielka, it's time to get Timmy on the line before another team gazumps us

Not sure how his Mallet will go down with Var though.

SGr · Post by **SGr** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:04 pm

Jagielka would be an awful signing.

Surely that’s the end of the debate?

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Tue Jul 02, 2019 10:41 pm

I'm just wondering, are we signing Jagielka as a player or are we lining up our next "ex-centre-half manager?"