This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
-
jedi_master
- Posts: 7172
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3603 times
- Has Liked: 1032 times
- Location: Chesterfield
Post
by jedi_master » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:10 am
ClaretAndJew wrote:If we're replacing one of our starting eleven with a loan player we should be looking at replacing them with someone permanently.
Astronomical wages will surely create some issues amongst the other senior players. Can't see this happening myself.
If he came on a 3 year deal on 45k a week then yes. But as it is, I feel his wages are just too much.
I get the desire for a permanent player, but I find our time in the Premier League dictates we have to approach things season-to-season.
We cannot push the boat out without gigantic relegation wage reductions in place, which is clearly resulting in us massively struggling to attract the players we want (or at least contributing to it). I think getting someone in like Drinkwater for a year initially (who knows, maybe next summer we could get him on loan for another year) knowing that it won't cripple us if we go down gives both the club and the player the security and protection to be happy to do the deal.
Realistically it's the only way we could ever sign someone of his ability who is currently contracted to Chelsea.
-
agreenwood
- Posts: 3169
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:22 pm
- Been Liked: 1749 times
- Has Liked: 273 times
Post
by agreenwood » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:14 am
It’ll come down to how much Drinkwater wants to leave Chelsea. If he does, a loan deal/wage agreement could be struck.
If he’s happy to pick up his huge wages in their stiffs, he’ll go nowhere. He wouldn’t be the first footballer to take the money over playing time.
-
Lord Beamish
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 2881 times
Post
by Lord Beamish » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:15 am
I really hope there’s some good Youth Players coming through, soon. It’s quite evident that we just cannot compete in the Transfer Market.
This user liked this post: Somethingfishy
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:16 am
jedi_master wrote:I get the desire for a permanent player, but I find our time in the Premier League dictates we have to approach things season-to-season.
We cannot push the boat out without gigantic relegation wage reductions in place, which is clearly resulting in us massively struggling to attract the players we want (or at least contributing to it). I think getting someone in like Drinkwater for a year initially (who knows, maybe next summer we could get him on loan for another year) knowing that it won't cripple us if we go down gives both the club and the player the security and protection to be happy to do the deal.
Realistically it's the only way we could ever sign someone of his ability who is currently contracted to Chelsea.
Of course, and it's a strategy which makes sense, however, what it does do is potentially create a rift among the permanent squad who may think "if he's getting this why aren't i?" I'm sure Dyche et al will do their best to ensure this doesn't happen, but it's still a worry.
I also feel that a loan player on big wages every year (or so) without adequately strengthening the squad could potentially disrupt the apparent unity we have in the camp. All in it together etc, whilst the highest paid player isn't really interested because he isn't "part of the group".
Though I'd hope whoever comes in will believe in the cause as much as the rest of the lads.
-
AndyClaret
- Posts: 1349
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
- Been Liked: 217 times
- Has Liked: 543 times
Post
by AndyClaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:16 am
agreenwood wrote:It’ll come down to how much Drinkwater wants to leave Chelsea. If he does, a loan deal/wage agreement could be struck.
If he’s happy to pick up his huge wages in their stiffs, he’ll go nowhere. He wouldn’t be the first footballer to take the money over playing time.
If he's going on loan then his money won't change.
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 681 times
Post
by Royboyclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:19 am
Lord Beamish wrote:I really hope there’s some good Youth Players coming through, soon. It’s quite evident that we just cannot compete in the Transfer Market.
That's not accurate. We can now financially compete, it's just that we choose not to.
These 2 users liked this post: cockneyclaret Right_winger
-
Lord Beamish
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 2881 times
Post
by Lord Beamish » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:22 am
Royboyclaret wrote:That's not accurate. We can now financially compete, it's just that we choose not to.
A circle has no beginning; we choose not to because we are unable.
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 681 times
Post
by Royboyclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:28 am
Lord Beamish wrote:A circle has no beginning; we choose not to because we are unable.
Not the case at all.
We continue to show a preference for building cash reserves over investing in the squad. The current levels of Cash in Hand indicates such a policy is no longer necessary and priority should be diverted to team building.
This user liked this post: cockneyclaret
-
Steddyman
- Posts: 2405
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 3:45 pm
- Been Liked: 624 times
- Has Liked: 491 times
Post
by Steddyman » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:29 am
Nixon has this to say about Drinkwater to Burnley. Doesn’t sound likely to me as we will be asking to take him on reduced wages.
“Chelsea want to move out Drinkwater. On loan. He is on monster money. If they take less at the death he may have a few choices.”
-
SGr
- Posts: 4413
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:46 pm
- Been Liked: 1022 times
- Has Liked: 307 times
Post
by SGr » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:30 am
Steddyman wrote:Nixon has this to say about Drinkwater to Burnley. Doesn’t sound likely to me as we will be asking to take him on reduced wages.
“Chelsea want to move out Drinkwater. On loan. He is on monster money. If they take less at the death he may have a few choices.”
I know what that means.
“Breaking! Newcastle United are delighted to announce the signing of Chelsea midfielder Danny Drinkwater on loan for the season. More to follow.”
This user liked this post: rob63
-
Lord Beamish
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 2881 times
Post
by Lord Beamish » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:33 am
Royboyclaret wrote:Not the case at all.
We continue to show a preference for building cash reserves over investing in the squad. The current levels of Cash in Hand indicates such a policy is no longer necessary and priority should be diverted to team building.
We have pots of cash but can’t get deals over the line because of our wage structure. Whichever end is up, however you look at it, we can’t compete in the Transfer Market. Saying we choose not to is making a virtue of a neccesity.
-
Woodleyclaret
- Posts: 6969
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:25 pm
- Been Liked: 1489 times
- Has Liked: 1848 times
Post
by Woodleyclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:37 am
We dodged a bullet with Drinkwater
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 681 times
Post
by Royboyclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:38 am
Lord Beamish wrote:We have pots of cash but can’t get deals over the line because of our wage structure. Whichever end is up, however you look at it, we can’t compete in the Transfer Market. Saying we choose not to is making a virtue of a neccesity.
To avoid repetition, see post #3631.
-
Spijed
- Posts: 17124
- Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2016 12:33 pm
- Been Liked: 2895 times
- Has Liked: 1294 times
Post
by Spijed » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:42 am
Royboyclaret wrote:To avoid repetition, see post #3631.
But even though we can pay transfer fees can we afford to pay the wages as well?
-
Lord Beamish
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 2881 times
Post
by Lord Beamish » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:44 am
Royboyclaret wrote:To avoid repetition, see post #3631.
It still amounts to the same thing. We desperately need strengthening in Midfield, but can’t get a deal over the line. Ergo; we can’t compete in the Transfer Market. If we could, we’d have done it.
-
AndyClaret
- Posts: 1349
- Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2019 2:08 pm
- Been Liked: 217 times
- Has Liked: 543 times
Post
by AndyClaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:45 am
Spijed wrote:But even though we can pay transfer fees can we afford to pay the wages as well?
Depends how you structure the deal, a new signing could come in near the top earners on wages, but with a huge signing on fee.
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 681 times
Post
by Royboyclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:46 am
Spijed wrote:But even though we can pay transfer fees can we afford to pay the wages as well?
Spijed.....it's all there in #3631 & #3633.
-
wilks_bfc
- Posts: 11526
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3188 times
- Has Liked: 1869 times
-
Contact:
Post
by wilks_bfc » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:46 am
We've gone from page 74 to 82 on here in last 24hrs
Before I attempt to read them all, has there been any real links or is it all waffle?
-
jedi_master
- Posts: 7172
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:33 pm
- Been Liked: 3603 times
- Has Liked: 1032 times
- Location: Chesterfield
Post
by jedi_master » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:48 am
wilks_bfc wrote:We've gone from page 74 to 82 on here in last 24hrs
Before I attempt to read them all, has there been any real links or is it all waffle?
I can confirm that at least two pages were nothing but a rather heated conversation between me and about 5 others on the prospects of re-signing David Jones, and should be avoided at all costs.
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:48 am
wilks_bfc wrote:We've gone from page 74 to 82 on here in last 24hrs
Before I attempt to read them all, has there been any real links or is it all waffle?
Linked to Drinkwater on loan from Chelsea. He's on 110k per week. It's basically nonsense.
-
claretblue
- Posts: 6418
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 3:36 pm
- Been Liked: 1835 times
- Has Liked: 962 times
- Location: cloud 9 since Dyche appointed
Post
by claretblue » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:53 am
jedi_master wrote:should be avoided at all costs.
David Jones or you jedi?
This user liked this post: jedi_master
-
Steve-Harpers-perm
- Posts: 5792
- Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:52 am
- Been Liked: 1884 times
- Has Liked: 841 times
Post
by Steve-Harpers-perm » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:54 am
ClaretAndJew wrote:Linked to Drinkwater on loan from Chelsea. He's on 110k per week. It's basically nonsense.
What was Joe Hart on at City when we signed him last summer?
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:55 am
Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:What was Joe Hart on at City when we signed him last summer?
13.5 billion per day.
This user liked this post: ksrclaret
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:56 am
Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:What was Joe Hart on at City when we signed him last summer?
To be serious I don't know, but Google suggests that in 2016 he was on 7 million a year which is about 130k per week.
Makes you wonder what we're actually paying him to sit on the bench.
-
williamjblazkowicz
- Posts: 380
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2019 6:21 pm
- Been Liked: 176 times
- Has Liked: 8 times
Post
by williamjblazkowicz » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:58 am
ClaretAndJew wrote:13.5 billion per day.
How many Twixes is that?
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:58 am
williamjblazkowicz wrote:How many Twixes is that?
In this economy it's hard to say but I'd estimate approximately 1.5.
This user liked this post: longsidepies
-
Firthy
- Posts: 4983
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
- Been Liked: 1613 times
- Has Liked: 277 times
Post
by Firthy » Wed Aug 07, 2019 10:59 am
So what happened to £150m value of promotion to the Premier League? We've reduced our wage bill, Spent a total of £6.5m without taking into account any fee for Vokes, had a profit of over £30m at the last audit and yet we still can't afford a midfielder even as back up. Surely Burnley aren't that unattractive that nobody wants to come here.
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:00 am
Firthy wrote:So what happened to £150m value of promotion to the Premier League? We've reduced our wage bill, Spent a total of £6.5m without taking into account any fee for Vokes, had a profit of over £30m at the last audit and yet we still can't afford a midfielder even as back up. Surely Burnley aren't that unattractive that nobody wants to come here.
Staying in the PL is worth 100 million per year, we've literally had half a billion in income in 10 years. We're skint.
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:05 am
This was our income last year. For ONE season. This is now our fourth consecutive season, with us finishing even last this year will net us basically £100 million.
£400 million income. Not bad is it?
Last edited by
ClaretAndJew on Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
elwaclaret
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2011 times
- Has Liked: 2910 times
Post
by elwaclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:05 am
Firthy wrote: yet we still can't afford a midfielder even as back up.
Who, rather who that actually knows say So?
-
summitclaret
- Posts: 3922
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
- Been Liked: 834 times
- Has Liked: 1330 times
- Location: burnley
Post
by summitclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:05 am
Firthy wrote:So what happened to £150m value of promotion to the Premier League? We've reduced our wage bill, Spent a total of £6.5m without taking into account any fee for Vokes, had a profit of over £30m at the last audit and yet we still can't afford a midfielder even as back up. Surely Burnley aren't that unattractive that nobody wants to come here.
We will know in about 30 hrs. Currently looking bleak. Keeping Tarks may be the best we can hope for. You never know, but the continued presence of Jonah is a concern.
-
Rick_Muller
- Posts: 6138
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:53 am
- Been Liked: 2634 times
- Has Liked: 6458 times
- Location: -90.000000, 0.000000
Post
by Rick_Muller » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:08 am
ClaretAndJew wrote:This was our income last year. For ONE season. This is now our fourth consecutive season, with us finishing even last this year will net us basically £100 million.
£400 million income. Not bad is it?
OK, thats great - do you know how much we SPENT during the past 4 seasons..? Players dont play for free; staff dont work for nowt; we dont get a free bus ticket to travel; etc etc etc...
-
Chuckypad
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:29 am
- Been Liked: 146 times
- Has Liked: 274 times
Post
by Chuckypad » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:08 am
elwaclaret wrote:Who, rather who that actually knows say So?
Eh?
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:09 am
Rick_Muller wrote:OK, thats great - do you know how much we SPENT during the past 4 seasons..? Players dont play for free; staff dont work for nowt; we dont get a free bus ticket to travel; etc etc etc...
That's right mate. So we must be spending £100 million per year which is a huge cost for a club like us.
Let's just put it in these terms. If we were GIVEN A GIFT of £400 million, it would only last 4 years??
Insanity.
-
elwaclaret
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2011 times
- Has Liked: 2910 times
Post
by elwaclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:12 am
Chuckypad wrote:Eh?
How do you know that we are not talking to the kind of midfielder hoping for a BIG move... if that is the case Burnley are unlikely to be first choice... so how do you know it’s that we are not offering big money for players not ready to commit?
Or are you just one of those that think the staff just sit on their hands all summer?
-
Rick_Muller
- Posts: 6138
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:53 am
- Been Liked: 2634 times
- Has Liked: 6458 times
- Location: -90.000000, 0.000000
Post
by Rick_Muller » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:13 am
ClaretAndJew wrote:That's right mate. So we must be spending £100 million per year which is a huge cost for a club like us.
Let's just put it in these terms. If we were GIVEN A GIFT of £400 million, it would only last 4 years??
Insanity.
In the Premier League - yes, thats about the going rate to fund a competitive team. If someone gifted us £400 million and we were League 2 it really wouldn't cost that to be competitive (I'd hope we'd do well and win it though!).
Our balance sheet is looking OK, we're cash rich, but NOT RICH. We can potentially buy players, but not necessarily fund them in terms of wages, it's really not that difficult to understand.
This user liked this post: BertiesBeehole
-
TheFamilyCat
- Posts: 10913
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
- Been Liked: 5560 times
- Has Liked: 208 times
Post
by TheFamilyCat » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:14 am
ClaretAndJew wrote:
Insanity.
You’ve just summed up modern football perfectly.
I’m not going to ask you how much you earn but do you spend every penny of your wage each month?
Would you expect any other business to spend exactly the same as it generates?
Last edited by
TheFamilyCat on Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Firthy
- Posts: 4983
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
- Been Liked: 1613 times
- Has Liked: 277 times
Post
by Firthy » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:14 am
elwaclaret wrote:Who, rather who that actually knows say So?
Well, that's the rhetoric from SD that we can't compete in the current market because of financial restraints. As much as I love Burnley and SD it's getting a bit tiresome now, hearing the same excuses about money being the problem. It's obvious and has been said a thousand times on here that we desperately need a midfielder with Defours fitness and injury problems, even SD has said as much. I really can't believe we'd risk our Premier League status by not signing anyone at all, even as back up. If either Cork or Westwood, or god forbid both get injured, then we might just see how much of a risk it is.
Last edited by
Firthy on Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
This user liked this post: summitclaret
-
ClaretAndJew
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 7:08 am
- Been Liked: 2819 times
- Has Liked: 503 times
- Location: Earth
Post
by ClaretAndJew » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:15 am
TheFamilyCat wrote:You’ve just summed up modern football perfectly.
I’m not going to ask you how much you earn but do you spend every penny of your wage each month?
Would you expect any other business to spend exactly the same as it generates?
It's a fair point. It's just insane seeing those figures.
Kilby must have been living in cuckoo land when he thought the 09/10 seasons money would set us up for 10 years.
-
BOYSIE31
- Posts: 2357
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:46 pm
- Been Liked: 264 times
- Has Liked: 1112 times
Post
by BOYSIE31 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:16 am
Lord Beamish wrote:A circle has no beginning; we choose not to because we are unable.
Thats why the premier league teams are given 120 million a season
-
Lord Beamish
- Posts: 5001
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 4:00 pm
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 2881 times
Post
by Lord Beamish » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:17 am
BOYSIE31 wrote:Thats why the premier league teams are given 120 million a season
And most of them have rich investors, too.
-
ClaretTony
- Posts: 67869
- Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2015 3:07 pm
- Been Liked: 32529 times
- Has Liked: 5276 times
- Location: Burnley
-
Contact:
Post
by ClaretTony » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:20 am
Lord Beamish wrote:I really hope there’s some good Youth Players coming through, soon. It’s quite evident that we just cannot compete in the Transfer Market.
Which is why we are really prioritising in that area. Unfortunately it is far from an exact science but if you can get some players through it is massively beneficial.
-
claretspice
- Posts: 5726
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:13 am
- Been Liked: 2833 times
- Has Liked: 141 times
Post
by claretspice » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:22 am
Let's say you worked in sales, with a relatively low basic salary topped up by commissions, and you had a period in which those commissions went through the roof for reasons that you could only partially control - and you knew that as a result, while it was nice while it lasted, those commissions were probably unsustainable in the long term.
In the short term, you'd have the money to really enjoy yourself. But would you set up your lifestyle so that your fixed outgoings - mortgage, car credit, etc. - all assumed that those commissions would continue to be unusually generous indefinitely?
That's the paradox we have now. Of course, we have money to spend. But our problem is spending it in a way that doesn't mean we have a major black hole in our finances if we go down.
However, I still think we'll strengthen before tomorrow night.
These 3 users liked this post: Dougall BertiesBeehole LeadBelly
-
ClaretAL
- Posts: 2573
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 7:39 pm
- Been Liked: 1045 times
- Has Liked: 819 times
Post
by ClaretAL » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:23 am
And there lies the basic economics of the struggle a club of our size has to contend with, and why Dyche states all the time we have to operate in a different circle and cut our cloth accordingly. To keep eating at the top table while wearing rags, to ensure you can pay the bill is massive testament to the way our club is run.
What concerns me more is the wages seen in the premiership are now being seen in the Championship, and while all think its fantastic that players go for 80M =and wages of 500k per week, all it does it lets the agents bump up the rest of the players wages in accordance with the "going" rate. I believe we are at the tipping point of the football bubble bursting as can be seen at Bolton and Bury. Those who have a massive fan base and can afford to pump a massive am mount of external money in to the club will create the divide and until something is done about it, the league top to bottom will not longer be about everyone plays for points it will be the privileged will rise to the top so league tables of who has the richest owners, as others will not be able to afford the wages of the players required.
This user liked this post: rob63
-
martin_p
- Posts: 10379
- Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
- Been Liked: 3767 times
- Has Liked: 696 times
Post
by martin_p » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:25 am
claretspice wrote:Let's say you worked in sales, with a relatively low basic salary topped up by commissions, and you had a period in which those commissions went through the roof for reasons that you could only partially control - and you knew that as a result, while it was nice while it lasted, those commissions were probably unsustainable in the long term.
In the short term, you'd have the money to really enjoy yourself. But would you set up your lifestyle so that your fixed outgoings - mortgage, car credit, etc. - all assumed that those commissions would continue to be unusually generous indefinitely?
That's the paradox we have now. Of course, we have money to spend. But our problem is spending it in a way that doesn't mean we have a major black hole in our finances if we go down.
However, I still think we'll strengthen before tomorrow night.
Exactly. If some people get their way the ‘ten years behind Bolton’ may turn out to be prophetic.
These 2 users liked this post: LeadBelly rob63
-
elwaclaret
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:57 am
- Been Liked: 2011 times
- Has Liked: 2910 times
Post
by elwaclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:25 am
Firthy wrote:Well, that's the rhetoric from SD that we can't compete in the current market because of financial restraints. As much as I love Burnley and SD it's getting a bit tiresome now, hearing the same excuses about money being the problem. It's obvious and has been said a thousand times on here that we desperately need a midfielder with Defours fitness and injury problems, even SD has said as much. I really can't believe we'd risk our Premier League status by not signing anyone at all, even as back up. If either Cork or Westwood, or god forbid both get injured, then we might just see how much of a risk it is.
What SD says to the media and what is happening are not necessarily the same as reality. So you would sign a “squad player” before knowing you aren’t going to get the cream you want?
Look at the uproar about David Jones.... he could be a squad player, by your parameters we should just sign him up?
We have no idea who might be at the club by the close of the window. We have know idea of what is going to happen. People assume based on previous seasons, this isn’t previous seasons.... so we just don’t know.
-
joey13
- Posts: 7506
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:39 pm
- Been Liked: 1767 times
- Has Liked: 1230 times
Post
by joey13 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:26 am
Lord Beamish wrote:I really hope there’s some good Youth Players coming through, soon. It’s quite evident that we just cannot compete in the Transfer Market.
Shouldn’t that read Won’t complete in the Transfer Market
This user liked this post: BOYSIE31
-
BOYSIE31
- Posts: 2357
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:46 pm
- Been Liked: 264 times
- Has Liked: 1112 times
Post
by BOYSIE31 » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:28 am
Rick_Muller wrote:OK, thats great - do you know how much we SPENT during the past 4 seasons..? Players dont play for free; staff dont work for nowt; we dont get a free bus ticket to travel; etc etc etc...
And look into what we have recouped please as well
-
Chuckypad
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:29 am
- Been Liked: 146 times
- Has Liked: 274 times
Post
by Chuckypad » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:28 am
elwaclaret wrote:Or are you just one of those that think the staff just sit on their hands all summer?
No, I just couldn't decipher what you were asking
-
Royboyclaret
- Posts: 3891
- Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 12:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1282 times
- Has Liked: 681 times
Post
by Royboyclaret » Wed Aug 07, 2019 11:31 am
claretspice wrote:Let's say you worked in sales, with a relatively low basic salary topped up by commissions, and you had a period in which those commissions went through the roof for reasons that you could only partially control - and you knew that as a result, while it was nice while it lasted, those commissions were probably unsustainable in the long term.
In the short term, you'd have the money to really enjoy yourself. But would you set up your lifestyle so that your fixed outgoings - mortgage, car credit, etc. - all assumed that those commissions would continue to be unusually generous indefinitely?
That's the paradox we have now. Of course, we have money to spend. But our problem is spending it in a way that doesn't mean we have a major black hole in our finances if we go down.
However, I still think we'll strengthen before tomorrow night.
In the event of relegation two key factors come into play, parachute payments of £88million over the first two seasons and our sensible policy since the last promotion of relegation clauses built into ALL player contracts.