Investor

[ewanrob]

Jesus christ, he knows we should be backing the best manager this club has ever had..and we are 9th place with a patched up team...its not difficult.

[levraiclaret]

Jesus christ, he knows we should be backing the best manager this club has ever had..and we are 9th place with a patched up team...its not difficult.

Yeh, we all know that if it were possible but if our owners don't have sufficient fund then what?

[Steddyman]

Unfortunately, what the last 3 performances have proven is he can just as easily win on a shoestring budget.

I doubt Mike Garlick has any ambition above not being relegated.

[Hedontplayforyou]

I wonder where Dyche could take us if we did have a bit more backing financially? I’d love to find out.

[ewanrob]

Yeh, we all know that if it were possible but if our owners don't have sufficient fund then what?

Dont want this to escalate, we both want same thing...I'm a glass half full and with all respect you appear not to be and that's ok. We will NEVER EVER have a better chance of concreting our place in this league than now. Throw the money at the man and enjoy the ride.

[summitclaret]

There will be no money thrown at anyone until there is a vaccine for Covid. Quite right too.

[bfcjg]

No credit due to the board for putting the foundations and management structure in place to get us where we are plus a cat 1 academy ?
I think we will use what we can afford now to back Sean.

[ewanrob]

No credit due to the board for putting the foundations and management structure in place to get us where we are plus a cat 1 academy ?
I think we will use what we can afford now to back Sean.

You cant sit there patting yourself on the back in this league, yes they've been brilliant...but appears they are now pulling back. Sorry but we have to move forward.
If MG and his board dont invest in our manager, this will rumble for years to come.

[dpinsussex]

I wonder where Dyche could take us if we did have a bit more backing financially? I’d love to find out.

would you take that risk if he failed we would not be in the Premier league and may not have a club ?

[levraiclaret]

Dont want this to escalate, we both want same thing...I'm a glass half full and with all respect you appear not to be and that's ok. We will NEVER EVER have a better chance of concreting our place in this league than now. Throw the money at the man and enjoy the ride.

Actually my glass is two thirds full just now. We may want the same thing, the difference is you think there is sufficient money available to cement our place in the PL and I have read the "model clubs" thread. I hope that Dyche stays and we generate sufficient funds to keep him. I also think that we are the model club for him and his skills don't fit the criteria of the more ambitious clubs, but he may get bored with the annual struggle to survive.
I am already enjoying the ride, I hope you are too.

[ewanrob]

Actually my glass is two thirds full just now. We may want the same thing, the difference is you think there is sufficient money available to cement our place in the PL and I have read the "model clubs" thread. I hope that Dyche stays and we generate sufficient funds to keep him. I also think that we are the model club for him and his skills don't fit the criteria of the more ambitious clubs, but he may get bored with the annual struggle to survive.
I am already enjoying the ride, I hope you are too.

Just loving the ride, let's not plan for the bad times...let's caress this moment in time.

[bfcjg]

The naive golly gosh we could do soooooo much better interviewer.
So investor heres the deal, how much have you in the bank ?
2 Billion
Ok bit on the low side but ok
Have you heard of Burnley ?
Ok we can get round that.
Do you know where Lancashire is ?
Not a problem it is nearer London then Abu Dhabi so that a tick after a reasonable guess from you.
Have you ever been to a Burnley game ?
Ok Lots of people have not can't hold that against you a cynic might.
Your passion for Burnley; was it born from going on the Turf with your dad or mum as a child ?
Ok nowhere to moor the yacht but Moor is part of the ground and the straight mile was built by people who didn't see the benefits of yachts. Not your fault.
Will you give us enough money year in year out to ensure a top 4 finish and thus a Champions league spot every year ie the next level ?
Ok it's where we ought to be you will get it.
Will you depart your tax haven warm country to come to Burnley every home and away game to support the Clarets ,
It's actually our nickname, never mind I agree with the interpreter it is wet and cold at times.
Will you sell us to another investor to write off profits against one of your other businesses as you run us into the ground so some would say ?
Oh thank you, I believe you, lots don't but they dont have ambition, internet connection down so perhaps next time we speak it will be in a pub where you put a grand behind the bar for your fellow Clarets ???
Hello....gone.

[dsr]

Dont want this to escalate, we both want same thing...I'm a glass half full and with all respect you appear not to be and that's ok. We will NEVER EVER have a better chance of concreting our place in this league than now. Throw the money at the man and enjoy the ride.

How much money? Put a number on it. As at last June, we had £42m in the bank. How much should we spend out of that? Should we get an overdraft? If yes, how much?

[gandhisflipflop]

would you take that risk if he failed we would not be in the Premier league and may not have a club ?

Do people really believe that not having a club nonsense? Not being in the PL if it goes wrong I will give you, but not having a club? No sorry.

[dsr]

Do people really believe that not having a club nonsense? Not being in the PL if it goes wrong I will give you, but not having a club? No sorry.

That depends how much people want to spend. Bournemouth are going down (probably) with net creditors of over £200m (certainly). How are they going to pay that back? Even allowing for a generous owner who might not ask for his money back, they owe over £100m to third parties, including well over £50m to other football clubs. They're up the creek. They might find what it's like to not have a club, simply because they "backed the manager".

[jurek]

The issue is relatively simple in the sense that if we wish
to compete in the Premier League and avoid relegation we'll
need a reasonable squad of players both in numbers and quality.
I don't think many, including Garlick, disagree with that
and would like to believe he would do his upmost to achieve that.

So that leaves us short of 3/4 players - possibly more?
What might that cost us? 20m? 30m?
How are we going about it?
Has Garlick already given Dyche and Rigg an indication
of how much he's willing to sanction?
Assuming he's accepted the requirements in terms of numbers
is he aware of potential targets and their likely costs?
Or are we having to go down the list and look for cheaper options
because Garlick has already said what the max. is and it's not a lot.
Or are we going to be forced to sell McNeil or Tarks
to help bring in 3 or 4?

Suspect it may well be the latter.

Unless we manage to get some sound and decent investor
who'll loan us 30m+ at a reasonable rate.

[Taffy on the wing]

The naive golly gosh we could do soooooo much better interviewer.
So investor heres the deal, how much have you in the bank ?
2 Billion
Ok bit on the low side but ok
Have you heard of Burnley ?
Ok we can get round that.
Do you know where Lancashire is ?
Not a problem it is nearer London then Abu Dhabi so that a tick after a reasonable guess from you.
Have you ever been to a Burnley game ?
Ok Lots of people have not can't hold that against you a cynic might.
Your passion for Burnley; was it born from going on the Turf with your dad or mum as a child ?
Ok nowhere to moor the yacht but Moor is part of the ground and the straight mile was built by people who didn't see the benefits of yachts. Not your fault.
Will you give us enough money year in year out to ensure a top 4 finish and thus a Champions league spot every year ie the next level ?
Ok it's where we ought to be you will get it.
Will you depart your tax haven warm country to come to Burnley every home and away game to support the Clarets ,
It's actually our nickname, never mind I agree with the interpreter it is wet and cold at times.
Will you sell us to another investor to write off profits against one of your other businesses as you run us into the ground so some would say ?
Oh thank you, I believe you, lots don't but they dont have ambition, internet connection down so perhaps next time we speak it will be in a pub where you put a grand behind the bar for your fellow Clarets ???
Hello....gone.

Daftest post i've seen for a while.

[JohnMac]

When 1st Division and Championship Clubs throw figures around like £50m for their rising stars, you just know the game is one of cat and mouse.

Let the fat cats splurge stupid money on the next World Cup squad player (who rarely gets a game for his Club).

I an happy we do things the right way and continue living within our means. There is no such thing as an established Premier League Club outside of Manchester, Liverpool and London. Wolverhampton may try and break the mould but they are currently 19 seasons behind Aston Villa.

[gandhisflipflop]

That depends how much people want to spend. Bournemouth are going down (probably) with net creditors of over £200m (certainly). How are they going to pay that back? Even allowing for a generous owner who might not ask for his money back, they owe over £100m to third parties, including well over £50m to other football clubs. They're up the creek. They might find what it's like to not have a club, simply because they "backed the manager".

But there we go again with extreme scenarios. Bournemouth have been wreckless. With fans there doesn't seem to be this happy medium because when people talk of investment they automatically think it means throwing large sums at it. All fans want is that boat pushing out a little bit more on the transfer front nothing ridiculous for example when we first went in for jay. I can't remember the exact sum on the top of my head but was it 20m wba wanted and we were prepared to offer 15m? With an investor I really don't think having that extra 5m is asking too much to get an obvious target. Now if wba said we want 35m then I'd be against throwing that kind of money at a player seemingly not worth that amount. James Maddison was another player I think that with an investor scenario having that extra 5-10 m to offer would have been a well calculated risk although I accept that we may not have been interested at the time. Small calculated risks is what's needed because without them we will go backwards anyway and sustainability even in the championship becomes difficult. Some won't come off (we have spunked 15m on Gibson without an investor) but get it right once or twice and we make huge profits.

[ewanrob]

How much money? Put a number on it. As at last June, we had £42m in the bank. How much should we spend out of that? Should we get an overdraft? If yes, how much?

Well I'd say a lot more than the average of 9 million Sean spoke of. We do well in that we generally make decent money on our shrewd investments, but now and again we need to attract the better player. Defour for example, we paid a decent amount for an exceptional player ..just didnt quite work out but what a player he was. So I would say, a minimum of 30 million a season possibly 40. Remember, other than taking a hit on a few...we have a lot of money to be made as we stand on 3 or 4 players
Tarks, Pope, Taylor, McNeil..so if the crap hit the fan selling those 4 could raise between 100-120 million with would hope. We are in a fantastic position, fantastic manager, no internal/external dept and some fantastic assets....so lets be adventurous in what we do as a club

[Gordaleman]

Tarks, Pope, Taylor, McNeil..so if the crap hit the fan selling those 4 could raise between 100-120 million with would hope.

And if we had to sell those four, how long do you think we'd stay in the PL?

[gandhisflipflop]

And if we had to sell those four, how long do you think we'd stay in the PL?

I read that as in if we got relegated but if it didn't read that way, given the results we are getting now on a squad thinner than threadbare I would say that it would be hard to say. That would depend on who we replace them with also. We are standing still, which equates to going backwards so at some point we need to push it a little bit more.

[Spijed]

Well I'd say a lot more than the average of 9 million Sean spoke of. We do well in that we generally make decent money on our shrewd investments, but now and again we need to attract the better player. Defour for example, we paid a decent amount for an exceptional player ..just didnt quite work out but what a player he was. So I would say, a minimum of 30 million a season possibly 40. Remember, other than taking a hit on a few...we have a lot of money to be made as we stand on 3 or 4 players
Tarks, Pope, Taylor, McNeil..so if the crap hit the fan selling those 4 could raise between 100-120 million with would hope. We are in a fantastic position, fantastic manager, no internal/external dept and some fantastic assets....so lets be adventurous in what we do as a club

But even if we spend a bit extra, what exactly can we achieve, considering clubs who already spend more are below us in the table?

[summitclaret]

A lot of people are missing the point about Sean's outburst. He has put his come and get me message in neon lights. It's discussed twice a week on tele in front of millions. Never ever was a fuss in public about the ooc players justified at a time of Covid uncertainty. Brownhill is an upgrade on Jeff. We now need one on Lennon, at rb and an other younger player as 1st reserve cm.

[Gordaleman]

I read that as in if we got relegated but if it didn't read that way, given the results we are getting now on a squad thinner than threadbare I would say that it would be hard to say. That would depend on who we replace them with also. We are standing still, which equates to going backwards so at some point we need to push it a little bit more.

Standing still? We're just about to possibly beat our best ever points total. How is that standing still?

I don't know how long you've been supporting Burnley, but I've been supporting them for 68 years. It seems to me that the vast majority of fans on here that want to 'Push the boat out' have only been around in the PL era at most, and live in a world where instant success is is the only option.

I don't agree with that sort of approach at all. Tortoise and the Hare is my way and so far, it's working at Burnley. Look how far we've come in eight years. I don't want to throw that away with rash expenditure.

[Wile E Coyote]

its a complex issue.
remember how it was before jack walker appeared as the fairy godmother figure down the road? one minute they're as bad as us, scratting around and being poor, next they're winning the premier league. back then it made me feel sick to death of the system.
Overnight they went from a ramshackle outfit with a delapidated ground, to having a winning team and a new stadium.
the fact that they are below us now is irrelevant. whatever anyone says, they bought success, not only that, they were for a time financially secure where previously they weren't. investment on that scale assured them of matching the already wealthy competitiors.
the prem clubs that remain relatively safe year in year out, and the ones that usually win things are backed heavily . its simply not a division to plead poverty. well, you can, but relegation awaits if you do.
we have had several seasons of top flight football now, many would attribute that to sean dyche's arrival alone.
he has had money, but its plain to see how much of a struggle it will continue to be for him to replicate this gigantic effort without the means to spend a lot more money.
That's not a criticism of our board either, they appointed him, and he knew full well the limitations when he took the job.
doesn't alter the fact premier league clubs require a lot more money than we have at our disposal to ensure survival in the league.
even if there are loads of examples elsewhere of where its all gone **** up, that doesn't change the fact.

[dsr]

And if we had to sell those four, how long do you think we'd stay in the PL?

I think the idea is that if we push the boat out now and it goes wrong and we get relegated, the club won't go bust because we can sell the best players and use the funds to repay the debts.

As opposed to last time when we got relegated and we kept the best players, or most of them, and we could use the funds from selling the rest of them to buy their replacements. It's swings and roundabouts. Ewanrob wants us to gamble more to try and climb up the league, and is willing to risk that if it all goes wrong we are back to bottom Championship - top League 1 sort of level.

[gandhisflipflop]

Standing still? We're just about to possibly beat our best ever points total. How is that standing still?

I don't know how long you've been supporting Burnley, but I've been supporting them for 68 years. It seems to me that the vast majority of fans on here that want to 'Push the boat out' have only been around in the PL era at most, and live in a world where instant success is is the only option.

I don't agree with that sort of approach at all. Tortoise and the Hare is my way and so far, it's working at Burnley. Look how far we've come in eight years. I don't want to throw that away with rash expenditure.

I was talking about the transfer market but I think you knew that. I've been supporting Burnley since the 90's well before the premier league era so I'm well aware of what we have done and appreciate what we have done to this point. That doesn't make my opinion any less valid anyway. I could counteract that and say the fans who throw about the nonsense about not having a club to support if we push the boat out a bit more are stuck in the 80's and it is that mentality that will ultimately hold us back. We are all aware that we can't go throwing stupid amounts of money at it, but buying players is an investment and our policy in recent years has been a policy of getting what's available to see us through short term with no hope of making any returns on those investments.

[Spijed]

our policy in recent years has been a policy of getting what's available to see us through short term with no hope of making any returns on those investments.

So Tarkowski, Taylor & Pope won't bring in much money then?

[Gordaleman]

I was talking about the transfer market but I think you knew that. I've been supporting Burnley since the 90's well before the premier league era so I'm well aware of what we have done and appreciate what we have done to this point. That doesn't make my opinion any less valid anyway. I could counteract that and say the fans who throw about the nonsense about not having a club to support if we push the boat out a bit more are stuck in the 80's and it is that mentality that will ultimately hold us back. We are all aware that we can't go throwing stupid amounts of money at it, but buying players is an investment and our policy in recent years has been a policy of getting what's available to see us through short term with no hope of making any returns on those investments.

If we are making progress 'On the field', why do we have to significantly increase our transfer spending? The club as a whole has improved year on year and our transfer policy has a lot to do with that. The prices we pay dictate the sort of players we get. I don't want to pay £30 or £40 million for someone who turns out to be a Prima Donna. I much prefer the hard working, solid grafters that we have right now.

By the way, I wasn't getting at YOU, or anyone in particular, but those who chase instant success will fail more often than they win.

[Gordaleman]

I think the idea is that if we push the boat out now and it goes wrong and we get relegated, the club won't go bust because we can sell the best players and use the funds to repay the debts.

As opposed to last time when we got relegated and we kept the best players, or most of them, and we could use the funds from selling the rest of them to buy their replacements. It's swings and roundabouts. Ewanrob wants us to gamble more to try and climb up the league, and is willing to risk that if it all goes wrong we are back to bottom Championship - top League 1 sort of level.

There are so many ways to look at this situation but I think that the board, even before they appointed Sean, have done a great job over the years. So why interfere with that and bring in an 'Investor' that might disrupt the board's way of thinking?

If it aint broke (And it isn't.) don't mend it.

[gandhisflipflop]

So Tarkowski, Taylor & Pope won't bring in much money then?

I'm talking about the last 4 transfer windows in particular going back to the summer of 2018. Two of your 3 examples there were signed before then and you could argue that even when we signed pope and tarks the fees for players were different to what it is now. Of course there will be one or two exceptions to this (maybe brownhill will be a good acquisition as he looks to be already). In the market that we are in you have 3 options.

1. Pay the fees required
2. Look abroad for cheaper options that provide a resale value (my preferred option without investment)
3. Look for cheaper aging players for a shorter term solution to plug gaps that don't provide a resale value.

It is clear to see that on the whole we have opted for option 3 be it through choice or a forced hand. Now there's nothing wrong with that but it makes the argument for investment all the more stronger because one bad season and we suddenly have no saleable assets to make up for the dramatic loss of income. An investor would at least accelerate option 2, and open us up to the possibility of option 1 providing the price was right.

[gandhisflipflop]

If we are making progress 'On the field', why do we have to significantly increase our transfer spending? The club as a whole has improved year on year and our transfer policy has a lot to do with that. The prices we pay dictate the sort of players we get. I don't want to pay £30 or £40 million for someone who turns out to be a Prima Donna. I much prefer the hard working, solid grafters that we have right now.

By the way, I wasn't getting at YOU, or anyone in particular, but those who chase instant success will fail more often than they win.

Fair enough gordanvale. I'm not saying significantly increase our spending, I'm saying we need to increase it enough to continue to be able to purchase young players to sell on at a higher value. We could do this up to a point recently however it's clear the market has outgrown us.

[AfloatinClaret]

...buying players is an investment and our policy in recent years has been a policy of getting what's available to see us through short term with no hope of making any returns on those investments.

Do you actually understand what the words 'investor' and 'investment' mean? If not, then I suggest a few minutes studying a dictionary and thesaurus might prove beneficial. If on the other hand you do know their meanings, then you might provide some explanations as to us how you anticipate the club consistently increasing it's annual income by an additional £35-£40 million to justify and recoup the additional £30 million you're proposing should be invested. Let's keep it simple to begin with:
You've posted the above, whilst earlier berating the club/board for not spending twenty million rather than ten to acquire Jay-Rod's services a year earlier; so, how would you have financed this additional £10 million expenditure in the first instance and how do you then envisage our making an additional £10+ million return on the investment to pay for it?

[Gordaleman]

Fair enough gordanvale. I'm not saying significantly increase our spending, I'm saying we need to increase it enough to continue to be able to purchase young players to sell on at a higher value. We could do this up to a point recently however it's clear the market has outgrown us.

Given the Covid situation, it's likely that most clubs will spend a lot less this coming window. However, I'm not sure that will happen with Burnley. We've reduced the wage bill a good bit recently and we're likely to reduce it more by somehow getting shut of Gibson, so maybe we'll spend a bit more than some people are anticipating?

Let's see.

[ewanrob]

But even if we spend a bit extra, what exactly can we achieve, considering clubs who already spend more are below us in the table?

We can achieve getting into the top 12 year on year, and maybe Europe on the odd occasion, instead of being relegation favs and being happy with 17th year on year. We have it all now, only thing missing is the proper annual investment it needs.

[Chester Perry]

People talking about spending more on transfers need to understand that any transfer fee is usually doubled with the salary contract and agents fees. Sean likes his team to have reasonably similar wages (believing it helps squad harmony) most of our squad are on basic wages of £35k, £40k, £45k or £55k per week depending where they are in the pecking order and stage of their career (possibly only Wood and Mee at that top level). Even a 5 year deal for a £20m transfer would demolish that structure with a basic wage coming in around £70k+ per week (which is more than we pay Dyche).

In simple terms that 1 individual would cost us a little over 5% (or 1/20th) with salary and amortisation of an £150m turnover (our record turnover to date is £139m) - in case you forget we aim to have first team squad of 25, who along with the first team support staff and probably others have generous bonus clauses that boost salaries around 25% - 30% if we stay in the Premier League. There is also the small matter that we employ around 250 people overall in full time positions.

All that before other costs.

[Ric_C]

I'm talking about the last 4 transfer windows in particular going back to the summer of 2018. Two of your 3 examples there were signed before then and you could argue that even when we signed pope and tarks the fees for players were different to what it is now. Of course there will be one or two exceptions to this (maybe brownhill will be a good acquisition as he looks to be already). In the market that we are in you have 3 options.

1. Pay the fees required
2. Look abroad for cheaper options that provide a resale value (my preferred option without investment)
3. Look for cheaper aging players for a shorter term solution to plug gaps that don't provide a resale value.

It is clear to see that on the whole we have opted for option 3 be it through choice or a forced hand. Now there's nothing wrong with that but it makes the argument for investment all the more stronger because one bad season and we suddenly have no saleable assets to make up for the dramatic loss of income. An investor would at least accelerate option 2, and open us up to the possibility of option 1 providing the price was right.

On the whole over the last 4 years we have gone for options 1, 2 and 3 with varying degrees of success. Sometimes it's just a case of all the stars aligning, i.e. Brownhill. Other times, I'm led to believe we've been extremely unlucky with missing out on a few of our targets over the years.

Wood, Hendrick, Brady, Gibson, Wells to me fall into option 1. We paid the asking price. Some have worked out, others not.

Pope, Tarky, Taylor, Brownhill, JBG, Westwood were all option 1 signings (but were a lot more of a gamble at the time), and so far they have all been excellent additions (bar injuries)

Then you have the shorter term solutions: Bardsley, Hart, Pieters, Lennon, Crouch (again, some have worked out, others not)

What SD I think is alluding to is that we need (on occasion) to stretch the budget when the next Maddison, Bowen, Cantwell become available.

Over the last 4 years there are only a couple of occasions where I have genuinely questioned our signings. These were:
Crouch, Hart and Wells

As for our oversees network, here's hoping we see improvements on this front.

[gandhisflipflop]

Do you actually understand what the words 'investor' and 'investment' mean? If not, then I suggest a few minutes studying a dictionary and thesaurus might prove beneficial. If on the other hand you do know their meanings, then you might provide some explanations as to us how you anticipate the club consistently increasing it's annual income by an additional £35-£40 million to justify and recoup the additional £30 million you're proposing should be invested. Let's keep it simple to begin with:
You've posted the above, whilst earlier berating the club/board for not spending twenty million rather than ten to acquire Jay-Rod's services a year earlier; so, how would you have financed this additional £10 million expenditure in the first instance and how do you then envisage our making an additional £10+ million return on the investment to pay for it?

First and foremost, before you start with your patronising posts you may actually want to stop to consider where you have got your 35-40 million from? The board was willing to spend an x amount on jay. It was an example, the difference between the amount wba wanted and the amount we were prepared to pay at the time was miniscule by our standards. That isn't berating the board at all, what I am saying is that with an INVESTOR on board the extra funds would have been available to make an INVESTMENT on a player. Also have you stopped to consider just how many people watch the PL every single week? With the right type of investor on board we could potentially tap into those markets for our increased revenue.

[gandhisflipflop]

Given the Covid situation, it's likely that most clubs will spend a lot less this coming window. However, I'm not sure that will happen with Burnley. We've reduced the wage bill a good bit recently and we're likely to reduce it more by somehow getting shut of Gibson, so maybe we'll spend a bit more than some people are anticipating?

Let's see.

That may well be true with other clubs and I hope you're right however with Norwich commanding 50 million for their young centre back who is just about to be relegated from the premier league it tells me that the market isn't slowing down, or Norwich are being entirely unreasonable. Probably both.

[bfcjg]

Daftest post i've seen for a while.

Don't read many on here then ?

[ClaretTony]

People at the top...just listen to Joe Cole post match interview on finances...bang on !

What does Joe Cole know about the finances at Burnley?

[ewanrob]

What does Joe Cole know about the finances at Burnley?

Nothing in detail CT as he alluded to, he was just saying they need to try and find money because we have a great manager who needs the backing.

And he is right.

[ClaretTony]

Nothing in detail CT as he alluded to, he was just saying they need to try and find money because we have a great manager who needs the backing.

And he is right.

Did the inspirational Cole offer any suggestions where this money could be found if we don't have it?

[Vegas Claret]

People talking about spending more on transfers need to understand that any transfer fee is usually doubled with the salary contract and agents fees. Sean likes his team to have reasonably similar wages (believing it helps squad harmony) most of our squad are on basic wages of £35k, £40k, £45k or £55k per week depending where they are in the pecking order and stage of their career (possibly only Wood and Mee at that top level). Even a 5 year deal for a £20m transfer would demolish that structure with a basic wage coming in around £70k+ per week (which is more than we pay Dyche).

In simple terms that 1 individual would cost us a little over 5% (or 1/20th) with salary and amortisation of an £150m turnover (our record turnover to date is £139m) - in case you forget we aim to have first team squad of 25, who along with the first team support staff and probably others have generous bonus clauses that boost salaries around 25% - 30% if we stay in the Premier League. There is also the small matter that we employ around 250 people overall in full time positions.

All that before other costs.

to be fair, at least from my point of view, I'm not interested in us going out and spending 25 million on one player (pre wages etc), I'm more interested in Dyche not having to fight tooth and nail to get the 7-9 million for someone like Brownhill who looks an absolute steal at that money

[ewanrob]

https://sport.bt.com/cole-dyche-is-the- ... 4449076705

Hope it works

[ClaretTony]

https://sport.bt.com/cole-dyche-is-the- ... 4449076705

Hope it works

It does work, but if there is no money to back him with, how is it done?

[ewanrob]

Then we ultimately lose him, as simple as that....and with all due respect that is quite shocking.

[Vegas Claret]

It does work, but if there is no money to back him with, how is it done?

it's why they are looking for investment I would imagine

[Gordaleman]

Then we ultimately lose him, as simple as that....and with all due respect that is quite shocking.

Throwing money (That we don't have.) at the problem, just doesn't work. How many clubs have to go bust for you to see that?