Great watch

Lee Mooney been given the boot?

He only came because of SP

Thought this was a really good watch and nice to see an extended insight into a transfer like that one.

TPClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2025 10:38 pm

He only came because of SP

It seems so, it appears we couldn't match Sunderland for wages

KernowHouseClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Feb 21, 2025 10:41 pm

It seems so, it appears we couldn't match Sunderland for wages

I think it was in reference to his wages at sporting not what Sunderland were offering

That goal tonight reminded me of the final third of the Maradona 1986 2nd goal in the hand of god game. Champions league level technique.

Why can't we match Sunderland for wages. That's a bit worrying.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 1:01 am

Why can't we match Sunderland for wages. That's a bit worrying.

It was Lisbons wages we couldn't match, hence the discussion on the phone about how much we were going to pay, and Matt Williams actually saying we couldn't match what he was being paid.

Row x wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 1:45 pm

It was Lisbons wages we couldn't match, hence the discussion on the phone about how much we were going to pay, and Matt Williams actually saying we couldn't match what he was being paid.

I'm sure he said Sunderland had offered more but we were banking on his relationship with Parker. I csnt be bothered listening again so hopefully someone else can clarify

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:29 pm

I'm sure he said Sunderland had offered more but we were banking on his relationship with Parker. I csnt be bothered listening again so hopefully someone else can clarify

I can clarify

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:29 pm

I'm sure he said Sunderland had offered more but we were banking on his relationship with Parker. I csnt be bothered listening again so hopefully someone else can clarify

Think you are right. Possibly also the case that we knew he wanted to come to us so were chancing our arm, ultimately he’ll be getting his full wage from Sporting so only them losing out.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:41 pm

Think you are right. Possibly also the case that we knew he wanted to come to us so were chancing our arm, ultimately he’ll be getting his full wage from Sporting so only them losing out.

It seems strange that we wouldn't be able to outbid a team without parachute payments for such a key signing. Not sure it'd really be worth the risk of chancing our arm against a promotion rival.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:41 pm

Think you are right. Possibly also the case that we knew he wanted to come to us so were chancing our arm, ultimately he’ll be getting his full wage from Sporting so only them losing out.

We're paying half his wage

Row x wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:48 pm

We're paying half his wage

Which is reported to be £20k a week. Quite shocked we can’t afford or wouldn’t be prepared to pay all of that really, but maybe indicates where our salary structure is now.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:42 pm

It seems strange that we wouldn't be able to outbid a team without parachute payments for such a key signing. Not sure it'd really be worth the risk of chancing our arm against a promotion rival.

Agree. Maybe we were very confident he wanted to come here.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 4:54 pm

Which is reported to be £20k a week. Quite shocked we can’t afford or wouldn’t be prepared to pay all of that really, but maybe indicates where our salary structure is now.

Why on earth would we pay it, if someone else is prepared to pay half

We may have been prepared to pay it if pushed, but that's what negotiations are all about.

More like an excellent negotiating strategy.

Good watch and whilst he's a brilliant loan signing for this season I hope we aren't obliged to sign him if we go up. By his own admission he's not up for a relegation scrap so let him get us up and send him back to Lisbon and sign someone with a bit of heart to match the talent

Devils_Advocate wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 9:28 pm

Good watch and whilst he's a brilliant loan signing for this season I hope we aren't obliged to sign him if we go up. By his own admission he's not up for a relegation scrap so let him get us up and send him back to Lisbon and sign someone with a bit of heart to match the talent

You have to be a robot account.

Row x wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:48 pm

We're paying half his wage

Actually, listening back, that was not what was said.

Williams said: “Hugo, how are you? We have got your counter proposal for Marcus. The best we are going to get to is half of you are seeking”.

There’s no indication whether he was discussing wages or the loan fee. Or what Hugo’s counter proposal was.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 4:54 pm

Which is reported to be £20k a week. Quite shocked we can’t afford or wouldn’t be prepared to pay all of that really, but maybe indicates where our salary structure is now.

That’s just business … why would you pay all of it if you can pay half ?

Lots of moving parts in a transfer …

The Shire Claret wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 10:04 pm

That’s just business … why would you pay all of it if you can pay half ?

Lots of moving parts in a transfer …

Yes, I’d referred to the same in a previous post:

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 3:41 pm

Think you are right. Possibly also the case that we knew he wanted to come to us so were chancing our arm, ultimately he’ll be getting his full wage from Sporting so only them losing out.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Sat Feb 22, 2025 1:01 am

Why can't we match Sunderland for wages. That's a bit worrying.

our home game Wednesday night against Wednesday 18987 fans at turf moor Sunderland's game yesterday 44,000 fans that's some 25000 more fans at £25 per adult is over £620.000 more than us on just fans coming to the game.
that is over £16,250,000 more per season than us
Our gross income from fans attending is £10,925,000 aprox against there £25,300,000


if you double what ever we get from merchandise etc even bigger gap

pureclaret wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 9:31 am

our home game Wednesday night against Wednesday 18987 fans at turf moor Sunderland's game yesterday 44,000 fans that's some 25000 more fans at £25 per adult is over £620.000 more than us on just fans coming to the game.
that is over £16,250,000 more per season than us
Our gross income from fans attending is £10,925,000 aprox against there £25,300,000


if you double what ever we get from merchandise etc even bigger gap

I'm sure Sunderland don't average 44000 every week so that's possibly over exaggerated slightly.

But regardless we received over £100million in Premier League money last season, £100 million in transfer fees and then the parachute payments of which I can remember the amount, 60 million rings a bell but could be wrong. That blows Sunderland out of the water.

It seems pretty clear there's been concern about finances this season. We've only signed by choice Barnes, Shelvey, Laurent, Sonne, Hannibal and Hladky on permanent deals to replace all of those outgoing players (not oncluding signings like Pires, Tresor and Esteve who wed committed to the season before). It's a clear focus on free transfers with players that won't demand much on wages and loans with permanent options which has kicked the can down the road so we may well have committed most of next seasons budget already if we don't go up. This small comment from Williams confirmed to me that is our biggest priority at the moment.

Probably also helps that Sunderland are owned by a billionaire. Hence why they were able to get Le Fee who is on £70k a week.

Anyway, doesn’t really matter, we got our man so good negotiating, and obviously Parker’s influence was huge.

Swizzlestick wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 10:10 am

Probably also helps that Sunderland are owned by a billionaire. Hence why they were able to get Le Fee who is on £70k a week.

Anyway, doesn’t really matter, we got our man so good negotiating, and obviously Parker’s influence was huge.

Doesn’t matter how rich owners are these days with the ffp. They’ll have to balance the books regardless

blatherwickstattoos wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 10:18 am

Doesn’t matter how rich owners are these days with the ffp. They’ll have to balance the books regardless

I know nothing about FFP so I won’t pretend I do but I know they’re covering Le Fee’s full salary. I imagine having owners with deep pockets helps with that and helps to outbid us on loan salaries etc.

Swizzlestick wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 10:21 am

I know nothing about FFP so I won’t pretend I do but I know they’re covering Le Fee’s full salary. I imagine having owners with deep pockets helps with that and helps to outbid us on loan salaries etc.

I think they made an exception with Le Fee. Our wage bill will be considerably more than Sunderland's.

Most websites like Capology have Burnley as second biggest behind Leeds with about £35m salary costs whereas Sunderland are down the list on about £15m.

However the list of individual players has our maximum about £40k pw for several players whereas Le Fee is listed as £67k on Capology and Iheanacho at Boro on even more.

My take on this - we are being very disciplined on individual salaries but some clubs are “going for it” with a small number of players, and for most this won’t work and have them up the creek.

As long as Edwards is earning the same as our upper earners altogether that is fair and keeps him happy. His talent is equivalent to a Trafford, Beyer, Esteve or Brownhill so good management would ensure he isn't shortchanged even if Lisbon pay some for now.

Sunderland’s total wage bill is around £15m.
Not sure what ours is now as it’s fluctuated so much since the new owners took over. It peaked at around £92m towards the end of the Dyche reign and I was told from a reliable source that in the first summer under Kompany they had managed to get it down to less than £30m. But since then there’s been a massive turnover of players, more premier league contracts etc so who knows where we are at right now ? But I am pretty sure it’s a lot higher than Sunderlands.

Given the position they are in with a chance of promotion it’s not a massive risk for them to put some money into funding a couple of big wages for loan players. Even if they are covering Le Fee’s full salary for the rest of the season that would still be a lot less for example than we have spent in January on a reserve right back.

CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 11:04 am

Most websites like Capology have Burnley as second biggest behind Leeds with about £35m salary costs whereas Sunderland are down the list on about £15m.

However the list of individual players has our maximum about £40k pw for several players whereas Le Fee is listed as £67k on Capology and Iheanacho at Boro on even more.

My take on this - we are being very disciplined on individual salaries but some clubs are “going for it” with a small number of players, and for most this won’t work and have them up the creek.

As long as Edwards is earning the same as our upper earners altogether that is fair and keeps him happy. His talent is equivalent to a Trafford, Beyer, Esteve or Brownhill so good management would ensure he isn't shortchanged even if Lisbon pay some for now.

Sunderland are "going for it" in terms of wages with one player only and on loan, so don't see how this would have them up the creek. The website you refer to has Sunderland paying £20k or over for just three players, compared to 16 players at our club.

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 11:15 am

Sunderland are "going for it" in terms of wages with one player only and on loan, so don't see how this would have them up the creek. The website you refer to has Sunderland paying £20k or over for just three players, compared to 16 players at our club.

Not so much Sunderland I meant with that comment, but WBA with Holgate, Boro with Iheanacho, etc, they are paying them almost double what we are paying anyone and unless I am mistaken are clubs already struggling financially. So they are gambling with players to get them up, may work, probably won’t. Loan players have loan fees as well of course.

The concern I have with our prudence is that in the video Williams clearly says the player would have gone elsewhere were it not for Parker, our balance of risk and prudence is different to the other teams I mention, we are >50% likely to go up so a costly loan can nudge us over the line, whereas Le Fee (for example) is likely to be money down the pan.

In hindsight, which is a wonderful thing, the Edwards signing has finished off Sunderland’s automatic hopes albeit not YET guaranteeing ours. If he had signed for them, it could be very different.

CrosspoolClarets wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 12:54 pm

Not so much Sunderland I meant with that comment, but WBA with Holgate, Boro with Iheanacho, etc, they are paying them almost double what we are paying anyone and unless I am mistaken are clubs already struggling financially. So they are gambling with players to get them up, may work, probably won’t. Loan players have loan fees as well of course.

The concern I have with our prudence is that in the video Williams clearly says the player would have gone elsewhere were it not for Parker, our balance of risk and prudence is different to the other teams I mention, we are >50% likely to go up so a costly loan can nudge us over the line, whereas Le Fee (for example) is likely to be money down the pan.

In hindsight, which is a wonderful thing, the Edwards signing has finished off Sunderland’s automatic hopes albeit not YET guaranteeing ours. If he had signed for them, it could be very different.

Are you sure West Brom are paying the whole of Holgate's wages?

taio wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 1:06 pm

Are you sure West Brom are paying the whole of Holgate's wages?

Feels unlikely I agree. Just going off Capology for wage levels. That WBA have overstretched is well known though, whatever they are paying for Holgate in wages and loan fees.

According to the sunderland forum nixon has said sunderland are going back in for Edwards in the summer

Terrier wrote: ↑

Sun Feb 23, 2025 2:06 pm

According to the sunderland forum nixon has said sunderland are going back in for Edwards in the summer

If we don't go up and they do.

It sounded like Sporting only want him here to regain his fitness and play some regular football. My take is there isn't an option to buy from anyone, and if they do decide to sell, he would probably be out of our price range. Lets enjoy him while we can.