What are Pace & The Board thinking now?

[boyyanno]

I think judging ‘at this rate’ when there’s 25 games left and a point or 2 in it is premature to say the least. Happy to accept that after 38 games if it remains! Although even then there is an argument to say our dominant brand of football suits that level more and our younger team has a higher ceiling moving forward.

I don’t find it that bizarre to suggest a team (more talented/dynamic than the one that got 101 points) would be clear favourites to gain promotion again with the same manager. In fact the bookies would likely have us favourites.

More talented and dynamic but currently bottom of the league and behind every other team including the ones who finished below us last year.

Yet somehow we are more talented and dynamic. Luton must have the best manager in the league if they've improved so much, having gone from way behind a team worse than this one to way infront of it? Have you actually looked at the league table...Luton are more than a point or two away.

Being the favorite in a division where you are the market leader isn't a surprise is it?

[RVclaret]

More talented and dynamic but currently bottom of the league and behind every other team including the ones who finished below us last year.

Yet somehow we are more talented and dynamic. Luton must have the best manager in the league if they've improved so much, having gone from way behind a team worse than this one to way infront of it? Have you actually looked at the league table...Luton are more than a point or two away.

Being the favorite in a division where you are the market leader isn't a surprise is it?

If you can’t see that this squad is stronger than last seasons then no point continuing this convo. Our current league position is irrelevant to that point. I’ll leave you with Cool and the Gang to fantasise over Tella.

[NewClaret]

If you can’t see that this squad is stronger than last seasons then no point continuing this convo. Our current league position is irrelevant to that point. I’ll leave you with Cool and the Gang to fantasise over Tella.

Best to give up RV, I agree.

I was wondering if Tony could clone the board and register a new domain: PutDownTheClarets.com.

Give the majority access to that and let the rest of us continue on UpTheClarets? I’ll happily put my name forward to moderate them both

[CoolClaret]

If you can’t see that this squad is stronger than last seasons then no point continuing this convo. Our current league position is irrelevant to that point. I’ll leave you with Cool and the Gang to fantasise over Tella.

Not only is it more or less impossible to make that claim when being on four points from 13, not to mention the 17 goals gone from Tella, looking at next season comparing it with last years promotion season:

Barnes gone, Jay/Cork be gone (two key contributors from that season)

JBG be 34, Chaz be 31.

This is before any further sales

[CoolClaret]

Best to give up RV, I agree.

I was wondering if Tony could clone the board and register a new domain: PutDownTheClarets.com.

Give the majority access to that and let the rest of us continue on UpTheClarets? I’ll happily put my name forward to moderate them both

You can have a go setting up DeludedClarets.com or FantasylandClarets.com if you fancy it?

[Newcastleclaret93]

If you can’t see that this squad is stronger than last seasons then no point continuing this convo. Our current league position is irrelevant to that point. I’ll leave you with Cool and the Gang to fantasise over Tella.

I certainly think it’s a talking point. On paper the squad looks better but I would also argue we have lost of the lot of the unity and experience that made us such a balanced force last year.

As it’s shown two teams that we annihilated in the league last year are both above us this season.

Next year is really interesting in the championship, as we will have lost a lot of experience and arguably we will lose a fair few of these technically superior players.

[ksrclaret]

If you can’t see that this squad is stronger than last seasons then no point continuing this convo. Our current league position is irrelevant to that point. I’ll leave you with Cool and the Gang to fantasise over Tella.

I guess snide digs at other posters is okay today then, you hypocrite.

[boatshed bill]

"Christmas in England or the USA?

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

Can I move this onto a 0% credit card?!!

[boyyanno]

If you can’t see that this squad is stronger than last seasons then no point continuing this convo. Our current league position is irrelevant to that point. I’ll leave you with Cool and the Gang to fantasise over Tella.

You are missing the point. The squad may have more talent and be more "dynamic" than last year, in the same way that Amdouni has more talent and looks flashier than Barnes ever did. But that's absolutely irrelevant, what matters is results, performances, whatever you want to call it but it's being effective of which we are currently not.

You can find every way you want to try and make the league position irrelevant but my point through this and I maintain it is that it won't be a walk in the park in the championship, we are seeing other clubs struggle to do it, preforming worse than other teams who will join us in the league below bur fantasising that as soon as we hit the championship we will steam roller the league.

This isn't about "putting burnley down" as your mate has said below, it's about being realistic. The rhetoric about us winning the league and finding it easy is the same shite we had this summer. And when you point it out you're called a negative nelly whilst everyone moves the goalposts.

First it was- we'll be fine

Then it was- we'll be fine after the first 8

Now it's, we probably won't be fine but we'll walk the league next season.

[Boss Hogg]

The ‘team’ is not stronger.

[jrgbfc]

I agree that the squad is probably stronger but not sure about the first 11. When you look how far ahead of Luton we were last season and they're currently making a much better fist of it then something has gone drastically wrong.

[kentonclaret]

He deserves a chance to take us back up as dyche did the first promotion /relegation. He’s still learning the ropes in the toughest league in world football.

Surely, if there was to be a period of “learning the ropes” that would have been in a league he was totally unfamiliar with and never played in (the Championship) not in the PL where he had spent 11 years making more than 350 appearances? If VK has been been taken aback by the power, pace and demands posed by the PL that raises questions as to why when he was part of it for so long.

[evensteadiereddie]

No, it doesn't. And your arrogance regarding VK's supposed ignorance of PL football is truly astonishing.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I would argue the likes of Tresor, Odobert potentially even Amdouni certainly haven’t lived up to there fees so far.

Odobert- 161 mins of league football
Tresor - 224
Amdouni - 823

All playing in a new country/league
All need time to settle

They’ve all got the ability to justify their fees, once settled

We just need to show patience

Or write them off early, whichever suits

[Newcastleclaret93]

Odobert- 161 mins of league football
Tresor - 224
Amdouni - 823

All playing in a new country/league
All need time to settle

They’ve all got the ability to justify their fees, once settled

We just need to show patience

Or write them off early, whichever suits

I’m not writing them off, I’m saying that due to our business two of the three listed have barely had any game time.

It’s not conducive to there value sittting on the bench week in week out

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I’m not writing them off, I’m saying that due to our business two of the three listed have barely had any game time.

It’s not conducive to there value sittting on the bench week in week out

They’ve had to adjust to England
They’ve had to reach the required fitness levels
We don’t know of any other issues they’ve had

If they’ve got to sit on the bench then so be it, we don’t know the reasons.

Their value isn’t an issue

[ClaretPete001]

On transfer market the summer spend is £111 million

Zeki Amdouni
€18.60m

James Trafford
€17.30m

Aaron Ramsey
€16.45m

Jordan Beyer
€15.00m

Sander Berge
€13.90m

Wilson Odobert
€12.00m

Dara O'Shea
€7.80m

Michael Obafemi
€4.00m

Hannes Delcroix
€3.00m

Luca Koleosho
€3.00m

[CoolClaret]

They’ve had to adjust to England
They’ve had to reach the required fitness levels
We don’t know of any other issues they’ve had

If they’ve got to sit on the bench then so be it, we don’t know the reasons.

Their value isn’t an issue

Can you at least accept the argument that the funds would have been better allocated elsewhere?

[NewClaret]

On transfer market the summer spend is £111 million

Zeki Amdouni
€18.60m

James Trafford
€17.30m

Aaron Ramsey
€16.45m

Jordan Beyer
€15.00m

Sander Berge
€13.90m

Wilson Odobert
€12.00m

Dara O'Shea
€7.80m

Michael Obafemi
€4.00m

Hannes Delcroix
€3.00m

Luca Koleosho
€3.00m

£96m then assuming you meant euros at the top. Assuming paid over 4 years, about £25m initial outlay.

Thanks for posting. I’d imagine a lot of those are based on success too.

[randomclaret2]

On transfer market the summer spend is £111 million

Zeki Amdouni
€18.60m

James Trafford
€17.30m

Aaron Ramsey
€16.45m

Jordan Beyer
€15.00m

Sander Berge
€13.90m

Wilson Odobert
€12.00m

Dara O'Shea
€7.80m

Michael Obafemi
€4.00m

Hannes Delcroix
€3.00m

Luca Koleosho
€3.00m

Pounds or Euros ?

[ClaretPete001]

I meant Euros - around £96 - £97 million....

And that is corroborated by most other sites I can find. It's a lot!

[JohnMcGreal]

Not sure how much we ended up paying for Tresor but he's not on that list.

[NewClaret]

Not sure how much we ended up paying for Tresor but he's not on that list.

We haven’t paid anything. He’s on loan.

[JohnMcGreal]

We haven’t paid anything. He’s on loan.

I thought I'd read that his move had been made permanent after so many appearances. Maybe not, then.

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

I thought I'd read that his move had been made permanent after so many appearances. Maybe not, then.

I’m pretty sure I read it was an obligation to buy next summer for £18m might be wrong on the price.

[Bordeauxclaret]

We haven’t paid anything. He’s on loan.

What would be in that deal for the side he played for last season if we’ve not paid anything?

[Big Vinny K]

I meant Euros - around £96 - £97 million....

And that is corroborated by most other sites I can find. It's a lot!

I think it is euros.
I have always thought that site inflates prices but I also think most of the other media outlets also do. But it doesn’t look a million miles away tbh.

If you look at the Foster price for example it indicates 11m euros. Did VK not say to the rest of the board they were getting a premier league striker for £7m in the sky documentary ?
Also quotes Wout at 17.5m which seems a lot more than I thought we paid.

As you say it’s still a lot of money !

The site also shows the outgoing fees and even if these might also be inflated a little from a relative point of view you can see over the period of the new owners how significant the net spend is to what we spent in the summer.

[boyyanno]

£96m then assuming you meant euros at the top. Assuming paid over 4 years, about £25m initial outlay.

Thanks for posting. I’d imagine a lot of those are based on success too.

I'm not sure what you mean here: Why would you assume the deals are structured like that?

[NewClaret]

I'm not sure what you mean here: Why would you assume the deals are structured like that?

What, spread over the term of the contract? In which case, because nearly all transfers are.

If you mean why do I think part of those total fees will be success-based, again because nearly all have some element guaranteed fee and some based on success. Thats why, for instance, Gibson only cost half of his reported transfer fee of £15m.

In short, the reported price is not always the price you pay.

[NewClaret]

I’m pretty sure I read it was an obligation to buy next summer for £18m might be wrong on the price.

£13.9m apparently.

[NewClaret]

What would be in that deal for the side he played for last season if we’ve not paid anything?

Well presumably the guarantee of the £13.9m in a years time, which is an absolute fortune in the JPL.

Maybe part of that has been paid as a loan fee too.

Although tbh I’ll be surprised if we’ve agreed to pay that if relegated.

[Carlos the Great]

how did we manage pay nearly 17 million for Ramsey
.::

[gawthorpe_view]

Still not fit though so why risk Ramsey, the change if any should have been larsen for gudmundson, obafemi for JRod. Amdouni and Koleosho were our 2 biggest threats knackered or not the mere fact they were on the pitch kept West ham guessing, soon as they went off they pushed up 10-15 yards and went for it, and got their rewards.

This

[Paul Waine]

What, spread over the term of the contract? In which case, because nearly all transfers are.

If you mean why do I think part of those total fees will be success-based, again because nearly all have some element guaranteed fee and some based on success. Thats why, for instance, Gibson only cost half of his reported transfer fee of £15m.

In short, the reported price is not always the price you pay.

Hi New, I'm pretty sure you are thinking of the accounting rule of amortising the transfer fee over the length of the contract, rather than the period over which the two clubs agree that the money will be paid. Let's assume a transfer fee (with no add-ons) of £10 million and the player signs for 4 years. The transfer fee is amortised (i.e. charged in the accounts) at £2.5 million each year. Settlement between the two clubs might per in one payment of £10 million or may be 2 payments of £5 million, the first on signing and the second a year later. Of course, other payment settlement terms can also be agreed. We get some insights when a club borrows money from a bank, Macquarie, for example, to advance funds to the club against the transfer money due from the selling club. Burnley did this with the sale of Chris Wood to Newcastle and again with Nick Pope to Newcastle. The security charge filed at Companies House give us the information required to confirm these settlement terms.

The accounting amortisation gets a little more interesting when add-ons are triggered as they also do when the player signs a new contract. The balance of the transfer fee is then spread over the new period of the contract (less whatever has already been charged to the accounts).

Of course, a player extending their contract should have no impact on the timings of the transfer payment(s) agreed with the selling club.

[Paul Waine]

how did we manage pay nearly 17 million for Ramsey
.::

The number is less if you measure it in GBP sterling. Nearly 17 million is the reported Euro equivalent.

[Big Vinny K]

Hi New, I'm pretty sure you are thinking of the accounting rule of amortising the transfer fee over the length of the contract, rather than the period over which the two clubs agree that the money will be paid. Let's assume a transfer fee (with no add-ons) of £10 million and the player signs for 4 years. The transfer fee is amortised (i.e. charged in the accounts) at £2.5 million each year. Settlement between the two clubs might per in one payment of £10 million or may be 2 payments of £5 million, the first on signing and the second a year later. Of course, other payment settlement terms can also be agreed. We get some insights when a club borrows money from a bank, Macquarie, for example, to advance funds to the club against the transfer money due from the selling club. Burnley did this with the sale of Chris Wood to Newcastle and again with Nick Pope to Newcastle. The security charge filed at Companies House give us the information required to confirm these settlement terms.

The accounting amortisation gets a little more interesting when add-ons are triggered as they also do when the player signs a new contract. The balance of the transfer fee is then spread over the new period of the contract (less whatever has already been charged to the accounts).

Of course, a player extending their contract should have no impact on the timings of the transfer payment(s) agreed with the selling club.

Hi Paul

Yes that’s correct in terms of the balance sheet impact and how amortisation of player assets is usually accounted for.

But it’s also the case that very few transfers are paid in one up front amount these days. If you look at our last few accounts you can see many of the transfer fees (in and out) being spread over a few years.

As you said the exception recently for us has been the factoring deals we have taken which effectively allows us to receive the money early that we are due from the other clubs for players sold (at a pretty significant cost in my experience of factoring and invoice discounting companies). If the buying club were not spreading out the player purchase and paying it all at once at the outset then of course we would not need to go down the factoring route.

[NewClaret]

Hi New, I'm pretty sure you are thinking of the accounting rule of amortising the transfer fee over the length of the contract, rather than the period over which the two clubs agree that the money will be paid. Let's assume a transfer fee (with no add-ons) of £10 million and the player signs for 4 years. The transfer fee is amortised (i.e. charged in the accounts) at £2.5 million each year. Settlement between the two clubs might per in one payment of £10 million or may be 2 payments of £5 million, the first on signing and the second a year later. Of course, other payment settlement terms can also be agreed. We get some insights when a club borrows money from a bank, Macquarie, for example, to advance funds to the club against the transfer money due from the selling club. Burnley did this with the sale of Chris Wood to Newcastle and again with Nick Pope to Newcastle. The security charge filed at Companies House give us the information required to confirm these settlement terms.

The accounting amortisation gets a little more interesting when add-ons are triggered as they also do when the player signs a new contract. The balance of the transfer fee is then spread over the new period of the contract (less whatever has already been charged to the accounts).

Of course, a player extending their contract should have no impact on the timings of the transfer payment(s) agreed with the selling club.

Hi Paul,

No I wasn’t referring to the amortisation treatment, just that in my experience the payments have tallied to the years on the contract. Wood - 2 years, 2 payments. I thought Pope was 4 years, 4 payments too from the Macquarie loans.

In any event, my point is that if we spent £96m - which seems about right - then only a proportion of that would’ve been payable up front. That might be £20m - £30m, depending on how we’ve structured the deals but it’s certainly not £96m outlay in one go.

Then further, as you say, there will be add-ons that will only be triggered if the players are successful. I heard the Trafford deal was nowhere near the reported fee in guaranteed payments for example.

[boyyanno]

Hi Paul,

No I wasn’t referring to the amortisation treatment, just that in my experience the payments have tallied to the years on the contract. Wood - 2 years, 2 payments. I thought Pope was 4 years, 4 payments too from the Macquarie loans.

In any event, my point is that if we spent £96m - which seems about right - then only a proportion of that would’ve been payable up front. That might be £20m - £30m, depending on how we’ve structured the deals but it’s certainly not £96m outlay in one go.

Then further, as you say, there will be add-ons that will only be triggered if the players are successful. I heard the Trafford deal was nowhere near the reported fee in guaranteed payments for example.

It did read like that to be honest but if you say that's not what you meant then fair enough.

I doubt the full amount has been paid up front but I'd be willing to bet more than half has, probably closer to 75 percent (performance/appearance add ons aside). It's generally the norm for the initial payment to be the largest followed by smaller ones. I can't see a club taking 4m x 4 years for a player worth 16m but 10m + 2 + 2 +2 might be plausible. Its got to be an attractive proposition for the selling clubs and generate them funds too. There's also the flip side in that it wouldn't be smart for our club as we'd have to commit to paying 25 percent of the value for the next x years. I'm sure we've committed to some but i cant imagine its anything like what youve suggested, I'm not even an Alan Pace fan and I don't think he'd be that stupid.

I'm not saying all the reported fees are correct, some no doubt include "add ons", some don't, but that's reasonably irrelevant to this point.

[Holtyclaret]

I’m not writing them off, I’m saying that due to our business two of the three listed have barely had any game time.

It’s not conducive to there value sittting on the bench week in week out

Why are you so concerned on their values 3 or 4 monrhs into long contracts ?

Bit odd

[Newcastleclaret93]

Why are you so concerned on their values 3 or 4 monrhs into long contracts ?

Bit odd

Because they are more than likely going to have to be sold or loaned out in 7-8 months time

[Superjohnnyfrancis]

Mother ****** told me this was a restaurant investment!

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Because they are more than likely going to have to be sold or loaned out in 7-8 months time

We aren’t going to lose money on any of them

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Can you at least accept the argument that the funds would have been better allocated elsewhere?

We spent the money on what was needed

We also tried to sign additional players for additional money for other positions that needed upgrading

So the “better allocated elsewhere” isn’t quite right

[Newcastleclaret93]

We aren’t going to lose money on any of them

I will absolutely astounded if we don’t lose money on at least a handful of them.

[CoolClaret]

We spent the money on what was needed

We have the most lopsided squad in the league. Demonstrably false

We also tried to sign additional players for additional money for other positions that needed upgrading

So the “better allocated elsewhere” isn’t quite right

'Tried' isn't good enough when the result is 1 win in 13.

Chaz wasn't even being considered in VK's plans for the squad till he realised we don't have a cat in hells chance with any one else playing at left fullback.

[Westleigh]

I will absolutely astounded if we don’t lose money on at least a handful of them.

Churlinov,Trafford.Vitinhio ,Twine,Bastien for a kick off.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

We have the most lopsided squad in the league. Demonstrably false



'Tried' isn't good enough when the result is 1 win in 13.

Chaz wasn't even being considered in VK's plans for the squad till he realised we don't have a cat in hells chance with any one else playing at left fullback.

Yes it’s lopsided, I agree

So you admit that we did try to address this, that’s progress

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I will absolutely astounded if we don’t lose money on at least a handful of them.

A handful?

If we did, that would be made up on the sales of others so it would balance out and we’d be in profit

[Newcastleclaret93]

A handful?

If we did, that would be made up on the sales of others so it would balance out and we’d be in profit

From this seasons signings I can currently only see Koleosho going for profit