The undisclosed fee thing 02:12 - Jan 24 with 13663 views | FalingeParka | Not really on is it? Discuss... | |
| | |
The undisclosed fee thing on 21:59 - Jan 24 with 2112 views | D_Alien | Nor does it affect mine, although i have an instinctive dislike of secrecy where sporting interest is concerned My take on FP's point about 'fan interest' is that dyed-in-the-wool fans are being denied a legitimate matter of interest whilst - perhaps more importantly - fans who aren't committed could see it as a further point of alienation. I know that when i was growing up, transfers such as the first £100k one (Tony Hateley) were the subject of a lot of debate and generated interest. That appears to have gone by the wayside now, and the game is most definitely the worse for it | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 22:05 - Jan 24 with 2090 views | TVOS1907 | I'd probably agree, but it's the norm nowadays - rightly or wrongly - so I don't understand why it keeps coming up for debate. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 22:14 - Jan 24 with 2064 views | D_Alien | Possibly due to having an instinctive dislike of norms! | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 22:20 - Jan 24 with 2041 views | TVOS1907 | I could use that in the Normal Distribution! | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 22:25 - Jan 24 with 2030 views | D_Alien | I hope it's compulsory in an educative sense! | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 22:26 - Jan 24 with 2025 views | TVOS1907 | It's the norm... | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 22:30 - Jan 24 with 2013 views | D_Alien | For those who're already committed... | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 23:38 - Jan 24 with 1945 views | James1980 | Are transfer fees, nice to know, need to know or not really that important? | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 23:42 - Jan 24 with 1945 views | FalingeParka | Ha. You're all Paulie Walnuts. All you discuss on here is money one way and another, all KH talks about is budget, on every level everything about what RAFC does and who runs it and so on. So why not know, given that, how much Preston paid for Raff? What is so off? Christ, you're sideways on a bike to tell me that the answer is 'SACROSANT'. | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 23:54 - Jan 24 with 1934 views | FalingeParka | Ace mate. No, the balance sheet ain't important, never has been, never has been a factor at all... | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 08:28 - Jan 25 with 1804 views | James1980 | The balance sheet can still be known without knowing specific details | |
| |
The undisclosed fee thing on 08:37 - Jan 25 with 1792 views | VivaDonaldo | Do you have any reason to be concerned? Do we have winding up petitions and CCJs lining up against us? Ok so we've had a change in board, but we've always trusted our board and Keith Hill with steering this club in the right direction and to the best of their ability they've done that. Football business throughout the country is done on an undisclosed basis and anything in the media or on forums is generally leaked or guesstimate. You would argue the club should either break the contract by naming the figure or lose out on the transfer entirely by not agreeing to remain undisclosed (as is t the buying clubs wish)? I can get the frustrations but just put it to one side. Put a figure on it for your own sanity if you like, but stop labouring a point that won't change. | | | |
The undisclosed fee thing on 14:09 - Jan 25 with 1704 views | finberty | Agree with all the above. And finally: "We don't owe the IRS or any bank as far as I know..." betrays FP's knowledge of his subject. The IRS is the Internal Revenue Service, which is operated by the US, in the US. I think FP might mean HMRC. [Post edited 25 Jan 2019 14:24]
| | | |
| |