| Jenkins clearly still meddling 21:58 - Feb 1 with 11155 views | latchford |
I very much doubt our new manager knows anything about Fer. So clearly another jenkins purchase. Just like Eder and Tabanou. Why doesn't he leave it to the new man?? |  | | |  |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:25 - Feb 2 with 2332 views | Oldjack |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:18 - Feb 2 by jasper_T |
We paid out several million wind up the contracts of Tiendalli and Michu this season, too. |
Not to mention Garry |  |
| Prosser the Tosser dwells on Phil's bum hole like a rusty old hemorrhoid ,fact
You Greedy Bastards Get Out Of OUR Club!
|
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:43 - Feb 2 with 2318 views | dailew |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:13 - Feb 2 by DafyddHuw |
Sorry, but there's nothing as misleading as statistics.
That table won't include the golden handshakes we gave, Gomis, Ayew and Gylfi for coming here. There may be more. I don't know.
But you can add on at least £7M for Gomis, £7m for Ayew and £4M for Siggy, if you want to play the statistics game. |
Won't include them for other teams, either.
But if you want to see us in the worst possible light, crack on. [Post edited 2 Feb 2016 14:43]
|  |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:56 - Feb 2 with 2300 views | DafyddHuw |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:43 - Feb 2 by dailew |
Won't include them for other teams, either.
But if you want to see us in the worst possible light, crack on. [Post edited 2 Feb 2016 14:43]
|
"Won't include them for other teams, either"
Exactly. Just pointing out to the poster that the table was meaningless. |  | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 15:02 - Feb 2 with 2295 views | dailew |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:56 - Feb 2 by DafyddHuw |
"Won't include them for other teams, either"
Exactly. Just pointing out to the poster that the table was meaningless. |
Not at all. Signing-on fees represent a small percentage compared to the £80m total transfer fees.
Unless you know otherwise it's fairly safe to assume that they will represent a similiar proportion for other clubs as well. | |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 15:20 - Feb 2 with 2274 views | Jackanapes |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 14:56 - Feb 2 by DafyddHuw |
"Won't include them for other teams, either"
Exactly. Just pointing out to the poster that the table was meaningless. |
The table of actual facts is meaningless but your feeling that we have signed a dud is tangible. L O L |  |
|
“The stupidest thing she knew was for people to act like they knew all about the things they knew absolutely nothing about.†|
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 15:21 - Feb 2 with 2271 views | jack247 |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 15:02 - Feb 2 by dailew |
Not at all. Signing-on fees represent a small percentage compared to the £80m total transfer fees.
Unless you know otherwise it's fairly safe to assume that they will represent a similiar proportion for other clubs as well. |
If we have spent so prudently up until now and in fairness, in terms of net transfer spend we certainly have, how come we aren't in a better financial position? Have we spent too much on legacy projects? Compensation for sacked managers? Is our wage bill too high? Are we paying too much to agents and intermediaries? Could we be selling a lot more merchandise? Is that really a significant proportion of our revenue anyway?
We earn a decent chunk just for being a PL club. I would have thought we would have a reasonable amount salted away for contingencies. | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:15 - Feb 2 with 2229 views | dailew |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 15:21 - Feb 2 by jack247 |
If we have spent so prudently up until now and in fairness, in terms of net transfer spend we certainly have, how come we aren't in a better financial position? Have we spent too much on legacy projects? Compensation for sacked managers? Is our wage bill too high? Are we paying too much to agents and intermediaries? Could we be selling a lot more merchandise? Is that really a significant proportion of our revenue anyway?
We earn a decent chunk just for being a PL club. I would have thought we would have a reasonable amount salted away for contingencies. |
It's a very fine balancing act.
We're competing against teams with sugar daddies, bigger support, bigger stadiums.
Chelsea have had a billion quid thrown at them yet are only three points above us. | |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:27 - Feb 2 with 2203 views | Treforys_Jack |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:15 - Feb 2 by dailew |
It's a very fine balancing act.
We're competing against teams with sugar daddies, bigger support, bigger stadiums.
Chelsea have had a billion quid thrown at them yet are only three points above us. |
A fact that many on here totally miss. There is no way we can match most of the club's in this league financially. Therefore we have to shop around and by the law of averages we are going to end up with a few duds. Tabanou was a real mystery though, great pedigree, scouted for 2 yrs etc. The only possible answer is mismanagement. Don't forget also Gomis was scoring for fun at the end of last season and the beginning of this so Eder was deemed acceptable. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:31 - Feb 2 with 2191 views | Tom1912 |
It's naive to expect a 100% success rate with transfers.
Yes Eder and Tabanou didn't work out but hopefully we'll reduce our losses this summer. I don't think Gomis hasn’t been a total failure either. He was very good in the second half of last season and started this season well. If we can get abit of money back for him in the summer (which if you believe the interest this window) does seem possible, it’ll hardly be the worst transfer we’ve ever made. | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:43 - Feb 2 with 2181 views | jack247 |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:15 - Feb 2 by dailew |
It's a very fine balancing act.
We're competing against teams with sugar daddies, bigger support, bigger stadiums.
Chelsea have had a billion quid thrown at them yet are only three points above us. |
Chelsea are having their worst season since Kerry Dixon played for them.
You are kind of contradicting yourself when you say we have a negligible net spend because our transfer dealings are so good and it's ok for us to be skint because we are organically run. It would make sense if we had bought badly every year, but the poor signings are normally more than compensated for by the good.
I find it hard to believe we would have a business plan that would account for more or less balancing the books in terms of transfer fees and would not account for bad signings. It's an incredibly fine balancing act if that is the case. Are we relying on selling a Joe Allen or a Ben Davies every year or two to keep us going? | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:54 - Feb 2 with 2161 views | vetchonian |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 15:21 - Feb 2 by jack247 |
If we have spent so prudently up until now and in fairness, in terms of net transfer spend we certainly have, how come we aren't in a better financial position? Have we spent too much on legacy projects? Compensation for sacked managers? Is our wage bill too high? Are we paying too much to agents and intermediaries? Could we be selling a lot more merchandise? Is that really a significant proportion of our revenue anyway?
We earn a decent chunk just for being a PL club. I would have thought we would have a reasonable amount salted away for contingencies. |
The issue is our costs are close to our revenue.
As we know we have a small stadium and therefore a fairly low income from gate receipts,the TV money gives us a nice wedge but this is eaten up with wages,day to day running costs. We have no/little debt unlike some of our bigger rivals with greater income streams but also are not cash rich and therefore able to "increase" the demands on our purse strings during a season.
You make some fair points re agents and intermediaires but then maybe we would be paying a larger scouting network. I think some of the investment in "legacy" projects is justified the development of a good training facility will help attract players plus we could not continue training at the Glamorgan. The academy is a longer term investment which should pay for itself in future years.
In short we have the costs of a PL club but not the income! | |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 17:02 - Feb 2 with 2154 views | jack247 |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 16:54 - Feb 2 by vetchonian |
The issue is our costs are close to our revenue.
As we know we have a small stadium and therefore a fairly low income from gate receipts,the TV money gives us a nice wedge but this is eaten up with wages,day to day running costs. We have no/little debt unlike some of our bigger rivals with greater income streams but also are not cash rich and therefore able to "increase" the demands on our purse strings during a season.
You make some fair points re agents and intermediaires but then maybe we would be paying a larger scouting network. I think some of the investment in "legacy" projects is justified the development of a good training facility will help attract players plus we could not continue training at the Glamorgan. The academy is a longer term investment which should pay for itself in future years.
In short we have the costs of a PL club but not the income! |
I agree with most of that. Obviously we don't have the revenues a lot of clubs do and I'm not at all against legacy projects.
What I do think is wrong is prioritising them over PL survival. I can accept the board probably thought we were reasonably safe at the start of the season, but we should never be in a position where we have to sell to buy in a precarious January window, but we are pumping funds into academy projects and training facilities. I'd much rather see these improved gradually whilst always keeping a bit of money back for when we need it.
I may be wrong here, but I think we would have sacked Garry sooner had we been able to do it without it having a significant effect on our finances. We may well be in a much better position now if we had. | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 17:11 - Feb 2 with 2142 views | vetchonian |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 17:02 - Feb 2 by jack247 |
I agree with most of that. Obviously we don't have the revenues a lot of clubs do and I'm not at all against legacy projects.
What I do think is wrong is prioritising them over PL survival. I can accept the board probably thought we were reasonably safe at the start of the season, but we should never be in a position where we have to sell to buy in a precarious January window, but we are pumping funds into academy projects and training facilities. I'd much rather see these improved gradually whilst always keeping a bit of money back for when we need it.
I may be wrong here, but I think we would have sacked Garry sooner had we been able to do it without it having a significant effect on our finances. We may well be in a much better position now if we had. |
I think there was more to the sale of Shelvey than just the money though.
I would hope that each year we construct a budget which will include longer term plans such as the infrastructure including some contingency as is good business practise.
I doubt if this season compensating for sacking a management team was factored in and this caught us on the hop.......again more lessons to be learned. I doubt the board has prioritised these projects over PL survival its just that the plan has gone a little t*ts up and lets be honest did any of us see any different in August or even early September? | |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:05 - Feb 2 with 2123 views | DAL9000 |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 13:12 - Feb 2 by dailew |
Yeah our scouting system has really let us down over the years .
 |
That table makes me wonder: what cabal of geniuses run scouting at Tottenham, and why aren't we just standing beneath their windows all night with a boombox and a bag full of cash? | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:08 - Feb 2 with 2118 views | Dr_Winston |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 17:02 - Feb 2 by jack247 |
I agree with most of that. Obviously we don't have the revenues a lot of clubs do and I'm not at all against legacy projects.
What I do think is wrong is prioritising them over PL survival. I can accept the board probably thought we were reasonably safe at the start of the season, but we should never be in a position where we have to sell to buy in a precarious January window, but we are pumping funds into academy projects and training facilities. I'd much rather see these improved gradually whilst always keeping a bit of money back for when we need it.
I may be wrong here, but I think we would have sacked Garry sooner had we been able to do it without it having a significant effect on our finances. We may well be in a much better position now if we had. |
We haven't prioritied the projects over the team though. Spending on the team far, far outstrips anything we've spent on facilities. |  |
| Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back. |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:22 - Feb 2 with 2094 views | monmouth |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:05 - Feb 2 by DAL9000 |
That table makes me wonder: what cabal of geniuses run scouting at Tottenham, and why aren't we just standing beneath their windows all night with a boombox and a bag full of cash? |
Just get one Gareth Bale, sell him and your transfer deficit evaporates. Unfortunately we'd have to sell long before maximum value. |  |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:36 - Feb 2 with 2077 views | jack247 |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:08 - Feb 2 by Dr_Winston |
We haven't prioritied the projects over the team though. Spending on the team far, far outstrips anything we've spent on facilities. |
Well yeah of course it does, but we obviously haven't allocated enough towards it or we wouldn't be in a position where we can't significantly strengthen when we really need to.
Prioritising it doesn't necessarily mean spending more on it, if we have allocated a few million towards an academy and therefore not been able to compete for a player who would have made a big difference, that is prioritising it. Fine up until now because we have only really been in relegation danger once, in the Laudrup/Monk season. | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 08:57 - Mar 3 with 1924 views | Jackanapes |
 | |
|
“The stupidest thing she knew was for people to act like they knew all about the things they knew absolutely nothing about.†|
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 09:10 - Mar 3 with 1900 views | Uxbridge |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:36 - Feb 2 by jack247 |
Well yeah of course it does, but we obviously haven't allocated enough towards it or we wouldn't be in a position where we can't significantly strengthen when we really need to.
Prioritising it doesn't necessarily mean spending more on it, if we have allocated a few million towards an academy and therefore not been able to compete for a player who would have made a big difference, that is prioritising it. Fine up until now because we have only really been in relegation danger once, in the Laudrup/Monk season. |
Newcastle have spent much, much more than us.
Our problem this year doesn't stem from a lack of money. We've never had more. And anyway, I've never had much time for the argument that we shouldn't use this time in the PL to build up our infrastructure and all money should go on the playing side. I'd like to see us having something to show for our time in this league. |  |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 09:11 - Mar 3 with 1892 views | SwaneeRiver |
The way Fer has made an impact so far, If Jenkins can meddle and pick players like him then maybe he should be the next manager | | | |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 09:18 - Mar 3 with 1854 views | Darran |
Ah good old Latchford the poster that detests all English players.
Just for the record that's Latchford. |  |
| |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 10:43 - Mar 3 with 1756 views | ItchySphincter |
| Jenkins clearly still meddling on 18:05 - Feb 2 by DAL9000 |
That table makes me wonder: what cabal of geniuses run scouting at Tottenham, and why aren't we just standing beneath their windows all night with a boombox and a bag full of cash? |
If Spurs hadn't sold Bale for 100 odd million when they did no one would be near us. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
