Bucks Saint

You forgot to mention another director has gone. The new guy looks very credible and the board looks tidy enough for me

Or were never really interested...

He has board level responsibility, for people who are actually in these roles. Not that unusual for an FD to pick up some wider areas as well

Welcome DB. To be successful, you just need to be as good as, or better, than the last guy

Where did i say i was convinced by anything? I was just explaining something you thought was wrong, or did not understand, that we can move to being self-sustaining while still spending all the transfer income. You have now moved on to moaning about how much of it we have spent so far.

You changed your moan to another topic, not me. I have already quoted your post #73 once. I assume you now understand the dual aims, and hence have moved on to something else

Ok so you now accept that there is nothing at all "wrong" with a dual aim of KL not investing more and the club wanting to spend all of the transfer receipts, but you have moved on to questioning when / if they will spend the receipts.

It is perfectly possible to both. Its been explained on here and other threads - we are trying to be self-sustaining, so that no further shareholder funds are needed (as well as complying with FFP). That does not mean we have to stop spending the transfer receipts we are generating, because these are not the only funds coming into the club.

"If we are trying to steady the ship 'we will spend every penny on transfers and wages' does not follow."

Inter have met him now. Crap

Why is it impossible to do both? If we can afford to spend all the transfer income, but we dont need to ask KL to put in any funds, why is this a problem for you? Blind determination to find a problem?

Which is exactly what he said in his interviews yesterday.

Love the fact that his Club did not know he had an injury....

Ah, as with last season, media love-in with us starting again. Just a different reason this time

Sunderland: "Just £10m for someone who has hardly played for 2 years? Cool, no problem, we know you are short of cash Man City. A 5 year contract at £60k per week, plus a 5% signing on fee? Yes of course, very happy to agree Mr Rodwell, sir, where do we sign?" Easy

This is one of the reasons we are trying to land more / different midfielders IMO. Goals from Morgan (reasonable) / Davis / Cork / Vic / JWP last season were simply not good enough

but how do you know how long they took to get the deals done?

Steady now, the manager may know what he is doing and knows a huge amount more than posters on here? Infraction for you

Good news then. Despite concerns over the form of various players, this Forum is consistently delivering

I just sold Mayuka for £56m too, also to Liverhampton. Franky I would take £5m and still be laughing

You may be right, I see nothing wrong with trying to reduce that to none especially with players from other leagues or those who are not personally known to the manager

So what about the many signings that have not worked out well for other clubs in the Prem then? Must be because all of their scouting networks are not doing their homework, as all potential signings are clearly cut and dried as either good enough or not.

Yes, but some players are riskier than others, so loans work well, which may well the case with the Inter Milan pair. Or in the case of Bertrand when we have our eyes on a youngster coming through

As has been said, we have an agreed first option. But otherwise, its no different to any player - play a blinder and they arouse interest. Like I said, if only Osvaldo had been on loan

What is it with people not understanding the benefit of loans with an option to buy? Low risk, if they come good we sign them, if they dont, or the existing young players turn out better, they go back. If only Osvaldo had been on loan