Window Cleaner

Involved with what, selling successful players to the highest bidder. Don't think they've any power over that. If we can't field a team on opening Sunday they may give us a call to ask why, until then!!!!!!!.

Decent buyer, bolloakks I want one with shedloads of moolah that he throws around like pocket change whilst awarding us a 50 year 100 million per annum publicity contract with some iffy company over which he presides. If you're going to have an owner make it one with money, money that he doesn't mind spending. One that you can look up in forbes and it clearly states how much he or she has.

Well yes, it's called asset stripping.

Basically the club had too much liability, if we asked for say 200 million we probably wouldn't get it even with our old side. But if you sell some of the players for 100+ million and then the club for say 90/100 with no debt and some fine fixtures and fittings you might find a buyer. In our case I think you'll find the sum of the parts is worth more than the total. But you need to do that now because in a month or 2 the players might be worth far less.

Makes sense, probably didn't fancy 38 week-ends playing with kindergarten kids. We have no status in the game, we might have had for about 3 months but it has now left the building so players of a certain standing are reluctant to get on the bus.

Thomas Cooper have talked with arsenal on his behalf apparently but there is still a 3rd option available to him, big move, lot of upheaval . You cannot imagine how much the FFF weigh on these situations, they're very intrusive. Like Griezmann and Tottenham, didn't like that, Atletico on him like a flash.

Tottenham were after Stones, gone quiet, probably has something better in view.

they are professional footballers, career span at top level perhaps 8 years,if you start getting stuck in non-achievers your career prospects just suddenly disappear. Ask players stuck at Villa or Newcastle. Not in demand really and they end up taking backwards moves to get out of the spiral.

don't even know what the sanctions are on FFP, if they're anything similar to those operated by UEFA it's just a smack on the wrist and don't do it again until the next time. Liverpool must be breaching FFP regulations, what punishment do they risk.

We certainly aren't down, nothing is set in stone as of yet. However if we go with too many of the young academy players plus Hooieveld,Sharp,Mayuka etc on occasions we won't be far off at the end of the day. We seem to still be trying to sign players, whether they are of sufficient quality to ensure our survival remains to be seen. the PL is a hard league, there are no easy games and this is exactly what worries me with Koeman and some of the supposed recruits, they are used to steamrollering the opposition because they come from superior sides in their leagues. Saw Willem II against Marseille the other afty, now I know that Willem II are Dutch D2 but they were quite frankly atrocious, not even Sunday League quality, Bielsa doesn't have a great squad at Marseille and yet they just strolled past the Dutchmen.

But would i not be right in thinking that 52 million £ is (or was) the salarial mass for the whole club whereas FFP refers only to player salaries IIRC. As the FFP cap for this coming season is higher than 52 million anyway it is highly unlikely that we would have breached it under normal circumstances. Now it comes down to "have we increased non TV revenues" in any way at all because FFP salary cap is linked to that alone. Selling Shaw for instance, something I've always advocated because I truly believe there is better available for less, now that gives us more CAP space and we already had firm offers apparently because it is a non-broadcasting revenue. Making our own shirts, that probably increases commercial revenue a bit as well, perhaps Veho pay a bit more tha AAP3. The salarial mass cannot be the sole reason for this unprecendented exodus of senior players.

the part that I revealed to you which came from a person who was actually Riberao Preto with the FFF was that Morgan would in no way be a Saint's player at the end of the transfer window and that his exit was already planned because there was no way that he could possibly be persuaded to stay. Oddly enough it was in a thread about Morgan Schneiderlin transfer rumours. As I got a lot of bolloaks about it I presumed it wasn't worth going any further down the avenue because it made no difference to anyone. Guan was telling you all all was rosy rosy so what could I add to that. If you remember on that day I contested his authority to say what he was saying in the way he was saying it. Once again I got hassle, no problem i can take it but sometimes I don't quite see the point in inviting any more. If you were to look back over the entire forum since 19 th January last I think that you would find somewhere that the only person to even reflect on the imbalance between the clubs book value (ie sale value) and it's liabilities would be, well yours truly. I reflect on a lot of things, it's what I do, I sometimes put them out there for discussion but when they bring only scorn and abuse then I back off as a rule.

Absolutely 52 million sounds about right, it was 41.7 million in the last accounts I believe, a couple of players have had improved contracts since then but we've lost some top heavy stuff (like Cortese for instance) and we haven't suddenly doubled everyones money.MP was lowly paid by all accounts, probably had a decent bonus clause though.Still against our income of what 100 million + a year no-one could really say that salarial mass was out of hand I'd have thought. Isn't that what GM is trying to say?

How long have the club got to pay for it though, surely it's not a cash on the nail job.

good enough for me, I like facts, positive or negative they're always what you need. Problem is on this forum positive non facts tend to be considered superior to negative facts.

So in fact the cost of Staplewood is a problem,is that right ? And to think I've been lambasted constantly for querying it's cost/utility ratio.

Official information ?

what do you want me to add ART, "told you so". I informed you all a couple of weeks back that I'd had an interesting conversation of a Sunday morning down in St Etienne. People poured scorn on some of it's content and chose to lap up what the club plant was telling them a little later on. Why should I now bother to comment on a fuller version of the same thing. Anyway I did comment, just said that Romain knows what he's about as a rule.

he probably thought it was the club's money after all. The football club earns money, the ex CEO spent it on err football.

thanks. I knew there was some sort of manoeuvre in the last known accounts.

bonuses no doubt triggered by finishing 8th instead of say 15th. That brings money to the club, players would normally participate in those gains. If the "board" thinks that they can attract top players and coaching staff and not pay them bonuses for achieving better results which in turn bring supplementary revenues to the club then they are dwelling in cloud cuckoo land. If the club paid even a quarter of the 7.4 million £ that finishing 8th instead of 15th brought in then I'd be surprised. Probably works out at 100K per first team player.

Why would he do that, perhaps Liverpool are lining him up now that their efforts to sign Remy have been ditched, 'Arry thinks that's a bit dodgy because Remy has passed numerous medical tests in the last few years with no hitch whatsoever. Seemed to think someone they might want more than Remy really has become available.

Liverpool have exactly the same side as they did at the start of last season don't they? Minus Suarez of course but he didn't start for 6 games. They have done what we should be doing, reinforcing roughly every sector. Except their owner doesn't count his coppers all day long.

I got called all the names under the sun for saying exactly that the other day when the was still a straw of optimism to be clung to. Then again who cares, it's a football forum.

Of course it does, if the owner loans the club money and then the club by bias of player sales is in a position to pay back those loans then it will probably happen unless said owner wishes to continue investing for the future. Liebherr wanting her money back is possible so it will probably happen. As for the equity of a mere 33 million £ well that will be recovered and plenty more by selling a debt free entity with state of the art facilities. As I've always said the liabillities exceeded the value of the club and we are seeing the solution to this problem. Look up Hofstetter....it's what he does.