Unbelievable Jeff

No-one has bid for Barkley, that's why. If someone wanted him stories would have been released in the papers and he'd be off.

Then what you gonna do, burn down the stadium, kill someone? Grow up.

Well, if we sign decent replacements then the posts will still apply? It wasn't about what was going on, it's about the panic of grown men when a club sells a few players.

Tell me what is incorrect about what has been said above. Or are you just following me around again?

Alright thanks. We have sold 4 players, 3 for bat **** mental fees, replaced 2 of them with potentially better players with more players to come. How are your sheets doing? You do have sheets, don't you? Or do you just sleep straight on the plastic mattress protector?

150/1. I smell bull.

Fair enough, my mistake!

None of the above.

So, have we still only sold Lallana, Shaw and Lambert?

Exactly. Not sure how people continuously fail to realise this.

"Only other". That's a joke yes?

Corporation tax only of profits though, if we re-invest the money in players we obviously don't pay that.

Oh I know, but we won't spend money based on what we will/can get. We will spend based on what we already have guaranteed, and keep aside money from that chunk for the clauses. Otherwise you're potentially hedging against money you don't have, which after the review of finances when they arrived it seems they don't want to do. If and when the money then becomes available down the line it will be made available then and there.

Firstly 93 + 27 is 120, HTH. Secondly, after you take out loyalty payments, the fact that these deals are never paid for up front and will be structured over the next couple of years on guaranteed payments, the clauses on some of the deals (Lallana especially), the actual amount to spend is a lot less, I would say around 60m. We've spent around 20M so far, and I would say that when Lovren and Chambers do go we probably have around 35m that we will spend and probably in the following way: Kolo 6m Forster 9m Van Dijk 7m Ings 8m Redmond 5m

Ha, has to be an adults, no concessions. Saint Charlie may want it though. What age is it up to?

I do trust that they're not looking to sell the club or cash in etc, however I do feel they're a bit naive. I don't think they could have done much about the players that have left/rumoured to leave mind.

Which one, Randall Cobb?

SEASON TICKET WANTED: I am willing to pay £300 for YOUR season ticket. With the ridiculous selling, massive cost cutting and disrespect shown to fans your seson ticket is now utterly worthless. So, please put your money where your mouth is and get this amazing one-time offer.

But what about golf, cricket, NFL, European football etc. If you can't take it just don't watch those games

Yes, we all know this, including the club.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree. For me (and definition wise) asset stripping includes selling all valuable assets and removing that money from the company, only leaving debts. For you it obviously isn't, and it seems like any amount of Internet definitions won't make any difference to you.

It's not good, I agree, but by definition it is not an asset strip. That is my point and my problem with this thread. We are just selling a lot of players at extremely good prices.

I can't deny that.

What are you misunderstanding here? The main point is for an asset strip is that each and every one of its valuable assets are sold off. That is not happening here, as you admitted above? Am I the only one feeling like they're banging their head against a particularly stupid wall?

And I have said I am disappointed with it, if you want to go back and read my posts. In relation to the job, I am trying to use a real world example so that people can actually understand what is going on. However what we are witnessing is NOT an asset strip and as such should not be classed as one.