Sport Republic

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

Finally are we all SR out?

  • No Lincs they're incredible owners we've just been unlucky for 4 years

    Votes: 6 20.7%

  • You were right all along you ****ing genius

    Votes: 23 79.3%
  • Total voters
    29
NNSaint said:
Isn't that the problem though? Even if we got that owner, we are restricted by PSR. The way SR have tried to do it is to increase the clubs turnover. I have limited knowledge of PSR but isn't it the case that if the owner wanted to inject **** loads of cash, the restrictions would not allow it?
Click to expand...

Correct. Hence Newcastle can’t just spend billions, and why Parsons has been working on the commercial side and the land buy out etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheRealSaints
NNSaint said:
Isn't that the problem though? Even if we got that owner, we are restricted by PSR. The way SR have tried to do it is to increase the clubs turnover. I have limited knowledge of PSR but isn't it the case that if the owner wanted to inject **** loads of cash, the restrictions would not allow it?
Click to expand...
I don't pay enough attention to the details but it depends on the situation and the punishment though, doesn't it?

So there may be times when pumping money in makes sense. Forest overspent went they got promoted but spent that money well enough they could take the 4 point deduction and still avoid relegation. I'm not so sure about the top of the league and Europe etc
 
Puck said:
I don't pay enough attention to the details but it depends on the situation and the punishment though, doesn't it?

So there may be times when pumping money in makes sense. Forest overspent went they got promoted but spent that money well enough they could take the 4 point deduction and still avoid relegation. I'm not so sure about the top of the league and Europe etc
Click to expand...
Agree and it seems that because of PSR, the only way for the promoted clubs to survive in the PL these days is by cheating!! It'll be really interesting to see what happens to them next season and how they go about surviving. PSR definitely seems to have preserved the status quo and I can't really see that changing.
 
NNSaint said:
Isn't that the problem though? Even if we got that owner, we are restricted by PSR. The way SR have tried to do it is to increase the clubs turnover. I have limited knowledge of PSR but isn't it the case that if the owner wanted to inject **** loads of cash, the restrictions would not allow it?
Click to expand...

True, but I think there is probably quite a large difference between spending the max amount we are allowed by PSR and not spending at all. We’ve spent over £100m both PL seasons under SR and PSR has been a thing for both of them. We pretty much broke even under Gao every year I think, and that was largely (entirely maybe?) without PSR. The “net spend is **** all” people like to bring up for SR is hugely skewed by the relegation season where we sold like £180m worth of players. If you look at solely the PL years I’d imagine our net spend is very high comparatively to other sides in the bottom half of the PL
 
Saintmagic said:
True, but I think there is probably quite a large difference between spending the max amount we are allowed by PSR and not spending at all. We’ve spent over £100m both PL seasons under SR and PSR has been a thing for both of them. We pretty much broke even under Gao every year I think. The “net spend is **** all” people like to bring up for SR is hugely skewed by the relegation season where we sold like £180m worth of players. If you look at solely the PL years I’d imagine our net spend is very high comparatively to other sides in the bottom half of the PL
Click to expand...
We spent £60m this season in terms of net spend. There was definitely room to spend more but I think they wanted to avoid the mistakes from last time we went down.
 
Ok here’s my 2+2 =5

Simon Jordan today leaks news that he’s heard that Southampton are up for sale.

Last week he was taking about having lunch with Turki Alalshikh,(the Saudi who now runs boxing) who was telling him that he is looking for an opportunity to buy an English football team, not necessarily a premier league team, as I think Sheff Wednesday was mentioned.

Could it be the about to be Championship club, Southampton???:emoticon-0102-bigsm
 
Saintmagic said:
True, but I think there is probably quite a large difference between spending the max amount we are allowed by PSR and not spending at all. We’ve spent over £100m both PL seasons under SR and PSR has been a thing for both of them. We pretty much broke even under Gao every year I think. The “net spend is **** all” people like to bring up for SR is hugely skewed by the relegation season where we sold like £180m worth of players. If you look at solely the PL years I’d imagine our net spend is very high comparatively to other sides in the bottom half of the PL
Click to expand...
But didn't we spend only a fraction of that money on players? And the ones we did buy were mostly crap. It did look a bit like "OK Russ, lets use that 180m to clear some of the debt (and buy some land and install a new fan zone and this and that...) and then we'll give you a bit for players" Again my knowledge is limited but that's what it seemed like to me.
 
NNSaint said:
But didn't we spend only a fraction of that money on players? And the ones we did buy were mostly crap. It did look a bit like "OK Russ, lets use that 180m to clear some of the debt (and buy some land and install a new fan zone and this and that...) and then we'll give you a bit for players" Again my knowledge is limited but that's what it seemed like to me.
Click to expand...

In the Champ season? Yeah we didn’t spend much at all, as we didn’t need to.

Just a quick google and it says we spent:

£25m on Ramsdale
15m euros, rising to 20m for Fernandes (not sure on exchange rate but what’s that like £12m initially?)
£15m on Archer rising to £17m
£18m on Downes
£20m on THB

That’s 90m before you factor in the rest who were all lower fees. I may have forgotten someone we sold for reasonable money though to get a lower net.
 
Saintmagic said:
In the Champ season? Yeah we didn’t spend much at all, as we didn’t need to.

Just a quick google and it says we spent:

£25m on Ramsdale
15m euros, rising to 20m for Fernandes (not sure on exchange rate but what’s that like £12m initially?)
£15m on Archer rising to £17m
£18m on Downes
£20m on THB

That’s 90m before you factor in the rest who were all lower fees. I may have forgotten someone we sold for reasonable money though to get a lower net.
Click to expand...
Fair point. Alcaraz gave us another £15m too I guess.
 
Solak did splash the cash. If we give him the benefit of the doubt , his intentions were good but the people he surrounded himself with were generally incompetent. When a bad decision was made , it tended to be catastophic. No one would have minded if we had not had two relegations nor appointed the likes of Nathan Jones. We would have tolerated a few duff signings as opposed to the one or two who worked out.

I would sum SR as ambitious but incompetent. The fact that the BBC is reporting the story adds some legs to it. I am not surprised and think a competent and experienced owner can turn the ship around. If we go for £125k, i would rather any undervaluation been spent on players.

I do think that we will lose Dibling quite cheaply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: saint horatio
Ian Thumwood said:
Solak did splash the cash. If we give him the benefit of the doubt , his intentions were good but the people he surrounded himself with were generally incompetent. When a bad decision was made , it tended to be catastophic. No one would have minded if we had not had two relegations nor appointed the likes of Nathan Jones. We would have tolerated a few duff signings as opposed to the one or two who worked out.

I would sum SR as ambitious but incompetent. The fact that the BBC is reporting the story adds some legs to it. I am not surprised and think a competent and experienced owner can turn the ship around. If we go for £125k, i would rather any undervaluation been spent on players.

I do think that we will lose Dibling quite cheaply.
Click to expand...

I may remortgage if we go for £125k and run it myself. Who's up for helping?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ian Thumwood and Toss saints
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back