Ok mate, so if he was to continue his form of last season (18 goals) you don't think that would benefit us?
In all honesty lad anyone would benefit us! But it is a risk and we have been burned so many times with price tags and wages you can understand the cautious approach.
Do nothing though and we lose 80m + a year. Its going to cost us a fortune to do anything. Plus we can afford it Short is a billionaire.
It might be a fair price but players don't go for fair prices anymore. He would take 60k a week in London but to get him up here I suspect it would take a lot more.
Being a billionaire is only any use to us if he keeps spending it though Vegas. You said yourself that you'd heard his interest was 1on a scale of 1 - 10.
Also you don't become a billionaire by making bad buissines decisions. No matter what anyone says Ellis has backed this club and it's understandable why he would question throwing money at it as the answer, it hasn't worked so far! I've also heard from people who have talked to the man that he very much has an interest and they were impressed by his knowledge of both the game and history of SAFC.
Well, all I can say is, you have to speculate to accumulate. It's also even easier to say when its someone else's money!
Agree lad, I would love us to spend spend spend but something's up, and I think our hands are tied financially. If it is the fair play rules how do City and Chelsea get around it?
But this could be interpreted as us being on his top ten list of interests or urgencies whilst running companies worth the economy of a few small countries. He is damned for doing , then further damned for not doing. He has seen enough of us to know how the fans feel, albeit from a rarefied atmosphere.
This is not a bad business decision though. Its a bad decision not to spend the money at this point. Billionaires usually take calculated risks. We don't know the whole story I admit that but relegation would be a business disaster. Either spend the money or sell the club because if we get relegated it will cost a small fortune to get back into the premier league, top championship clubs are spending 10m on one player.
Who the hell would want to play here when the crowd turns on its own players after 10 minutes of the first home game and walk out everytime we go 2 goals down. Our fans are not exactly a great selling point for the club at present and in my opinion are making it harder to attract quality.
Totaly agree mate. Its still a big ask though when the players make no effort worthy of support! Its a vicious circle that can spiral downwards very quickly but only climbs slowly back.
I totally agree..However, it is my view that showing unity and support when the chips are down (it is easy to support success) would give us a better chance of turning things around..
Thing is vegas - we'd have Austin to hold the ball up and bring other s in - how's he going to stop the ball at the other end which is where our problem has been for the first 2 games? We've scored 3 so far - which is OK for 1 away and 1 home game - and is a better return than last season's average per game! Just we can;t stop the oppo scoring! As for the "£80m" - complete myth - if we go down then we will still receive 55% of the TV revenue - with players on championship wages rather than PL wages this wouldn't be as big an impact and it's nowhere near £80m lost - more like £20m-£30m.
It may do us good to go down and rebuild. Anyone who mentipns a phrase like this. May i suggest going to see a shrink.
Why do people keep saying this as though our spending is up there with man city and chelsea. Over Shorts tenure at the club I would be surprised if we were above mid table for actually spending. Our problem is we buy a large number of squad players and then expect them to be good enough first 11 every week which they arent and then we get very little when selling them on. The table in the link below shows we are 9th for actual spending over the last 5 years. Granted higher than some teams who are performing better than us but if there was another column for number of players bought then the average spent on each player im guessing we would be 1st (or last) at around 50p for each player. I thought and i believe from his comments in the media that DA realised this and that ES would listen and spend money on 3 or 4 quality players in key areas. I believe this has happened on DA part but i also believe that ES has lost his bottle and is just doing the bare minimum he thinks will scrape us through. On the flip side i cant believe that ES can not see where he has went wrong before now and before we were in this mess. Hope i am proved wrong but I dont think i will be. http://www.transferleague.co.uk/pre...tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons
Dave, our net spend each season since 2009 is an average go £4.5 million. On another story, Burnley are after buying a Brentford player for £9 million and I believe Middlesbrough, after beating us to the signing of Downing, had made a £12 million bid for Rhodes.
Charley I know, I read that somewhere also. its really frustrating, and I am not saying going out and spending a lot on players is a must if you can get the quality thats needed for a cheaper price im all for that, Like Guzman i think he will be a good buy (loan), but generally speaking you get you get what your paid. ES has employed a manager and DOF and he now needs to trust these and forget the clowns that bought our players in the past and back them. Why would you employ these people and then not trust them in doing there jobs ie buy players.
I have no idea what the real figure is, but I would have thought the going rate just to stand still, never mind improve, in the PL, is about £20m-£30m, for mid-level clubs. Top 4 - 6/7 obviously more and newly promoted, invariably less.
