Maguire looks better in a back three that doesn't include Stones, personally I think Stones would be better if developed to be a defensive holding midfielder.
Harry
- Thread starter cheshireles
- Start date
-
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
-
Maguire looks better in a back three that doesn't include Stones, personally I think Stones would be better if developed to be a defensive holding midfielder.
Plus Man City have to sign home grown players or register a smaller squad. That puts his price up at least another £10m
mostly 40% unless they've an accountant that does some safe tricks. and 20% on most of what they spend. that's more than half his daily £40k gone already!
Anyone else feel like setting up a just giving page for the poor lad?
The key thing for me is the point when it starts costing then money. Surely that's about now? The parachute payments are gone so surely the club makes a loss excluding transfer fees. You can't rely on continually getting big fees because you run out of good players to sell. Surely there has to come a point very soon where they need to get out.
It's Riyad Mahrez that needs help, despite earning about 200,000 a week he's been struggling to pay his nanny 3,600 quid he owes her.
Even went on to spend thousands on legal fee's trying to avoid paying her what she was due.
You would expect so, but what worries me is that they will have a good idea of what income they are likely to get in the coming season. They seem to have set a budget within those parameters, so are cutting their cloth accordingly.
Therefore the budget only allows maybe a small amount for transfers if anything and players wages are at a level that will only attract league one or two players or maybe older or poorer quality players from the championship looking to get a year or two extra payday before they retire.
In a nutshell, they will work with their means, which ultimately means the squad will only be good enough for scrapping around the bottom end of the table or at worst relegated.
I really feel there is vindictiveness in their intentions, and they will just hang on until the bitter end, but as you say will go when it no longer is possible to operate. When that is nobody knows!
Last edited:
I don't think it is vindictive to operate the club day to day within its means - that's good business sense, ignoring that has led to the financial downfall of many clubs. What would be vindictive is if they trousered all the income from player sales to pay down their fictitious £50m debt. Time will tell on that.
I have said on here before that in some ways the Allam's are running the club in the right way, based on the fact that they have stated they are not putting any more money into the club. When I say vindictive, I mean that they are purposely not selling, because they know that the likelihood is that a new owner would invest in the club, and they are effectively stopping that happening by not selling.
I made that exact point on another thread. They are budgeting on existing expected revenues. I expect any transfer funds will get trousered straight away.
I doubt many owners invest in the club
They loan the club money and charge interest don’t they?
Leaving the club in the **** eventually
We don’t have a local owner on the horizon and never have had who actually invests or throws his own money away like Gibson at boro
It's mixed, some, like Ashley, Gibson, Coates and Abramovic have made their loans interest free, others charge interest at nominal rates. The interest we paid on our debt was the same as Everton, West Ham and Southampton and double that of Leicester and Man City.
We would hopefully get owners that ambition is to get to the EPL, as that is where the money is. To do that you need to invest, which is what the Allam's did when SB was with us. Their mistake was not taking advantage of the situation when we beat the Wendies at Wembley because Ehab had a wonderful plan of trying to do it his way.
If they had been sensible, they could have invested wisely and stayed in the EPL, instead the followed Ehab's master plan, and see where that go us.
[HASHTAG]#opportunitymissed[/HASHTAG]
Wasn't there a note to the last published accounts stating, without external monies the company could not operate? Any transfer fees will help pay the bills. And yes, this does include loan interest. What would you call it, indirect trousering? And if there is any left pay down the loan. But 4/5 million interest payments for doing nothing, why even do that?
I would put Adam Pearson firmly in that category (backed by Peter Wilkinson's money, of course).
Gibson hasn't really thrown his money away, at least not for a long time. He simply covers the debt at the club he owns, just like the Allams. The key difference between Steve Gibson and the Allams, is that Steve Gibson isn't a humongous bell-end.