Transfer Rumours Summer '22 Transfer Thread

  • 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!
HullCityInEurope said:
Negative news then I take it?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say negative, no. More eye opening about where the money funding the club is coming from.

According to the ex-city player, a short term loan was apparently taken out from a Dubai based bank to buy the club at pretty high interest if left unpaid. The buying party tried to pay it back early, but before the deal was complete (which is the bit I don't understand/find difficult to believe) and were told no by the EFL. So in order to pay back the loan within the time frame deals had to be sought to finance the club, such as the Corendon airlines deal and the other sponsorships. And in order to fund our players, other players had to leave, KLP included.

It makes sense when you think about it, because a man whose wealth is mostly tied up in businesses and investments isn't going to have the ready cash available to buy a Championship club outright. The CA deal is multi year, so if there's a yearly fee paid or it was all paid up front, that's plenty of money to pay back the loan and the money from KLP has provided us with money to sign almost a new squad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NewcastleTiger, HullCityInEurope and Howdentiger2
Mckechnie Orange said:
Baz figures suggest we've spent about 12m in fees already. KLP doesn't cover half a dozen players 7 figure wage contracts over 3 years also now does it? Match day income won't cover it either.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that, but if the owners spending is reliant on KLP money like I feel ST is implying then it's worrying for our sustainability is it not? If they don't have the funds I'd rather we aim slightly lower and protect ourselves long term
 
  • Like
Reactions: SydneyTiger14
HullCityInEurope said:
I'm aware of that, but if the owners spending is reliant on KLP money like I feel ST is implying then it's worrying for our sustainability is it not? If they don't have the funds I'd rather we aim slightly lower and protect ourselves long term
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, but it does mean we'll have to take more of a Brentford stance in that we'll have to sell our best players to continue to progress. Which, for a club of our size, is perfectly normal but sometimes comes across as unambitious or annoying to the fans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kalman, Lincoln Tiger, NewcastleTiger and 1 other person
Steven Toast said:
I wouldn't say negative, no. More eye opening about where the money funding the club is coming from.

According to the ex-city player, a short term loan was apparently taken out from a Dubai based bank to buy the club at pretty high interest if left unpaid. The buying party tried to pay it back early, but before the deal was complete (which is the bit I don't understand/find difficult to believe) and were told no by the EFL. So in order to pay back the loan within the time frame deals had to be sought to finance the club, such as the Corendon airlines deal and the other sponsorships. And in order to fund our players, other players had to leave, KLP included.

It makes sense when you think about it, because a man whose wealth is mostly tied up in businesses and investments isn't going to have the ready cash available to buy a Championship club outright. The CA deal is multi year, so if there's a yearly fee paid or it was all paid up front, that's plenty of money to pay back the loan and the money from KLP has provided us with money to sign almost a new squad.
Click to expand...

The KLP money doesn't cover the fees and increase in playing budget though, nor did we have anyone on high wages to really make much of a saving.
 
Steven Toast said:
Interesting. So it checks out about KLP paying for our spending then. I heard something from a former City player (through a family member) about our new owners, trying to work out if it's true.
Click to expand...

Even if the plan of the owner was always to cash in on KLP, to help fund new players, in some way it is prudent to not flaunt these FFP rules and stay well within these limits.

Also, it is likely if the previous owner was still in situ, then this money for KLP wouldn't have been reinvested in the players, it would have gone largely into their pocket.
 
Mckechnie Orange said:
The KLP money doesn't cover the fees and increase in playing budget though.
Click to expand...

It's probably covered the bulk of what we've spent and when you consider the fact we've only paid fees for three players (Sinik included), it sort of makes sense. Add to that increased membership sales and more generous sponsorships and you can see where the majority of the money is coming from.

It probably means Greaves will more than likely go if an eight figure offer comes in this season, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SydneyTiger14
Steven Toast said:
I wouldn't say negative, no. More eye opening about where the money funding the club is coming from.

According to the ex-city player, a short term loan was apparently taken out from a Dubai based bank to buy the club at pretty high interest if left unpaid. The buying party tried to pay it back early, but before the deal was complete (which is the bit I don't understand/find difficult to believe) and were told no by the EFL. So in order to pay back the loan within the time frame deals had to be sought to finance the club, such as the Corendon airlines deal and the other sponsorships. And in order to fund our players, other players had to leave, KLP included.

It makes sense when you think about it, because a man whose wealth is mostly tied up in businesses and investments isn't going to have the ready cash available to buy a Championship club outright. The CA deal is multi year, so if there's a yearly fee paid or it was all paid up front, that's plenty of money to pay back the loan and the money from KLP has provided us with money to sign almost a new squad.
Click to expand...

I don't understand why the EFL would block us paying off a loan? Also if we were in a position to pay it off before the takeover, what's stopping us paying it off now?

I suppose it makes sense as to why we're in constant dialog with the EFL like Baz claims.
 
HullCityInEurope said:
I don't understand why the EFL would block us paying off a loan? Also if we were in a position to pay it off before the takeover, what's stopping us paying it off now?

I suppose it makes sense as to why we're in constant dialog with the EFL like Baz claims.
Click to expand...

Because they tried to pay it back before the sale was completed, apparently and use assumed funds from sponsorships lined up. It's got nothing to do with FFP, we're miles into the black with that.
 
Steven Toast said:
It's probably covered the bulk of what we've spent and when you consider the fact we've only paid fees for three players (Sinik included), it sort of makes sense. Add to that increased membership sales and more generous sponsorships and you can see where the majority of the money is coming from.

It probably means Greaves will more than likely go if an eight figure offer comes in this season, though.
Click to expand...

Baz is saying 11.5 in fees. We got 16 up front for KLP. That's 4.5 left to cover 6-8 3 year deals over 1m a year. And there's still more to come in.

If Acun can be believed about. Top 10 playing budget, then KLP would only really pay for the increase in wages over the season.
 
Mckechnie Orange said:
Why is Baz quoting a meeting to ensure compliance then?
Click to expand...

I don't know, I don't know the finer intricacies of how FFP works, other than the fact that we aren't going to make anything like the losses required to trigger any penalties or wrongdoing.

They might have been put on alert with the whole loan thing, might just be checking in to make sure we aren't going mad like Derby did.
 
Mckechnie Orange said:
Baz is saying 11.5 in fees. We got 16 up front for KLP. That's 4.5 left to cover 6-8 3 year deals over 1m a year. And there's still more to come in.

If Acun can be believed about. Top 10 playing budget, then KLP would only really pay for the increase in wages over the season.
Click to expand...

It’s £16m guaranteed for KLP, not £16m up front
 
  • Like
Reactions: M88 EVN
Steven Toast said:
No, he's right, it was £16m rising to £20m with add ons (some places have reported £22m, but I've heard more reliable ones say £20m).
Click to expand...

So we only have 4.5m to cover all the new contracts and the 3 or so left to come in?

4.5 million only covers one player on 30k a week for 3 years. We'll have paid 7 figure signing on fees even on free transfers also.

What was our wage budget last year? You can easily add 10m onto that this year with the signings we've made or planning, and those leaving won't make much of a dent as they were on Allam wages anyway.
 
Steven Toast said:
So if we've made £16m from KLP and another half a mil say on Honeyman, would that cover all those transfers and wages do you think?
Click to expand...
Didn’t I read something from the City hierarchy earlier in the season suggesting increased commercial activity would cover wages. While Acun plus sales would provide transfer kitty? I have no idea if that is anywhere near plausible, but it was said.
 
Mckechnie Orange said:
So we only have 4.5m to cover all the new contracts and the 3 or so left to come in?

4.5 million only covers one player on 30k a week for 3 years. We'll have paid 7 figure signing on fees even on free transfers also.

What was our wage budget last year? You can easily add 10m onto that this year with the signings we've made, and those leaving won't make much of a dent as they were on Allam wages.
Click to expand...

Well not necessarily, those details are usually kept private but I can't imagine we've paid a million pounds to get somebody to sign for us. We'll have paid something, but more likely there'll be generous promotion bonuses rather than flat out million pound payments.

Our wage budget last season was amongst the lowest. Wilks was our highest paid player if you're to believe some tenuous transfer sources and nobody was on more than £10k a week.

The KLP money was used for the bulk of the transfer costs, but it won't be the sole source of it. The club still generates income through sponsorships and other means too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SydneyTiger14
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back