Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
In which case proportionally there is no difference between us and the other clubs-except Wolves who will be able to outspend anybody.
No it won't be easy but with FFP everyone will be offering less wages than they were over the last couple of seasons.
we have already comprimised our league status
not signing king
not investing when we lost Juke
not investing last summer
costs will go lower and sadly, so may our league status
King had effectively signed a contract but he went to a club with better prospects, for a larger wage, and for longer, can't blame well anyone for that move - Thorn shouldn't have spouted his mouth and SISU can't go spending beyond the means of the club.
We signed Nimely and Norwood on loan because of the Juke deal, but that's probably what we could afford, every penny we make from transfer revenue can't possibly go back into the playing staff, it has to go into running the club - it isn't that black and white.
Last summer as in the the 12/13 summer window? If so, we signed 9-10 players... 20 over the course of the season.
If you're on about 11/12 summer window, well, we did waste 400-500k on Cody...
Relegation to L1 has probably cost us more than it would have to appoint a decent manager and have an acceptable Championship squad. Who knows what damage that idiot Thorn did to our prospects.
Forget the manager, that side had relegation fodder written all over it from day one. Two kids making their début when they were clearly not ready yet in the first game because there was no one else said it all. And I love the way the Cody fee keeps going up, just like SISU's "investment"...it was 150k according to many sources at the time. Some people have very short memories.
Forget the manager, that side had relegation fodder written all over it from day one. Two kids making their début when they were clearly not ready yet in the first game because there was no one else said it all. And I love the way the Cody fee keeps going up, just like SISU's "investment"...it was 150k according to many sources at the time. Some people have very short memories.
Just had a look at the Doncaster ground arangement. I think our current rental agreement is far better.
Out of interest why? How does it help with FPP rules?
A case in point is the cross invoicing of revenue ACL offered. The money isn't ours but still 'counts' and allows us to spend more even though we haven't got it.
In which case proportionally there is no difference between us and the other clubs-except Wolves who will be able to outspend anybody.
Yep, but wolves are going to find it hard to offload players to meet the FFP.
Easy.
We pay no rent for the Ricoh. no overheads so how can it not benefit fpp ?
Yep, but wolves are going to find it hard to offload players to meet the FFP.
Forget the manager, that side had relegation fodder written all over it from day one. Two kids making their début when they were clearly not ready yet in the first game because there was no one else said it all. And I love the way the Cody fee keeps going up, just like SISU's "investment"...it was 150k according to many sources at the time. Some people have very short memories.
We were rarely outplayed and lost most games by one goal. I will always hold that buffoon responsible and Kenny boy for hiring him. Dumb and Dumber if ever I saw it.
You don't need to guess, until May 2011 they were paying at least £981k under the penultimate agreement (before taking on the 99yr long lease of the entire stadium) which allowed them to keep the perimeter advertising and match day car parking income. They had the option to end this in May 2011 which they did and the rent under the new agreement dropped to £281k but presumably (and the document doesn't mention this specifically) lost the access to the income streams mentioned above.Brilliant a classic own goal. Guess what Doncaster were previously paying in rent until they renegotiated a new deal?
In my opinion we would have stayed up had our owners allowed Thorn to bring a loan or two in for the run-in With six games to play starting with Peterbrough at home we were fourth from bottom of those six games only Southampton away was the most difficult. I am puzzled as to why this wasn't done as the cost to sisu was massive, 4million in TV money alone, the cost of getting in a couple of loans for a month or two, in wages £20k ? What is their reasnoning and why ?If we had gone for Mark Robins instead, I believe 100% he would have kept us up.
It's a very boring and old debate, but although a superb manager may have just kept us up, that squad had relegation written all over it. You don't have to be a genius to work out that if you take King, Aron, Westwood, Turner and later Lukas out of a side that struggled that it was certain to be in a relegation battle. And honestly, that off-field/in dug-out bullcrap with KD and co didn't help.
Grendel-can you tell me what RB we had on the bench first game of that season? And I'm not going to go around searching for a source to justify any point I made to you, especially considering that they were electronic and are I assume unavailable. Suffice to say Eakin for one said that it was "no-way near" the fee that some sources had said it was, being nearer to 150k than the mooted 300k. 500k isn't even close.
We had wood and McPake on the bench. Thorn preferred to play keogh at centre back so it was his choice alone.
Every source says McDonald was £400k and given your criticism of Cwr its somewhat amusing you now use them as a source of info.
I thought we got Cody because we could not afford ALF, who moved for 350k
I thought we got Cody because we could not afford ALF, who moved for 350k
We could not afford ALF because we hadnt sold turner in time. We needed to sell turner to buy cody.
An inspired decision.
We could not afford ALF because we hadnt sold turner in time. We needed to sell turner to buy cody.
Are you talking about the agreement they had until May 2011:Own goal number 2. What were they paying before?
Are you talking about the agreement they had until May 2011:
Where they were paying at least £981k and allowed them to keep the perimeter advertising and match day car parking income.
or
The one after that which was for one season and was £281k but presumably (and the document doesn't mention this specifically) lost the access to the income streams mentioned above.
Source: https://www.doncaster.gov.uk/db/cham...ReportID=14161
Obviously the first in the context of the question. Your second point is speculative.
I asked a while ago which present arrangement offers the best FPP benefit ours or theirs. You never answered, how odd. Which is it?
Keep asking you your opinion on Swansea bit again no answer.
Obviously the first in the context of the question. Your second point is speculative.
I asked a while ago which present arrangement offers the best FPP benefit ours or theirs. You never answered, how odd. Which is it?
Keep asking you your opinion on Swansea bit again no answer.
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...il-done-enough?p=435053&viewfull=1#post435053That is a non answer. FPP rules are capped as a percentage of revenues James so regardless of your personal view on football expenditure which is likely to offer greater revenue -- the arrangement proposed by our council or the arrangement given by Doncaster's council.
To make you happy I guess Doncaster would, although as I say if you've got no money to spend it's a bit academic having the potential to spend it.
Not odd as I did answer. Maybe you dumped this dull and irrelevant information to the archive section of your brain.
http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...il-done-enough?p=435053&viewfull=1#post435053
Doncaster didn't annoy their council by witholding rent etc. to the point that the council refused to sell them their share of the stadium though did they.
Oh and where are the thousands that we're going to spend on the team going to come from? At the moment we have very little money coming in, don't think you buy a season ticket yet because there's been no official firm decision on where we're going to be playing yet. Or for that matter who owns the club (i.e. golden share), administrator or Holdings and a transfer embargo to boot. Just how many season tickets we'll sell is another matter, given the way SISU have behaved threatening to move us out of Coventry.
Swansea coming soon, although it sounds like a bit of a Hull situation.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?