Non AMP
Sky Blues Talk
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Does anyone else feel that we’ve been sold short ? (4 Viewers)

  • Thread starter skyblue_55
  • Start date Monday at 8:01 PM
Forums New posts
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
Next
First Prev 5 of 6 Next Last

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 10:25 AM
  • #141
shmmeee said:
We were bidding like £20m worth of bids while there was zero interest in MvE so not sure I buy that. Money is clearly there. The problem seems to be in selecting realistic targets who’s wage expectations we can meet.
Click to expand...
But unless that money is actually spent there's no proof of the money being there. We could put in a £250m bid for Yamal but it means nothing if the deal doesn't go through.

Maybe those bids were made to get the ball rolling so we weren't rushing around last minute but the actual funds to proceed with it were only going to be there if certain transfers out occurred first. As they didn't maybe we never actually had the money to spend
 
Reactions: CCFCSteve, wingy, Speedie's Head and 1 other person
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 10:29 AM
  • #142
shmmeee said:
The ITKs said Hughes (which was widely reported) Woolfenden (which happened) and a forward. We were linked with Godo who went for £7m, even if that was too rich you’re talking £14m in bids for Hughes and Woolfenden we know about.

There was clearly money to spend.
Click to expand...
Maybe, maybe not, perhaps not all of them together, nobody knows the detail (but then you know that). It's quite likely that any business would have depended on somebody going too. What we do know is that Woolfenden had been on the radar for a long time (like most, if not all of our transfers in)
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 10:34 AM
  • #143
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
But unless that money is actually spent there's no proof of the money being there. We could put in a £250m bid for Yamal but it means nothing if the deal doesn't go through.

Maybe those bids were made to get the ball rolling so we weren't rushing around last minute but the actual funds to proceed with it were only going to be there if certain transfers out occurred first. As they didn't maybe we never actually had the money to spend
Click to expand...
Maybe the bids were just posturing to look like we would be busy, and to throw the fans off! No proof we have any money at all.
 
C

CovValleyBoy

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 10:35 AM
  • #144
I am entirely with Doug King on the way he is conducting the business of our club.
Organic growth is the right way to grow a football club. Our fans backing has enabled him to get it right. Hope he stays the course.

Shame he has the odd (very "odd" detractor).
Deserves all our support.

& no I never met the guy.
If I did I'd tell him to trend up his hair piece.
Good luck DK.
 
Reactions: Lamps, StrettoBoy, blunted and 1 other person

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 11:05 AM
  • #145
rob9872 said:
Nobody is arguing there isn't money to spend, the point is, was it Hughes and Wolfenden or was it Hughes or Wolfenden? Would Hughes only have happened if MVE went? We'll never know. Did the Sheaf money cover the Wolfenden fee? As for the ITK's who do you think they are? Only Jimmy really with any credit and he never shared anything, ITK's now = guessers and that's fine, but it's like Chinese whispers. According to this site, Facebook and Twitter the Bovin & Hughes deals were completed on Friday. As soon as someone says it and another repeats it, then it spreads like wildfire and suddenly becomes fact.
Click to expand...

Jimmy was the one that said we were in for both Hughes and Woolfenden
 
K

Kingokings204

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 11:16 AM
  • #146
CovValleyBoy said:
I am entirely with Doug King on the way he is conducting the business of our club.
Organic growth is the right way to grow a football club. Our fans backing has enabled him to get it right. Hope he stays the course.

Shame he has the odd (very "odd" detractor).
Deserves all our support.

& no I never met the guy.
If I did I'd tell him to trend up his hair piece.
Good luck DK.
Click to expand...

totally agree. We have to go up the right way and not throw a load of money at it then it fails and we are left in the shit.

We all want better players and investment but it can’t be just like that. We know we have a process and roughly what we have to work with.

the problem we have now is better players will cost more with bigger returns though. So instead of being in the 2-4m market we need to be in the 6-8m market .
 
Reactions: StrettoBoy and CovValleyBoy
H

Hincha

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 11:29 AM
  • #147
If the (winger) Rak-Sakyi rumour was true it could be that Palace's failed move for Solomon meant that we couldn't get it done
 
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 11:31 AM
  • #148
Kingokings204 said:
the problem we have now is better players will cost more with bigger returns though. So instead of being in the 2-4m market we need to be in the 6-8m market .
Click to expand...
Around £5m seems to get you a solid champ player still in most positions, except top goal scorers. These kinds of players are never going to be turned around for big money though, so you can't be a "Brentford" doing that. The best we can really hope for on average is a return something close to neutral (if you ignore the wages) and everyone else is playing the same game of course! The top money youngsters have youth international pedigree already and these players tend to get signed or get poached much earlier on by the PL clubs. I find it quite interesting that Woolfenden, just for example, was around £4m, Hughes on the other hand has some connection to the England set up. The lower leagues are full of players who never made the progression from the unders so it's always a big gamble. That's why the smaller European markets are so important.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 12:05 PM
  • #149
This
Kingokings204 said:
totally agree. We have to go up the right way and not throw a load of money at it then it fails and we are left in the shit.

We all want better players and investment but it can’t be just like that. We know we have a process and roughly what we have to work with.

the problem we have now is better players will cost more with bigger returns though. So instead of being in the 2-4m market we need to be in the 6-8m market .
Click to expand...

I think the problem is at that level you’re competing with European clubs and parachute clubs. And if you can’t offer a really good chance of PL next season or European competition then you need to be at least competitive on wages and some of these teams pay silly amounts. I don’t think the bottleneck to a top 4 squad if fees, I think it’s wages.
 
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 12:13 PM
  • #150
shmmeee said:
I think it’s wages.
Click to expand...
It's pretty clear they're running a budget for around 23-25 seniors registered players. That's still a smallish squad especially with the older/better u-21s out on loan. They'll also be paying player transfers over 3 years or so and big committments in the past couple of seasons will still be pulling on the accounts.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 12:28 PM
  • #151
Speedie's Head said:
It's pretty clear they're running a budget for around 23-25 seniors registered players. That's still a smallish squad especially with the older/better u-21s out on loan. They'll also be paying player transfers over 3 years or so and big committments in the past couple of seasons will still be pulling on the accounts.
Click to expand...

I think ins and out since King arrived at roughly balanced now Sheaf has gone. Maybe a couple of million in the red still.

Looking at wage bills the likes of Sunderland and the parachute clubs just spend a chunk more than most. I forget the numbers but it was something like £40m to £30m so a fairly big percentage jump. I wonder if you either have to risk that or just keep finishing 5/6 and hoping for a lucky season losing 5-6m a season instead of £15-20m for a couple.

It’s one of the things that makes me think King might sell up to someone with the appetite for that risk to get us over the line if we don’t do it this year.
 
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 12:55 PM
  • #152
shmmeee said:
It’s one of the things that makes me think King might sell up to someone with the appetite for that risk to get us over the line if we don’t do it this year.
Click to expand...
Clearly the big value in his investment comes with promotion but the finances are so delicately balanced. The thing that persuaded him to sack Robins in the end was threat to the income streams of a relegation fight.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 1:08 PM
  • #153
Speedie's Head said:
Clearly the big value in his investment comes with promotion but the finances are so delicately balanced. The thing that persuaded him to sack Robins in the end was threat to the income streams of a relegation fight.
Click to expand...

I think he’s probably cleaned the club up enough and raised its profile that he could exit with a profit without promotion. We’ll see though not exactly a huge market so it depends if someone wants a crack at the PL.
 
Reactions: CCFCSteve
A

aloisiwouldhavescored

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 1:11 PM
  • #154
shmmeee said:
Which is why you don’t leave all your business until the last minute.
Click to expand...
Which is what happened with Sheaf apparently. Wrexham were in for someone and that fell through so they swooped in for Sheaf at the 11th hour which didn't give us any time to find a replacement. Apparently Lampard was well peed off.
 
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 1:16 PM
  • #155
shmmeee said:
I think he’s probably cleaned the club up enough and raised its profile that he could exit with a profit without promotion.
Click to expand...
Yes but perhaps not if the total losses start becoming £25 or £30m over the 3 years all of a sudden. As you rightly said it's as much about the wages
 
Reactions: Captain Dart and shmmeee

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 2:33 PM
  • #156
Speedie's Head said:
It's pretty clear they're running a budget for around 23-25 seniors registered players. That's still a smallish squad especially with the older/better u-21s out on loan. They'll also be paying player transfers over 3 years or so and big committments in the past couple of seasons will still be pulling on the accounts.
Click to expand...
Instalments out are ok as long as they are roughly matched by the payments received for outgoing transfers.
 
Reactions: Speedie's Head
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 2:45 PM
  • #157
Captain Dart said:
Instalments out are ok as long as they are roughly matched by the payments received for outgoing transfers.
Click to expand...
Yes, it's still a while before the next accounts are due.
 

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:19 PM
  • #158
So was the money there for transfers or not ?
No proof either way.
 
Reactions: Lamps

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:20 PM
  • #159
Chris1987 said:
So was the money there for transfers or not ?
No proof either way.
Click to expand...
If we bid on a player for £10m then yes.
 

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:22 PM
  • #160
Ccfcisparks said:
If we bid on a player for £10m then yes.
Click to expand...
Was there any actual proof that bid of that sum was made ? I honestly don't know.
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:23 PM
  • #161
Chris1987 said:
Was there any actual proof that bid of that sum was made ? I honestly don't know.
Click to expand...
So you are saying King would bid on a player without the funds then, as a bluff?
 

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:25 PM
  • #162
Ccfcisparks said:
So you are saying King would bid on a player without the funds then, as a bluff?
Click to expand...
No thats not what I'm saying. i was just asking whether there was any actual concrete proof that a bid of that amount was made.
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:27 PM
  • #163
Chris1987 said:
No thats not what I'm saying. i was just asking whether there was any actual concrete proof that a bid of that amount was made.
Click to expand...
Multiple media sources
 

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:28 PM
  • #164
Ccfcisparks said:
Multiple media sources
Click to expand...
Which ones in particular ?
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:29 PM
  • #165
Chris1987 said:
Which ones in particular ?
Click to expand...
Baz Cooper from the Hull Daily Mail
 
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:30 PM
  • #166
Chris1987 said:
Was there any actual proof that bid of that sum was made ? I honestly don't know.
Click to expand...
Not at all. Just paper gossip
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:31 PM
  • #167
Speedie's Head said:
Not at all. Just paper gossip
Click to expand...
What more do you one than one of Hull City's primary reporters mentioning it? The fax that Doug King sent to their owner?
 

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:32 PM
  • #168
Ccfcisparks said:
Baz Cooper from the Hull Daily Mail
Click to expand...
So one source which was reported as a bid believed to be in the region of £10M
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 3:33 PM
  • #169
Chris1987 said:
So one source which was reported as a bid believed to be in the region of £10M
Click to expand...
What more evidence do you need than that?

You think that their paper made up 3 bids?

There was clearly money there to be spent I cant believe you are trying to suggest there isnt
 
S

Speedie's Head

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 4:08 PM
  • #170
Ccfcisparks said:
What more do you one than one of Hull City's primary reporters mentioning it? The fax that Doug King sent to their owner?
Click to expand...
I know there's a lot more to serious negotiations with millions of pounds at stake than that trivial nonsense. It's all click bait!
 

procdoc

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 7:56 PM
  • #171
Ccfcisparks said:
What more evidence do you need than that?

You think that their paper made up 3 bids?

There was clearly money there to be spent I cant believe you are trying to suggest there isnt
Click to expand...
Chris chatting utter bollocks shock, horror!
 
Reactions: Ccfcisparks

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 8:08 PM
  • #172
procdoc said:
Chris chatting utter bollocks shock, horror!
Click to expand...
Ah that's lovely . Always good to see others stepping into the breach to help out their insecure friend . Good work
 
Reactions: Lamps

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 8:11 PM
  • #173
Chris1987 said:
Ah that's lovely . Always good to see others stepping into the breach to help out their insecure friend . Good work
Click to expand...
Avoiding my question i see
 

Chris1987

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 8:13 PM
  • #174
Ccfcisparks said:
Avoiding my question i see
Click to expand...
Learnt that one from your good self. The next step is diversion and the final one in your armoury abuse .
 
Reactions: Lamps

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
  • Wednesday at 8:20 PM
  • #175
Another argument won against Chris, get in!
 
Reactions: procdoc
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
Next
First Prev 5 of 6 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Share:
Facebook Twitter Reddit Pinterest Tumblr WhatsApp Email
  • Home
  • Forums
  • Coventry City Football Club
  • Coventry City General Chat
  • Default Style
  • Contact us
  • Terms and rules
  • Privacy policy
  • Help
  • Home
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2021 XenForo Ltd.
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Home
  • Forums
    • New posts
    • Search forums
  • What's new
    • New posts
    • Latest activity
  • Members
    • Current visitors
  • Donate to the Season Ticket Fund
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?