New contracts (1 Viewer)

skyblue_rich said:

According to @thegoalzone on twitter, we have offered new contracts to clingan, Thomas, bigi and Christie. If we can keep all of these I will be amazed, especially if sisu are in charge

Click to expand...

Signing new contracts with the players is not necessary the same as keeping them.
But by signing new contracts the players will have greater value and hence the balance sheet will hold more assets.

This along with trying to get half (or whatever it is) of the stadium smacks to me of bumping up the price for selling!! could be bargaining tool at the current takeover or even to try and make us look more appealing.

smileycov said:

This along with trying to get half (or whatever it is) of the stadium smacks to me of bumping up the price for selling!! could be bargaining tool at the current takeover or even to try and make us look more appealing.

Click to expand...

Any potential buyer will first and foremost look at the profit/loss situation to decide if they want to invest. Asset value in the eyes of the buyer is like an insurance - 'if all goes wrong what can we regain if we sell of the assets'.

Bigi signed a new 4 year contract not long ago.

I think any new buyer is not even looking at the player assest's we may or may not have.The jewell in the crown and any buyers ultimate goal is the Ricoh, and with the train station going ahead it makes the Ricoh even more valuable.
With the new rules coming in next year,the income from a properly run stadium like the Ricoh ,and on the surrounding land could provide the much needed further income for invester profit, and the income to improve the skyblues.Its as central in England you can get and with further enterprise,concerts,exibitions,bars,casino,I think Its the nugget they all want.

The Rev

good posts rev, rich, et. al.,
any prospective owner would easily see what our owners ploy is,
& also it gives a massive hint as to their future intentions,
that mailonline article emphasises their devious intent,

PUSB

Christie wont sign, he hears the premiership calling

If he was a Southampton player, he would go for 5 million and they would get him on loan for the rest of the season

We will accept 100k over the next 4 years

Let's all just have a big cry.

Whats the situation with clingan? i havent heard if we have offered a new contract or what.

hmmm i wonder if we really have offerd new deals tho.

i mean, if you believed the club last 2 years you would think we offerd westwood a new contract, yet he was not offerd one until september of last year even tho the board would tell you he had been offerd 1 over a year before that!!

no wonder our good players dont renew deals!!

brinner said:

hmmm i wonder if we really have offerd new deals tho.

i mean, if you believed the club last 2 years you would think we offerd westwood a new contract, yet he was not offerd one until september of last year even tho the board would tell you he had been offerd 1 over a year before that!!

no wonder our good players dont renew deals!!

Click to expand...

That all happened under Ranson and the new board have many times complained about this and said it won't happen under their regime ... we'll see.

Well Bigi signed a new contract earlier on this season, and TBF to Sisu they seem to realise that its quite scandalous to let players dwindle their contract down so we up losing them for nothing. However on the other side of that they were the money man while Ranson was here, so why did they allow the situation to happen then?

Godiva said:

That all happened under Ranson and the new board have many times complained about this and said it won't happen under their regime ... we'll see.

Click to expand...

sisu hold the purse strings.

SkyBlueScottie said:

Well Bigi signed a new contract earlier on this season, and TBF to Sisu they seem to realise that its quite scandalous to let players dwindle their contract down so we up losing them for nothing. However on the other side of that they were the money man while Ranson was here, so why did they allow the situation to happen then?

Click to expand...

bit of a diffrence tho, Bigi will be commanding aroud £600 a week.

Westy was on about £3k a week at the time and a new deal would have been more in the region of £10k a week.

why would sisu spend an extra £7k a week in wages when the player is only on £3k a week for the next 2 years??

backfired on them didnt it.

Come on Brinner even Westwood later admitted he had been offered a contract 2 summers ago.

crowsnest said:

Come on Brinner even Westwood later admitted he had been offered a contract 2 summers ago.

Click to expand...

the club told him they were goingh to offer him 1, but he wasnt actually offerd 1.

well not until last september anyway.

same with gunnar.

simple question,
who do you believe ?
sisu (kd), or true SKY BLUE fans,
they continually come across as 'fake', & do nothing to amend that,
the concensus of opinion is undoubtebly that (we) CCFC are being progressively shafted by this outfit,
what they consider to be timely media bursts are no more than their tedious attempts to either pacify, or, create a spurious alternative,
we've had some 'iffy' owners in the past but this 'mob' mmmmmmmmmmmm

PUSB

I really hope all these sign, but it is still beyond me how we offered baker and bell contracts until 2015, i would use the money for their wages to get our younger players to sign as they are the future of the club

They would be wise to listen to Thorny.
Clingan though may bide his time to assess what is happening and judge it in the new year. But he must remain injury free to walk this line. Another long term injury could scupper a new contract or any possible move. His risk.

brinner said:

sisu hold the purse strings.

Click to expand...

Sorry, not in these matters they don't. I'm not sure you understand the structure of our club.

The board make these decisions. They are employed by SISU as owners. The club are given a budget and have to work within it. SISU would not interfere directly with contracts and transfers, they'd just say "you have X to spend this year" or (more likely) "I expect a target of X losses this year" beyond that it's down to the board, and more specifically the chairman. Which was Ranson.

cooperskyblue said:

I really hope all these sign, but it is still beyond me how we offered baker and bell contracts until 2015, i would use the money for their wages to get our younger players to sign as they are the future of the club

Click to expand...

Because one of the biggest issues is the fact that so many of our players are at the end of their contracts, so their value is decreased and any potential investors would be worried that if the shit hit the fan we'd have nothing to sell. It's not a football decision, it's a financial one.

Smmeee ... where have you been????

Can I take a break now? Please?

personally how Baker Bell and McPake got new contracts is beyond me. I understand the financials but those signings do not actually add anything to the assets of the balance sheet, no fee so no value in terms of the accounts. The logic is that it adds to the value of the overall squad which is not valued on the balance sheet in full so there is a hidden asset for potential investors. However the club are locked into contracts that have a potential liability on a sliding scale between now and the end of the extension. So unless we plan to sell them on we dont in reality improve much worth at all

Right now I wouldnt ,mind betting the potential liability of paying up their contracts is actually worth more than their sale value (none have featured in transfer speculation - unsurprisingly given their form - so clearly there is no great demand elsewhere for their services)

Its not the the financials i have a problem with its the lack of consistent performance that has earnt each of them an extension! I accept that we need to keep a squad but think there were other priorities than the three musketeers extended.

Oh and SISU fund managers will oversee any major signing or sale or new contract or extension because it substantially and potentially affects their investment - they may rubber stamp a board decision but they will be involved. They set the budget - clearly substantially less than it was. They have Onye on the Board - suddenly more public of late. You dont give, loan or risk £30m (approx) without some representation or involvement especially when a succession of Boards have proven themselves so inept. SISU have their own business plan to max out their "investment" of course they are involved in the bigger decisions. They might not choose who supplies the coffee but purchase and sale of players or extended contracts directly affects the worth of the investment called CCFC. Of course they are involved in the decisions, they choose to let the public face of those decisions be the board. This is not like lots of little investors - it is effectively one investor - reality and logic says they will have a large input into "Board decisions"

WElcome back OSB ,youve' gained the perception of jinx in you're absense.:claping hands:

cheers wingy - i was following it on my mobile and very happy to get the 4 points! - am perfectly happy to continue holidaying in the sun if someone wants to pay and think it might help the team!!!

oldskyblue58 said:

cheers wingy - i was following it on my mobile and very happy to get the 4 points! - am perfectly happy to continue holidaying in the sun if someone wants to pay and think it might help the team!!!

Click to expand...

Don't believe that for one minute ,you almost sound like ken not trying to sell us:laugh::laugh::laugh:

I can be insulted yanno ...... he has a far better tan than me (if you like orange!). Missed going to the match and am looking forward to going tomorrow. While I was away I got reports from my lad and others who went (my phone bill will be horrific ) fingers crossed the jinx has been banished !!!!!

PUSB

shmmeee said:

Sorry, not in these matters they don't. I'm not sure you understand the structure of our club.

The board make these decisions. They are employed by SISU as owners. The club are given a budget and have to work within it. SISU would not interfere directly with contracts and transfers, they'd just say "you have X to spend this year" or (more likely) "I expect a target of X losses this year" beyond that it's down to the board, and more specifically the chairman. Which was Ranson.

Click to expand...

so who does big nosed ken go to cap in hand then when he says he begs for money to see us thru to the end of the season??

think that would be sisu pal.

shmmeee said:

Sorry, not in these matters they don't. I'm not sure you understand the structure of our club.

The board make these decisions. They are employed by SISU as owners. The club are given a budget and have to work within it. SISU would not interfere directly with contracts and transfers, they'd just say "you have X to spend this year" or (more likely) "I expect a target of X losses this year" beyond that it's down to the board, and more specifically the chairman. Which was Ranson.

Click to expand...

so when Ranson, Hoffman and Elliot were against the Fox, Dann, and Conor Thomas Loan deals, who exactly made those decisions? SISU's man on the board?

oldskyblue58 said:

m perfectly happy to continue holidaying in the sun if someone wants to pay and think it might help the team!!!

Click to expand...

Sounds like something Ken would say. :thinking about:

Agreed that the liability of McPake and Bells contracts outweigh their sale value, as I argued the other day, and agreed that SISU hold the purse strings. Ranson complained strongly about Igwe holding the power on the board, and also that SISU would never give him any long-term budget and made changes to budgets with a frequency that made instability inevitable. You can choose not to believe him, but it fits in perfectly with all that we know about them. I mean, we were going to replace King, we were going to have the same budget as last season, and we are going to sign loan players (HA!); they are incredibly flexible when it comes to promises they've made.

Nonleagueherewecome said:

Agreed that the liability of McPake and Bells contracts outweigh their sale value, as I argued the other day, and agreed that SISU hold the purse strings. Ranson complained strongly about Igwe holding the power on the board, and also that SISU would never give him any long-term budget and made changes to budgets with a frequency that made instability inevitable. You can choose not to believe him, but it fits in perfectly with all that we know about them. I mean, we were going to replace King, we were going to have the same budget as last season, and we are going to sign loan players (HA!); they are incredibly flexible when it comes to promises they've made.

Click to expand...

Yea they are incredibly flexible in reducing budgets on short notice.
Wonder what there response would be if the board went to SISU asking them to release another couple of k p/w for the wage budget to get Clingan to sign up.:thinking about:

Well I don't think they'd even ask...they'd probably tell AT they would, then as soon as he's out of the boardroom they'd all collapse into guffaws of laughter!

Got to remember: whilst the board aren't SISU as such, they may as well be. Many of them are SISU placemen, most notably Ken who makes out constantly that he has no links with them other than through CCFC's "begging bowl"..ha ha ha ha ha! You only really need to read his quotes upon resigning at Southampton...he's their puppet, simple.

The kids may well sign the contracts but I just don't see Clinigan signing a new deal