Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Well !!! Mr Waggot, We're still waiting, Where is it???...............http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sp...ws/callum-wilson-cash-reinvested-back-7387302
Wilson money to SP. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Sky Blue Kid
- Start date
bradwellskyblues
Well-Known Member
was used to buy a packet of grass seed for sixfields the rest on legal fees
skybluebeduff
Well-Known Member
Kingokings204
Well-Known Member
We have brought in SM and MT so don't be greedy SBK.
Wyken Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I completely forgot we haven't signed anyone and that the transfer window shuts at midnight...
Silence_Is_The_Enemy
Well-Known Member
it will get spun to say its the fans fault for not going to sixfields (there will be no mention of why we are there)
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ skyblue1991......I also completely forgot that any player that's "Half Decent" will already be signed up. Silly me!
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Surely the players who have left were also getting paid or were they playing for nothing as they loved the club so much?
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
@ Grenduffy.......In your "Estimation" of course.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I didn't know existing players get signing in fees and agent payments.
You learn something every day.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Didn't we have a policy of not paying agents fees, or was that a previous regime? Was a good idea whoever it was.
In typical Sisu style, when you actually pick apart the details you'll find that he never actually promises cash being spent on transfers. It says very clearly it'll be the "entire football budget", which as the only thing we do as a business is football is any expenses whatsoever. Even if you take the generous interpretation, there's no promises of spending the cash, he gives the get out of "if we think a player is worth a fee" (or something like that), meaning he can always take the position that no player was worth paying a fee for.
Grendel: If we've spent £4m on agents fees, someone needs shooting.
In typical Sisu style, when you actually pick apart the details you'll find that he never actually promises cash being spent on transfers. It says very clearly it'll be the "entire football budget", which as the only thing we do as a business is football is any expenses whatsoever. Even if you take the generous interpretation, there's no promises of spending the cash, he gives the get out of "if we think a player is worth a fee" (or something like that), meaning he can always take the position that no player was worth paying a fee for.
Grendel: If we've spent £4m on agents fees, someone needs shooting.
Astute
Well-Known Member
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
That was McGinnity.
And not so much a policy, more the players we were signing were too hopeless to have agents!
Once again however, since the Ranson days money spent on the squad has always been in terms of total value including wages, not transfer fees. The statements were always very carefully worded before... so surprised anybody would be surprised here, either.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Cheers, I couldn't remember if it was Ranson or just before Sisu.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Something something what's new something something.
Some facts:
FL Report on Agents Fees 2012/13 said:
Gives an average of about £10k per transfer agents fees.
So that's £60k of the £4m accounted for then
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 5849
Guest
Almost scared to quote the piece I found while looking for the agents' fees, as it'll start off shitstorm #4793
MikeMcGinnity said:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sp...ws/mcginnitys-verdict-things-sky-blue-3142580
Me saying the same thing in 2010 seems to be the top search result when looking for the figures
ointlaugh:
Astute
Well-Known Member
Something something what's new something something.
Some facts:
Gives an average of about £10k per transfer agents fees.
So that's £60k of the £4m accounted for then
How about the agents fees for the groundsmen who our club are employing to sort out their pitch for them?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
When we were paying £1.3 million a year and match day costs we had to pay a groundsman as well didn't we?
Astute
Well-Known Member
At least it was for a ground that was ours.
Now it is for a stadium with three stands that nobody wants to go to that isn't ours. But you think it is OK as when the deal about the Ricoh was done the rent had to be so much otherwise it would have needed state funding. And we know what SISU think about that.
Do you still wear platform shoes, flares and collars that are wider than your shoulders? The reason for asking is that you never seem to want to let the past go.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
This wages line is a red herring, surely? Since January we've lost Clarke, Moussa, Murphy and imminently Baker. All high earners at this level. Other loan departures, plus Wilson and Christie. Now I can see Tudgay and Pugh would be on reasonable wages. But nobody else. Looking January to now, I would suggest we have reduced the wage bill and received the Wilson money.
Agents fees on these transfers? Negligible. Do me a favour
Agents fees on these transfers? Negligible. Do me a favour
Last edited:
I'd think 4 or 5 have received a signing on fee .
And Adams ,guess that gets close to lopping £1M off and achieves the suggested £1.5M for this season.
Mary_Mungo_Midge
Well-Known Member
Any signing on fees we have paid wouldn't even be 5% of the Wilson fee; at a guess. I'm sure the wages, as explained above, are down now compared to January. So, where's any of the Wilson cash being 'handed' to Pressley?
Or is the Wilson money simply covering the lost season ticket sales of the move to Sixfields to distress ACL?
Last edited:
No need to convince me that It's substituting Paying fans,a direct consequence of that Tool moving us and expecting sell outs In Northampton.
Lorksalordy
New Member
Wilson fee was touted as "allowing investment in the team" and "made in the interests of giving the best possible chance of gaining promotion this season". Both deliberately ambiguous / non-committal about how that might be achieved.
Stemming the losses from the criminally fucking stupid decision to move could be argued to fulfil both of those criteria with a little stretching . Especially if one had a leaning towards playing with words and looking for weasly get out routes at every opportunity.
Stemming the losses from the criminally fucking stupid decision to move could be argued to fulfil both of those criteria with a little stretching . Especially if one had a leaning towards playing with words and looking for weasly get out routes at every opportunity.
Nick
Administrator
ruper_bear will know!
?
So they would affect FFP
Astute
Well-Known Member
Are the wages on offer so low that our new players have to sign on? How much is dole money these days?
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
AFAIK yes (though I'll defer to OSB if he's about) as they are player related wage costs, same as win bonuses, etc.
The tax man sees them as wages I believe.
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Any part of the wage bill in excess of income will be funded through transfer fees. That would be sensible.
Also I think Waggott's comment starts from a lower base I.e. considering the wage bill minus the players we've lost (as without the Wilson money I suspect not so many signings would be made).
Also I think Waggott's comment starts from a lower base I.e. considering the wage bill minus the players we've lost (as without the Wilson money I suspect not so many signings would be made).
Last edited: