Quick Radio Five stat

[Irn Bru Canary 0]

At the time of last weeks game and to be fair was before our dealings this week but from July 2014 the relative spends of us and Bournemouth,

Bournemouth 38 million

Norwich - 13 million

Difference 51 million

Makes a difference having an owner with money to throw at the club.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Yeh, about 1 place and 1 point difference

[Norfolk Dan 336]

Who did we get for minus £13m? Dean Coney mkII?

[Tetteys Jig 851]

Bear in mind they have had about £20m worth of players more get injured.

I highly doubt they''d have signed both Afobe and Grabban if Wilson was still fully fit and possibly not Iturbe if Gradel was still fit.

Guess what, at the end of the season, if they have all these players and need to sell them, they can sell them and make their money back easily on the likes of Wilson etc. When you spend £10m or so on Afobe, he doesn''t just become worthless overnight. He''s an asset.

Completely different circumstances. Bournemouth are probably risking more than us though.

[Irn Bru Canary 0]

Not quite the fairytale story Bournemouth is made out to be.

[The ghost of Michael Theoklitos 0]

I''ve also heard that their sausage rolls are even colder than ours when bought at 1:30pm.

[Irn Bru Canary 0]

If Grabban turns out to be the player we suspect and Afobe bombs like many before him then they won''t be much of an asset and maybe even a financial liability after relegation.

[Nuff Said 5,973]

Agreed IBC. I was going to point out RVW could have been described similarly, but I don''t think he''s doing much for our balance sheet right now.

[Tetteys Jig 851]

Hard to imagine Afobe getting to a point where they can''t recoup any fee for him. They''d get half back if he flopped this season and they wanted to offload him anyway.

Grabban could potentially end up worth zero or worse, but again I don''t think he''ll be on mega bucks, there''d always be a championship side that''d want him for a couple of million at the worst much like Gary Hooper going to SWFC.

Ricky was an unmitigated disaster and such that the amount we still owe him on his contract is worth more than his transfer worth hence we can''t even give him away, much like Adebayor for Spurs with his £100k salary.

That also could show why Bournemouth have spent more on transfer fees. We have a higher wage obligation with the likes of Bassong, RVW, Ruddy, Hooper all on big wages before the season started. Bournemouth were starting with very much a blank canvas at this level. I would estimate their highest paid player last year was on £20k a week where as ours will have been on at least double.

Their main problem is where their income will come from if they lose their premiership status. Due to FFP, their owner isn''t allowed to simply chuck money at them, they have to prove an element of self sustainability. We on the other hand have a far bigger infrastructure and fan base. Things like selling 20k season tickets in league 1 mean we don''t need some fat cat to lob money at us.

This is where Portsmouth went wrong during their glory years. They kept spending on players and short term things and in the end had little to fall back on when sh1t hit the fan. Bournemouth better be careful they don''t go the same way.

[cornish sam 1,040]

But Mr Jig, If they get relegated then the money will just come from their Sugar папа. Don''t forget that Muff have been chucking money at it for the last few years and ignoring the FFP in the process, currently being in ''conversation'' with the football league over their punishment.

Also, if this site is to be believed:

http://www.totalsportek.com/money/english-premier-league-wage-bills-club-by-club/

(doesn''t look too unbelievable to me) then they are only £12m behind us in wages, which they have more than blown on just the transfer fees...

[Matt Morriss 69]

And this time last week when we were above Bournemouth this point is irrelevant?

I guess it will be more relevant at the end of the season.

All in all I dont think we can really complain about spending £20m. Maybe we tried in the summer to spend big but players didnt want to come, which has always been an issue.

[Horse Renoir 1]

We had a blip last week. this squad has done it plenty of times before and Under AN at least we''ve bounched back strongly every time.

I couldn''t tell you who has the better side but Bournemouth aren''t 3 goals a game better than us. It''s like at the Cr fixture where they were quite poor. We shouldn''t be envying their signings or spending power too much.

Afobe is the only player they''ve signed who I think is a bit better than anyone we currently have in that position. Gradel and Grabban are not PL quality players, Mings will be quality but he''s still raw and certainly isn''t currently as good a player as Brady or maybe even Olsson and Iturbe could go either way.

We''ll get a result on Sat and everyone will forget last week and what Bournemouth are doing

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,424]

That £12m is yearly though, so it is more than that in terms of liabilities.

£12m equals about £230,000 a week - a very significant amount of money and shows how they have been able to add to their squad last summer and this January.

Published transfer fees are pretty meaningless - if you think Bournemouth transferred £8m into Norwich''s bank account when signing Grabban you are well wide of the mark. Almost all transfer fees are heavily weighted to performance related clauses, I imagine Bournemouth will only have to pay most of that £8m if they aren''t relegated this season. QPR got out of paying £3m for Fer when they were relegated last season. I imagine there is such a clause in place with Afobe also - as well as the usual clauses that deal with appearances and goals.

Clubs don''t go bust due to transfer fees, but they do go bust due to wages.

The Radio 5 stat is fairly meaningless to be honest, it is based on very selective dates and looks at one club who were on the way down so needed to cost cut, and one on the way up so looking to expand and strengthen. If you expand the time period back a year, and move it forward to today - then the difference is roughly zero.

[lappinitup 629]

[quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"]players didnt want to come, which has always been an issue.[/quote]But they''re coming now- so is it because they''ve finished that cycle path on Tombland? [:^)]

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Huckerbys Boots - Matt"]players didnt want to come, which has always been an issue.[/quote]But they''re coming now- so is it because they''ve finished that cycle path on Tombland? [:^)][/quote]

 

Either that or the arrival of Mr. Ed....

[Tetteys Jig 851]

£12m a year...

The point is, due to FFP, they aren''t allowed to simply shove money in from mr Sugar daddy. Yes he can bail them out of debt, but they''ll get a transfer ban and won''t be able to keep half their squad should they go down and rely on him pumping his roubles in.

We on the other hand will sell a couple of the more sellable players, turn around, give a bit of youth or lesser expensive signings a go and have a squad ready to compete for the next few years at least while it gradually gets chipped away at until we get promoted again in theory.

Obviously, we know how ridiculous the championship is and the team who seems like they have the best squad can often find themselves struggling for whatever reason.