Huddersfield are serious!

[hogesar 10,261]

Approximately 25 million spent in transfer fees already with a recent 11.5m on Mounie.

Will be interesting to see how Wagner''s style etc works in the prem next season but can''t deny they''re going for it in the transfer market.

[ROBFLECK 132]

Well, if your goal is survival and becoming a settled PL side, you need to splash out and get your team up to PL standards. S what Huddersfield are doing...

Our board wasn''t prepared/capable enough to do that in my honest opinion, although I know they had to look at the bigger picture financially etc... We don''t have rich owners...

But to become a settled PL side , you need to spend! Something we didn''t / couldn''t do enough... Good examples of clubs who did spend and were able to get themselves settled in PL are WBA , Stoke,... we all know them... I still feel Huddersfield are gonna have to fight to stay up though

[peter-plastic 0]

Bear in mind their reliance on loans last season. Suddenly you are without a number of key team members once they go back to their parent clubs. To buy the likes of Mooy now will set you back a small fortune. They really have little choice but to spend (relatively) big, I suppose.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,395]

Because Huddersfield got promoted while spending very little on wages/transfers last season they have a huge capacity to spend now.

When Norwich went up after the play-off final the club was pretty much running on a Premier League budget, thus there wasn''t suddenly room to spend £20m - £30m. Also the TV deal is larger now than the one Norwich had while in the Prem. Huddersfield aren''t being funded by some super wealthy owner who is pumping money into the club - they run pretty much on a self funded model.

[norfolkngood 1,167]

Bear in mind their reliance on loans last season. Suddenly you are without a number of key team members once they go back to their parent clubs. To buy the likes of Mooy now will set you back a small fortune. They really have little choice but to spend (relatively) big, I suppose.

Exactly my thoughts with the loan system if we go up this season we would have to buy at least a premiership keeper and a CM unless we bought Reed of course !!

it is a nice problem to have with the money you get for being in the PL but you have to spend to fill the gaps

and that is without even looking at upgrading players

but like i said with the money you get it is less a problem spent wisely

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,395]

The inverse to that argument though NorfolknGood is that this season Norwich can only buy players willing to play in the Championship. So even if a keeper and central midfielder were bought not loaned, you are still looking at potentially having to replace them again after promotion as they will be Championship level players. That means two outlays in quick succession.

After promotion Watford pretty much signed an entirely new team (and sacked their manager), and despite everyone writing them off they survived comfortably. If you have a competent recruitment team and competent coaches then signing 6, 7, 8 players in one window shouldn''t be a problem. Especially with the riches that now come with the Premier League.

[nutty nigel 7,778]

Surely wba and stoke arent the only example? At this stage last season we had nearly the exact same thread about middlesbrough. Very few clubs become established in the PL. Even wba and stoke simply aim to get to 40 points each season. Sunderland finally dropped last season after 10 years and were never established. Becoming established in the PL is a myth whether you try and live within your means like us or spend spend spend like QPR. The real established clubs won''t ever make way.

[norfolkngood 1,167]

I agree but thats what Lambert did well ( easy said than done) but we any signing we buy has to make to step up with us to avoid double buying

i think that''s where the lower German leagues with Farke''s knowledge may well find us those type of players for us

[SwindonCanary 456]

We could not do the same, Huddersfield have a wealthy owner who''s bankrolling them. If we ever get back to the massive money of the Premiership, we need to stay in there to pick up the first payment, we don''t get it as soon as promoted.

[Captain Birdseye 0]

Why can''t we be Huddersfield

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,395]

Huddersfield''s owner isn''t that wealthy and hasn''t put huge amounts of money into the club - roughly £40m, but a lot of this was paying off debts to previous owners and the club have to pay £1m a year to use the stadium.

They have made a profit on players sales since Hoyle took over in 2008 up until the end of last season.

Their success is down to trying to think a little differently to other Championship clubs - luckily Norwich poached the man behind a lot of that thinking!

[TIL 1010 5,041]

[quote user="Canary Top Hat"]Why can''t we be Huddersfield[/quote]Because they have that dirty Northern habit of pouring gravy over everything so can you imagine scampi and gravy ?

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]Surely wba and stoke arent the only example? At this stage last season we had nearly the exact same thread about middlesbrough. Very few clubs become established in the PL. Even wba and stoke simply aim to get to 40 points each season. Sunderland finally dropped last season after 10 years and were never established. Becoming established in the PL is a myth whether you try and live within your means like us or spend spend spend like QPR. The real established clubs won''t ever make way.[/quote]that rather puts the kibosh on one of the favourite cliches on herethe club needs to consolodate

[PurpleCanary 6,103]

I don''t know anything about Huddersfield Town''s finances, but I would have thought the question was not so much what they are spending on transfer fees but more how much are they paying in wages, what lengths of contracts they are giving, whether they have relegation-wage clauses etc. In general (assuming, which I don''t necessarily, that they plan to abide by financial fair play for the foreseeable) are they doing what Burnley did, and not over-committing themselves, or gambling on staying up, or some kind of middle course.

[Bill 1,788]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]I don''t know anything about Huddersfield Town''s finances, but I would have thought the question was not so much what they are spending on transfer fees but more how much are they paying in wages, what lengths of contracts they are giving, whether they have relegation-wage clauses etc. In general (assuming, which I don''t necessarily, that they plan to abide by financial fair play for the foreseeable) are they doing what Burnley did, and not over-committing themselves, or gambling on staying up, or some kind of middle course.[/quote]That is the pertinent question as the headline transfer fees are usually very wide of the mark and are more down to the credulity of those quoting them than any proximity to reality.If Huddersfield are relegated they will like us only have two years of parachute payments, so that will be factored into any contracts. The fees quote are all too often the cost of buying out the players contract rather than an purchase fee.For my part I would be concerned that the bubblle is not so much bursting as the balloon is deflating. Sky have recently readjusted their deals and there maybe a case for viewers to pay more for the actually games they want to watch rather than a whole package."More than a third of Premier League football fans regularly watch

matches via illegal online streams according to a new survey by BBC

Radio 5 Live.

36 per cent of supporters polled admitted to streaming Premier League

matches via unofficial providers at least once a month, with 22 per

cent saying they used online streams at least once a week."

Technology will impact more and more on the ability for SKY and BT to raise the revenues they are generating currently. Whether clubs can as so easily adapt their financial models is another matter. However I would expect clubs to have legally provided for any collapse or downturn.

[djc 0]

Bradford spent big when they were in the premier league, and that was their downfall. Fingers crossed on Huddersfield.

[Tetteys Jig 845]

it also depends on how their main players perform if they do go down. will they have people willing to pay prem money for them? look at the likes of Pickford, gibson, Maguire going for like 20 odd million a piece. if hudds do go down but go fighting and the likes of mooy and the new striker attract 20m bids then they have nothing to worry about. What they don''t want is complete expensive flops like RVW that nobody wants to take off your hands. I can imagine mooy will be a reasonably safe buy but strikers can go either way.

[AJ 1,306]

A lot of people making noise about Huddersfield but, as a previous poster said, actually they have just signed a few players permanently they had on loan last season (I assume a lot of them were potentially pre-agreed pending promotion).

You have to spend money to survive, but Huddersfield need a strong start given their end run-in!