Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, BobLoz3 said:

But what about the not-so-random bridging loan which was for exactly £21 million?

Indicative? Or no?

Where did you see that figure reported? 

Anyway, a £20m budget wouldn’t mean the club are spending £20m straight away. All transfer fees are spread out over years, so a total budget of £20m would only require a fraction of that immediately. 

The ‘bridging loan’ which was actually an extension to Norwich’s overdraft, is also to pay player/staff bonuses, the extra bit of transfer money Norwich will be due to pay to clubs and repaying the Canary Bond holders. 

Again, the story that alleged the £20m said it was for fees and wages. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, BobLoz3 said:

But what about the not-so-random bridging loan which was for exactly £21 million?

Indicative? Or no?

Not really - they have to pay various things out, the supposed £10m bonus kitty and repaying the Bond (£7m I think?). 

Clearly transfer fees might form part of it but those are often linked to instalments rather than up-front so not necessarily linked to ‘cash’ per se.

Edited by Branston Pickle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would there be any truth in this from the TalkSport site?
 
"11 Jan 2019 - Chelsea have reportedly been knocked back in their attempts to sign Senegal striker Mbaye Diagne. Turkish newspaper Milliyet claim the Blues have had a £13.5million bid rejected for the Kasimpasa striker, who has also attracted interest from Wolves and Leeds in recent months."
 
Good that he excited Chelsea's interest, not so good about the offer being refuted.
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BroadstairsR said:
Would there be any truth in this from the TalkSport site?
 
"11 Jan 2019 - Chelsea have reportedly been knocked back in their attempts to sign Senegal striker Mbaye Diagne. Turkish newspaper Milliyet claim the Blues have had a £13.5million bid rejected for the Kasimpasa striker, who has also attracted interest from Wolves and Leeds in recent months."
 
Good that he excited Chelsea's interest, not so good about the offer being refuted.
 
 

Given that Gala signed Diagne for a reported €5m a couple of weeks later I doubt it is true. 

Turkish football has a very over active transfer rumours media. Every club or player is linked many, many times. It’s exhausting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could be competition for Stiepermann? From the youtube highlights he doesn't look like a typical out and out striker, makes a lot of runs with the ball, good technique and incisive passing but some wayward finishing and doesn't seem to play on the shoulder like Pukki does. I've never seen him play and youtube highlights are a poor way to judge a player but with his height, quick passing and awkward dribbling he reminds me more of Stiepermann. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Where did you see that figure reported? 

Anyway, a £20m budget wouldn’t mean the club are spending £20m straight away. All transfer fees are spread out over years, so a total budget of £20m would only require a fraction of that immediately. 

The ‘bridging loan’ which was actually an extension to Norwich’s overdraft, is also to pay player/staff bonuses, the extra bit of transfer money Norwich will be due to pay to clubs and repaying the Canary Bond holders. 

Again, the story that alleged the £20m said it was for fees and wages. 

Ah! My apologies all. I thought that this actually showed the figure but it doesn't-

https://twitter.com/KieranMaguire/status/1130401105115062272/photo/1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Bethnal Yellow and Green said:

Given that Gala signed Diagne for a reported €5m a couple of weeks later I doubt it is true. 

Turkish football has a very over active transfer rumours media. Every club or player is linked many, many times. It’s exhausting. 

Its just impossible to know the exact transfer fee of any player unless you were involved in it..5 mill?...ive just read two different outlets about the Diagne to City story...one says the guy moved to Gala  for 10 mill...another says it was 13.5 mill. That is all as widely different as one poster here who says Leeds reportedly offered 3.5 mill for him yet another report says Chelsea couldnt agree on a 13.5 mill transfer.

Only two things will be factual..he wont be City player until the club inform us of that...and he will blow apart the highest  fee  City have ever spent on a transfer. But hey...this is the 2019-20 Prem season coming up...and City  are in the elite now...this is how much guys cost these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ron obvious said:

OK, who's been fiddling with wiki?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mbaye_Diagne_(footballer)#cite_note-1

Mbaye Diagne (born 28 October 1991) is a Senegalese professional footballer who plays as a striker for English side Norwich City and the Senegal national team .[1]

Someone mentioned this had happened earlier, I went and looked and it wasn't on the Wikipedia page. But now it is.

Yeah... Someone has figured out how to edit Wiki.... *slow clap*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, this just can't be true, it would fly in the face of everything Webber has said. He's always been very forthright, never been the sort to say one thing and do another. He said we'd be the lowest spenders in the league and I believe him.

If this came true I'd be extremely suprised - unless there's some kind of wildcard thrown in the mix like a high value sale we dont yet know about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BobLoz3 said:

Someone mentioned this had happened earlier, I went and looked and it wasn't on the Wikipedia page. But now it is.

Yeah... Someone has figured out how to edit Wiki.... *slow clap*

That’d be me who mentioned it!  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Captain Obvious said:

Sorry, this just can't be true, it would fly in the face of everything Webber has said. He's always been very forthright, never been the sort to say one thing and do another. He said we'd be the lowest spenders in the league and I believe him.

If this came true I'd be extremely suprised - unless there's some kind of wildcard thrown in the mix like a high value sale we dont yet know about.

Could spend £17m on a striker and still be the lowest spenders in the League. Every club, apart from Tottenham who spent £1bn on a stadium, spent in excess of £30m on transfers last season. With the TV deal being larger the up coming season I imagine the bar will move up again. 

Not that I believe this rumour at all of course. 

Edited by Bethnal Yellow and Green

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Plumping for the middle ground on any fee speculation, we would be handing over a big chunk of the war chest on a player who has never played in this country before or is from European stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spending that much money on a (relatively) older player who doesn't obviously fit Farke's style of football would be an interesting move too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, KeiranShikari said:

Spending that much money on a (relatively) older player who doesn't obviously fit Farke's style of football would be an interesting move too.

I haven’t seen him enough to comment on his style of play. I remember many commenting that Rhodes wasn’t a Farke style player before he signed, but Farke later talked about needing a player who stayed in the box to finish chances, which is largely what Pukki and Rhodes did. 

As for age, if you look at the Webber era signings, the many have been around 27 or 28 when they signed. I think only one player under 23 has been brought in by Webber on a permanent deal, so a lot of the talk about signing young players isn’t particularly accurate up to now. Things may change this window as with more money they club can get younger players - who can have a premium in their fees. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the one hand I could see something in this on the basis he’s a very different striker to Pukki and fits the mould in terms of having a bigger, more physical option to play up front when needs must or bring on late in games.

on the other hand, despite an excellent goal record, watching the highlights he just doesn’t look like the type of player who fits into how we play. Doesn’t look particularly technically good and looks a bit cumbersome to me but only going by  YouTube footage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Branston Pickle said:

That’d be me who mentioned it!  

Apologies BP - missed that one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be strange with that price. In addition there was something about attitude issues in that Turkish news (if translation did nog mess up things), so would think that as major obstacle for team which is all about attitude and teamwork.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that hasn't been mentioned (unless I've missed it) is that this bloke's rise has been absolutely incredible; along the lines of Jamie Vardy or Grant Holt.

Seven years ago, at the age of 20, he played a season in the Italian amateur leagues and a year later he spent a season in the semi-pro fifth tier. Spells in France, Belgium, Saudi Arabia, Hungary and China followed before ending up in Turkey where he's banged in 42 goals in 46 games over the last season and a half.

Mental.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still don't think this is true, £15m seems too big a risk for our financial model..I just thought it was interesting the report seemed to be sure it's a done deal.

Having said it 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems more likely, in The Sun,(Admittedly might be most reliable) we have apparently signed Patrick Roberts from Man city on season long loan..i suspect we would still want another senior striker so Diagne may still happen,assuming there is any truth in that rumour

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, glory.win or die. said:

I still don't think this is true, £15m seems too big a risk for our financial model..I just thought it was interesting the report seemed to be sure it's a done deal.

Having said it 

 

£15m really isn't that much in the modern climate. Wages are much more of an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How the Suffolk Socialists expect to be taken seriously with an EPL budget of £20 million is just farcical. You'd be lucky to get half of one leg of an EPL player for that amount.

I think it is safe to say they have been completely lulled into a false sense of security by the low budget wonders of the boy Webber and the £100 million crash and burn of Fulham FC.

The hard reality of the EPL still remains - those who are not prepared to pay the going rate for quality acquisitions will get relegated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

How the Suffolk Socialists expect to be taken seriously with an EPL budget of £20 million is just farcical. You'd be lucky to get half of one leg of an EPL player for that amount.

I think it is safe to say they have been completely lulled into a false sense of security by the low budget wonders of the boy Webber and the £100 million crash and burn of Fulham FC.

The hard reality of the EPL still remains - those who are not prepared to pay the going rate for quality acquisitions will get relegated.

Like your lot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

How the Suffolk Socialists expect to be taken seriously with an EPL budget of £20 million is just farcical. You'd be lucky to get half of one leg of an EPL player for that amount.

I think it is safe to say they have been completely lulled into a false sense of security by the low budget wonders of the boy Webber and the £100 million crash and burn of Fulham FC.

The hard reality of the EPL still remains - those who are not prepared to pay the going rate for quality acquisitions will get relegated.

It was that failure to spend that saw us dumped out of the Championship in May

And that willingness to commit to long term contracts when in the PL that saw us .......err, unable to spend in the Championship

 

ps you don't live in Lowestoft do you, by any chance........Dave ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

The hard reality of the EPL still remains - those who are not prepared to pay the going rate for quality acquisitions will get relegated.

We're doomed I tell ye, doomed, DOOMED! 😫😫😫

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Bill said:

It was that failure to spend that saw us dumped out of the Championship in May

And that willingness to commit to long term contracts when in the PL that saw us .......err, unable to spend in the Championship

 

ps you don't live in Lowestoft do you, by any chance........Dave ?

The Suffolk Socialists managed to defy the laws of football gravity last season, but this will not work in the EPL. If they think they can go around picking up 30-goal-a-season pie men on frees, on a constant basis, then they are very sadly deluded.

Moreover, history has demonstrated that Delia is an EPL tourist. She has no plan to get there and kick on. As the boy Webber has hinted, the plan is to get relegated again as this suits the financial model of the club which is to have insufficient money to go for it in the EPL, but enough money from one-season stays plus parachute payments to off-set losses in the Championship.

Verdict: the club exists to suit the ownership stranglehold the Suffolk Socialists have over it, not any other purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they are majority shareholders (just) not the owners

 

ps are you sure you are not from suffolk, as you don't sound too bright ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Big Vince said:

The Suffolk Socialists managed to defy the laws of football gravity last season, but this will not work in the EPL. If they think they can go around picking up 30-goal-a-season pie men on frees, on a constant basis, then they are very sadly deluded.

Moreover, history has demonstrated that Delia is an EPL tourist. She has no plan to get there and kick on. As the boy Webber has hinted, the plan is to get relegated again as this suits the financial model of the club which is to have insufficient money to go for it in the EPL, but enough money from one-season stays plus parachute payments to off-set losses in the Championship.

Verdict: the club exists to suit the ownership stranglehold the Suffolk Socialists have over it, not any other purpose.

Ah, yes, Big Vince. One of our many disappeared posters, but the only one tasteless and stupid enough to think a thread devoted to remembering Roy Blower, a much-loved and genuine Norwich City fan through thick and thin,  is the appropriate place to indulge in yet another this-is-all-about-me piece of ego-driven self-promotion.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×