The elephant in the room.....I'm going to ask it...

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

....so if we're not spending any of the money on new players....where are we spending it?

Training ground improvements

Academy structure

New Academy players

Stadium improvements

Saving toward stadium expansion??

Improved contracts for first team players

2 x loan signings..£750k x 1 new player

....has this taken all of our money?....is there any left over?.....are we ok with possibly not being good enough on the pitch this season if all other aspects of the club are improved?

....we're obviously playing an entirely different game to most/all of the rest of the Premier League this season and I must confess to being slightly nervous.

 

 

[Petriix 2,834]

We're saving the money to pay the current squad for the remainder of their contracts so that, if we get relegated, the club doesn't go bankrupt or have to sell everyone. Fairly sensible if you ask me.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

I for one am enjoying this refreshing approach to promotion back to the Premier League, it will be interesting to see if it works or not. If we do get relegated, we will be in an incredible position to gain promotion back at the first time of asking with the club in a very healthy state. And should we stay up, I would imagine we’ll start becoming a little more brave in our approach to transfer fees. Win/win for me.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

£6m went on repaying the Canary Bond. There was the reported £10m worth of bonuses for the players for gaining promotion, also the £9m(ish) that Norwich had to pay due to clauses in deals should Norwich gain promotion. (Everton and Wigan got £1m each, Getafe got almost £5m plus some others). 

The youth players signed probably represents about £1m in fees. 

13 new contracts for players doesn’t come cheap - the agent fees alone will probably be around £5m. 

Norwich have spent money here and there but in a much harder to account way. I suspect there is still some left for the club to spend on players should they choose. We know a £3m+ bid was made for Turnbull for example and there have been a few other players who’ve turned Norwich down. 

Will be interesting to see what happens in the last week of the window - I think there is likely to be something. 

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

The spending includes both fees and wages for new players and the other areas. We have good squad depth with existing players who know each others play and four quality additions from top level teams (5 with Heise who's like a new player) who arrived early and have already settled well. The fact that we didn't spend much on fees doesn't mean they're not top players. The exceptional togetherness and hunger for success in the PL will pull us through.

[vlad666 203]

i mostly like the way we are doing things but it would not break the bank to sign a couple of players for a total of 10 million per say. We haven’t addressed our weaknesses from last season and were obviously up against better players now. Have we given ourselves the best chance of staying up with the funds available? I don’t think we have. Fingers crossed it will be enough. 

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

I’d be astounded if we didn’t make any signings in the next week.  Yes there’s good squad unity etc but there’s also some holes that need filling.  SW said all along that some deals take longer to sort, and you have to think he was talking about more than just Rhodes.

[king canary 7,562]

27 minutes ago, Petriix said:

We're saving the money to pay the current squad for the remainder of their contracts so that, if we get relegated, the club doesn't go bankrupt or have to sell everyone. Fairly sensible if you ask me.

Isn't that sort of what parachute payments are for?

[Thirsty Lizard 3,154]

Let me help GJL - there's a large element of back of the fag packet accounting about this, but I'd say that at a rough guess promotion has cost the Club about £70 million so far.

£10 million promotion bonus for the squad that got us promoted last year.

£6.5 million repaying the Canary bond that paid for the redevelopment of Colney.

£20 million (ish) paying all the promotion related clauses in the contracts of players we had already signed. The accounts for last year showed a total of £22 million being payable "if certain conditions in transfer and player contracts are fulfilled". As we have learned most of these relate to us being promoted, e.g. we've have had to pay out extra money for Wildschutt and Naismith even though they didn't play a League game for us last season. 

£30 million (ish) for all of the new contracts that players have signed since we got promoted (there's been lots of them and they won't have come cheap).

£5 million (ish) for the new signings we've made, including loan fees and signing on fees.

 

 

[ricardo 7,330]

I am reliably informed that we only have ninepence halfpenny left in the tea money tin.

[HertsCanary93 222]

Regarding the finances - let's all just agree It will be interesting to see the accounts when they are released. 

As with everything, there is a balance to be struck. If we go down - the decision to only spend 750k on permanent signings for the first team will be rightly criticised. 

In my opinion, we should always be strengthening. Last season is over and we cannot afford to rely on past glories.

However, should we stay up - it will be a remarkable achievement worthy of significant praise.

A very exciting season to come! 👍

Edited August 1, 2019 by HertsCanary93

[Bill 1,788]

12 minutes ago, ricardo said:

I am reliably informed that we only have ninepence halfpenny left in the tea money tin.

we should sell Alex Tettley immediately

[splendidrush 698]

1 minute ago, HertsCanary93 said:

 

With everything, there is a balance to be struck. If we go down - the decision to only spend 750k on permanent signings for the first team will be rightly criticised. 

 

Disagree, this time last year, we'd sold all our assets to balance the books, brought in some players most of us had never heard of, added a few kids and hoped to improve on the previous season. 

Fast forward to today and the financial position has improved greatly, we do however, need to remember how we ended up in such a parlous situation. 

I agree with SW, this season represents 38 'free hits' if we survive, great, if not, we're still 3 or 4 years ahead of where we should be considering our position only a year ago. 

I, for one will not be encouraging our Club to repeat the policies of a couple of years ago, big contracts for underperforming players, which we've only just got off of the wage bill.

[Bill 1,788]

I would have thought that players like Dr Mick, and Byram would set us back £15-£20m

As far as I can see we have acquired players such as Pukki, Lewis, Aarons, Gordon, Steiperman and others at almost next to nothing in relative terms. However as pointed out by Bethnal above I have no doubt that they and many of the U23's have clauses attached to their signings which are future liabilities on the balance sheet.

Was the money spent on Pritchard and Brady any better than that spent of Buendia and McLean ? Likewise the money spent by others on both the Murphys better used than the money spent on Onel and loaning Roberts ? Is Maddison £20m better than Cantwell ?

Unfortunately there is this rather simple believe that the amount quoted in the media is the sum total of a player's cost. So as our total supposed transfer fees dont appear to equal the amount we will receive this season there must be money 'laying about'. It doesn't work that way.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

35 minutes ago, king canary said:

Isn't that sort of what parachute payments are for?

It depends on how many players and what lengths of contracts and how much in wages. But our recent experience (from which we plainly have learned) was that even with starting to cut back after only one season of parachute payments, with another to come, we still had to sell a player for more than 20m to balance the books.

[Bill 1,788]

5 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

It depends on how many players and what lengths of contracts and how much in wages. But our recent experience (from which we plainly have learned) was that even with starting to cut back after only one season of parachute payments, with another to come, we still had to sell a player for more than 20m to balance the books.

we only get two years if we are relegated this season

[HertsCanary93 222]

12 minutes ago, splendidrush said:

Disagree, this time last year, we'd sold all our assets to balance the books, brought in some players most of us had never heard of, added a few kids and hoped to improve on the previous season. 

Fast forward to today and the financial position has improved greatly, we do however, need to remember how we ended up in such a parlous situation. 

I agree with SW, this season represents 38 'free hits' if we survive, great, if not, we're still 3 or 4 years ahead of where we should be considering our position only a year ago. 

I, for one will not be encouraging our Club to repeat the policies of a couple of years ago, big contracts for underperforming players, which we've only just got off of the wage bill.

This is why I emphasised the balance part.

I don't think anyone is asking we sign underperforming players and give them long contracts. What we can do however, is invest wisely - while also improving the first xi.

[splendidrush 698]

6 minutes ago, HertsCanary93 said:

This is why I emphasised the balance part.

I don't think anyone is asking we sign underperforming players and give them long contracts. What we can do however, is invest wisely - while also improving the first xi.

Trouble is, you don't know if they're going to underperform until the contract is signed. 

I think that we are investing wisely, Heise may not pull up trees but he adds depth in a position where we were short. Likewise Byram. Farhmann and Roberts add quality without the long term financial commitment and we couldn't have afforded to buy them anyway. 

The real investment has gone on beneath the first Team, the U23s and those going out on loan will, in time mean, that when the Big Boys come waving their cheque books, we've already identified and developed replacements. 

[Icecream Snow 761]

Misread a full stop as a comma

Edited August 1, 2019 by Icecream Snow
.

[splendidrush 698]

4 minutes ago, Icecream Snow said:

Misread a full stop as a comma

Sorry IS, I like a comma as I get short of ,breath 😜

[Dean Coneys boots 1,398]

It’s a massive gamble. Before a ball is kicked people are all happy but give it ten games and the criticism will be easy. 

There is being prudent and there is not even trying to give it a go. 

As others have said - if the team perform this will be heralded as genius. But if they don’t the anger will come quick. Put bluntly spending 750k in fees is frankly astonishingly brave for a newly promoted side. 

Looks like the club would rather bank the money and budget for relegation than give it a go 

[Jim Smith 2,314]

What this summer shows very starkly (whether it’s being charged extra for memberships or an inability to match our rivals in terms of transfer activity) is the limitations placed upon us by our ownership model or “self funding” status.

It’s certainly not the case that we can’t buck the trend and stay up whilst taking this approach but once again we will have to be absolutely outstanding in all that we do and long term it’s going to stay extremely challenging as the potential to significantly grow revenues above a certain ceiling would appear limited. That ceiling will already no doubt see us paying the lowest wages in the premier league. 

 

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

9 hours ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

....so if we're not spending any of the money on new players....where are we spending it?

Training ground improvements

Academy structure

New Academy players

Stadium improvements

Saving toward stadium expansion??

Improved contracts for first team players

2 x loan signings..£750k x 1 new player

....has this taken all of our money?....is there any left over?.....are we ok with possibly not being good enough on the pitch this season if all other aspects of the club are improved?

....we're obviously playing an entirely different game to most/all of the rest of the Premier League this season and I must confess to being slightly nervous.

 

 

 

9 hours ago, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

....so if we're not spending any of the money on new players....where are we spending it?

Training ground improvements

Academy structure

New Academy players

Stadium improvements

Saving toward stadium expansion??

Improved contracts for first team players

2 x loan signings..£750k x 1 new player

....has this taken all of our money?....is there any left over?.....are we ok with possibly not being good enough on the pitch this season if all other aspects of the club are improved?

....we're obviously playing an entirely different game to most/all of the rest of the Premier League this season and I must confess to being slightly nervous.

 

 

Last 6 years of transfers:

prem13/14 in-27.05m out-4.35m -22.7m

cham14/15 In-18.32m out-17.44m -0.88m

prem15/16 In-42.8m out-19.34m -23.46m

cham16/17 In-23.81m out 33.03m +9.22m

cham17/18 In-13.6m out-30.27m +16.67m

cham18/19In-4.91m out-33.84m+28.93m

The mess this club was in must have been concerning. I get there are wages, but I see years of tv revenue, near capacity crowds and merch sales to oppose it. Imo the owners aren’t as great as people think they are. 

 

[HertsCanary93 222]

11 hours ago, splendidrush said:

Trouble is, you don't know if they're going to underperform until the contract is signed. 

I think that we are investing wisely, Heise may not pull up trees but he adds depth in a position where we were short. Likewise Byram. Farhmann and Roberts add quality without the long term financial commitment and we couldn't have afforded to buy them anyway. 

The real investment has gone on beneath the first Team, the U23s and those going out on loan will, in time mean, that when the Big Boys come waving their cheque books, we've already identified and developed replacements. 

Agreed - the signings we have made are excellent and prudent.

I never get too excited by loan players, because best case scenario, they are brilliant and the price tag to sign gets pushed beyond what we can afford. They are only really worth the investment if they keep us up. Whereas a realistic permanent signing gives us sell-able assets and an improved championship squad, even if we go down.

On one hand we all know the dangers of panic buying and being left with overpaid mercenaries (EG. Naismith), on the other hand many remember times when we have delayed on making the signings that give us the quality to stay in the division (EG. Dean Ashton).

It comes down to the scouting staff to decide whether a player will become an underperforming player or a gem. I am still hoping they have some players in the pipeline that will make is a better team for the next few years.

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

I am not surprised we haven't spent loads. I am very surprised that our total spend is effectively 750k.

It's all very well keeping last year's squad together, but we have no idea how last year's squad will fare in the EPL.

A total thrashing against Liverpool could signal a very tough season.

[Feedthewolf 4,844]

4 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

It’s a massive gamble. Before a ball is kicked people are all happy but give it ten games and the criticism will be easy. 

There is being prudent and there is not even trying to give it a go. 

As others have said - if the team perform this will be heralded as genius. But if they don’t the anger will come quick. Put bluntly spending 750k in fees is frankly astonishingly brave for a newly promoted side. 

Looks like the club would rather bank the money and budget for relegation than give it a go 

Good to see you getting a good strong pre-season's moaning in. It's a long, hard season, so you've got to be on your game.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

4 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

It’s a massive gamble. Before a ball is kicked people are all happy but give it ten games and the criticism will be easy. 

There is being prudent and there is not even trying to give it a go. 

As others have said - if the team perform this will be heralded as genius. But if they don’t the anger will come quick. Put bluntly spending 750k in fees is frankly astonishingly brave for a newly promoted side. 

Looks like the club would rather bank the money and budget for relegation than give it a go 

I don't think there is any extra money to 'bank', the club just aren't spending money they don't currently have. 

They could be a bit riskier and spend part of next year's parachute payment now but on previous experience they seem to have decided against that.

[Bill 1,788]

1 hour ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

I am not surprised we haven't spent loads. I am very surprised that our total spend is effectively 750k.

It's all very well keeping last year's squad together, but we have no idea how last year's squad will fare in the EPL.

A total thrashing against Liverpool could signal a very tough season.

you can only hope

[Bill 1,788]

5 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

It’s a massive gamble. Before a ball is kicked people are all happy but give it ten games and the criticism will be easy. 

There is being prudent and there is not even trying to give it a go. 

As others have said - if the team perform this will be heralded as genius. But if they don’t the anger will come quick. Put bluntly spending 750k in fees is frankly astonishingly brave for a newly promoted side. 

Looks like the club would rather bank the money and budget for relegation than give it a go 

so let's wait and see, should we ?

as I for one trust those who have turned the club round in such a short time

..................rather than numpties like you

[HertsCanary93 222]

Liverpool away is really an awful opening fixture. Even if we sign Messi and Kante next week, we would still potentially get pumped. They are so good going forward.

They have thrashed better teams than us, but fans and media alike will use it to categorise our season.

If anyone is going to use a single game as a signal for the season (which is never a good idea anyway) - at least wait for Newcastle.