Over to you Mr Webber

[Beefy is a legend 224]

Even when Leicester won the Premier League they lost Mahrez and Kante. 
 

They probably had fans too moaning about lack of ambition. 

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

2 minutes ago, Beefy is a legend said:

Even when Leicester won the Premier League they lost Mahrez and Kante. 
 

They probably had fans too moaning about lack of ambition. 

That's a bit different though as they retained their status in the PL and reinvested in the squad. 

We've been relegated and allegedly want to get back up so to do so you need a team good enough to make that happen. 

Yes before people say we have invested and we have to sell and Covid etc etc, the reality is that we will not be as strong as last season or even of the promotion season and that's the bit that concerns me as a fan not that we have have sold/had to sell.

[hertfordyellow 460]

There is a food chain in football and we are lower than Everton in it. The reverse of that is we are higher than York and Luton. People bemoaning us selling should also be up in arms about how we have poached young talent from Luton for peanuts and reaped the rewards financially.

[Terminally Yellow 2,448]

11 hours ago, CANARYKING said:

What have you to say after today’s debacle, are you on a bonus for cash coming in ?

Honestly, the state of you. Grow up.

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

51 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Leicester will spend though and on real quality, we on the other hand don’t. 

I'm struggling to think of another Championship club that has matched our spending during this window. 

[Midlands Yellow 3,913]

2 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

I'm struggling to think of another Championship club that has matched our spending during this window. 

I’m struggling to find another club in the Championship who had the funds to do that after spending little in the Premiership. Add to the fact the club knew valuable assets would also leave hardly equates to pushing the boat out. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

30 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

I’m struggling to find another club in the Championship who had the funds to do that after spending little in the Premiership. Add to the fact the club knew valuable assets would also leave hardly equates to pushing the boat out. 

The reason we spent very little in the Premier League is that we were paying for the sins of the past. We spent money on the likes of Naismith, Wildschutt and others that cost us a fortune we didn't have. We ended up having to sell Maddison to avoid going out of business and in the year we were promoted we still lost £35m. We budgeted for a profit of £25m last season to try and claw that back but that figure will obviously be reduced due to Covid which is not the club's fault. 

Bear in mind that when Webber arrived we were looking down the barrel of a gun. That situation has been turned round and we now have one of the highest paid squads in the division and have spent more than any other club. 

I can't really see that the club could have done any more. I'm sure you'd like to see a rich investor buy out Delia and take us to the promised land but for every Leicester City there is an Ipswich Town, Sunderland or Bolton. 

No doubt you will point to Villa spending to survive but they relied on a referee's mistake to keep them up. And the much hailed Sheffield United are looking like relegation favourites already. As someone has rightly pointed out above, we are lower than Everton in the football food chain and probably always will be. Stoke, Middlesbrough, Sunderland and co are far closer to us in terms of size and would all swap places with us at the moment. 

Edited October 2, 2020 by dylanisabaddog

[Midlands Yellow 3,913]

40 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

The reason we spent very little in the Premier League is that we were paying for the sins of the past. We spent money on the likes of Naismith, Wildschutt and others that cost us a fortune we didn't have. We ended up having to sell Maddison to avoid going out of business and in the year we were promoted we still lost £35m. We budgeted for a profit of £25m last season to try and claw that back but that figure will obviously be reduced due to Covid which is not the club's fault. 

Bear in mind that when Webber arrived we were looking down the barrel of a gun. That situation has been turned round and we now have one of the highest paid squads in the division and have spent more than any other club. 

I can't really see that the club could have done any more. I'm sure you'd like to see a rich investor buy out Delia and take us to the promised land but for every Leicester City there is an Ipswich Town, Sunderland or Bolton. 

No doubt you will point to Villa spending to survive but they relied on a referee's mistake to keep them up. And the much hailed Sheffield United are looking like relegation favourites already. As someone has rightly pointed out above, we are lower than Everton in the football food chain and probably always will be. Stoke, Middlesbrough, Sunderland and co are far closer to us in terms of size and would all swap places with us at the moment. 

Some will be using the Naismith excuse for seasons to come but conveniently forget all the money from Sky and player sales. Most clubs are selling clubs but it’s the one thing we lead the field in by a decent margin. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

4 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Some will be using the Naismith excuse for seasons to come but conveniently forget all the money from Sky and player sales. Most clubs are selling clubs but it’s the one thing we lead the field in by a decent margin. 

Sorry, but that's absolute nonsense. All the money that has come into the club has gone out in player purchases and wages. At the end of our last promotion season we were £35m in debt and the latest accounts are likely to show that figure being reduced to between £15m and £20m. The sales of Ben and Jamal have brought in around £40m but we've already spent a considerable amount in this window.

We have definitely done very well out of sales since Webber has been here but that money was mainly used to cover the mistakes of the previous regimes. To date, everything that has come in has gone back out again.

I'm completely baffled by your arguments. Do you think a huge amount of money has magically disappeared? Are you suggesting that we throw caution to the wind and spend £20m on players then keep our fingers crossed that we go up?

As things stand I would guess that we are around even financially. By the end of next week we may be significantly better off if we sell the other 3 players that are attracting interest. That will be the time to talk about spending but not now. And if we do spend, do we spend it on players or a new stand? If it wasn't for Covid I would say an increased capacity is a must but now I'm not so sure. 

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

1 minute ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Sorry, but that's absolute nonsense. All the money that has come into the club has gone out in player purchases and wages. At the end of our last promotion season we were £35m in debt and the latest accounts are likely to show that figure being reduced to between £15m and £20m. The sales of Ben and Jamal have brought in around £40m but we've already spent a considerable amount in this window.

We have definitely done very well out of sales since Webber has been here but that money was mainly used to cover the mistakes of the previous regimes. To date, everything that has come in has gone back out again.

I'm completely baffled by your arguments. Do you think a huge amount of money has magically disappeared? Are you suggesting that we throw caution to the wind and spend £20m on players then keep our fingers crossed that we go up?

As things stand I would guess that we are around even financially. By the end of next week we may be significantly better off if we sell the other 3 players that are attracting interest. That will be the time to talk about spending but not now. And if we do spend, do we spend it on players or a new stand? If it wasn't for Covid I would say an increased capacity is a must but now I'm not so sure. 

I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories about the money but a season in the EPL is supposed to be worth £100m. And we've now sold ~£40m worth of talent. There has to be SOME money available even if we're looking at a £35m debt at the start of last season and player purchases this summer, surely? If there isn't any money even after all that, then it's as-good-as saying that the self-funding model we're pursuing is NEVER going to bring us financial security or allow us to compete in the "Top 26".

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

1 minute ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories about the money but a season in the EPL is supposed to be worth £100m. And we've now sold ~£40m worth of talent. There has to be SOME money available even if we're looking at a £35m debt at the start of last season and player purchases this summer, surely? If there isn't any money even after all that, then it's as-good-as saying that the self-funding model we're pursuing is NEVER going to bring us financial security or allow us to compete in the "Top 26".

There is no conspiracy. The club's accounts are there for all to see. They are prepared by an independent firm of accountants with a very good reputation. There is a steady stream of people on this forum who say that we must have lots of money but they never produce any evidence. The only evidence there is shows quite clearly that we have consistently spent all our money on transfer fees and wages and have often spent more. Before Webber took over our spending on wages was actually higher than our income. And in the year to 30 June 2019 we lost £35m. Those are facts, not pie in the sky conjecture. 

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

10 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

There is no conspiracy. The club's accounts are there for all to see. They are prepared by an independent firm of accountants with a very good reputation. There is a steady stream of people on this forum who say that we must have lots of money but they never produce any evidence. The only evidence there is shows quite clearly that we have consistently spent all our money on transfer fees and wages and have often spent more. Before Webber took over our spending on wages was actually higher than our income. And in the year to 30 June 2019 we lost £35m. Those are facts, not pie in the sky conjecture. 

But since June 2019 we've been in the EPL for a season, made it to the quarter finals of the FA Cup and now sold Jamal and Godfrey. Given our record-low transfer spending last summer, I cannot seriously believe that the rest of that money has been swallowed by loan fees and wages. If so, the failed loans last season should be held up as a massive failure on Webber's part as it not only failed to assist the squad last season but has also financially killed our chances of improving the squad for this season.

I eagerly await the accounts for this year.

Edited October 2, 2020 by Canary Wundaboy

[seanthecanary 168]

4 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

But since June 2019 we've been in the EPL for a season, made it to the quarter finals of the FA Cup and now sold Jamal and Godfrey. Given our record-low transfer spending last summer, I cannot seriously believe that the rest of that money has been swallowed by loan fees and wages. If so, the failed loans last season should be held up as a massive failure on Webber's part as it not only failed to assist the squad last season but has also financially killed our chances of improving the squad for this season.

I eagerly await the accounts for this year.

I would be interested to know what the loan fees and wages were for the likes of Amadou and Duda as well what signing on fee and wages Drmic got.  Honestly, beyond Byram and the fact the Fahrmann maybe pushed Krul to be better to keep his place, any money spent was a complete waste last season.  I do expect that the loans cost a lot more than we would want.

Edited October 2, 2020 by seanthecanary

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

4 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

But since June 2019 we've been in the EPL for a season, made it to the quarter finals of the FA Cup and now sold Jamal and Godfrey. Given our record-low transfer spending last summer, I cannot seriously believe that the rest of that money has been swallowed by loan fees and wages. If so, the failed loans last season should be held up as a massive failure on Webber's part as it not only failed to assist the squad last season but has also financially killed our chances of improving the squad for this season.

I eagerly await the accounts for this year.

Yes we did waste loan money on loans last season, particularly on Duda and the lad from Manchester City. But that's a different argument altogether from your previous statement, in fact you are totally contradicting yourself. 

The accounts for last season were originally expected to show a profit of £25m but then along came Covid. And of course the accounts  will only show part of the story as the season overran. As I said earlier, that £25m was planned for to cover the previous £35m loss but I assume you find that figure hard to believe as well. 

Overall, I think it's a bit rich moaning about wasting money on a couple of loans when the overall record of signings by the current regime is actually quite good. 

[Canary Wundaboy 1,358]

30 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Yes we did waste loan money on loans last season, particularly on Duda and the lad from Manchester City. But that's a different argument altogether from your previous statement, in fact you are totally contradicting yourself. 

The accounts for last season were originally expected to show a profit of £25m but then along came Covid. And of course the accounts  will only show part of the story as the season overran. As I said earlier, that £25m was planned for to cover the previous £35m loss but I assume you find that figure hard to believe as well. 

Overall, I think it's a bit rich moaning about wasting money on a couple of loans when the overall record of signings by the current regime is actually quite good. 

Ok, so we started last season with a debit of £35m. We then had last season in the EPL earning many millions, and leaving us with a pre-COVID profit of £25m. So despite a whole season in the EPL, earning £100m, we're still £10m in debt from the year before? And then we sell Jamal, and Godfrey, and because of COVID we're expected to believe that we're just about even and have no money to spend? I'm not disputing it, I'm genuinely asking. Because what we're saying is unless we get promoted at the first time of asking, financial we're back to square one: utterly ****ed. 

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

Webber 100% will be on a bonus for the money he has generated. I would like to hope that at least some is spent on some new first team players.. doubt it will be.

[horsefly 4,273]

The loans of Amadou and Duda provide an interesting way to consider the two different perspectives trading on this thread.

Broadly speaking, one perspective says we should have thrown a lot more money at signings in trying to stay up, the other perspective says Weber and co were right to proceed more cautiously in order to protect the financial security of the club. 

Both Amadou and Duda are considered high quality footballers (and I certainly don't recall anybody on this site saying otherwise when we contracted them on loans). So let's imagine we had bought those players outright instead of loaning them. At the time they arrived their combined (estimated) values would have involved a layout of something around £30m+. I assume both perspectives would agree that such an outlay would have pretty much maxed out our budget and shown the "ambition" craved for by the first perspective. The actual subsequent performance of those players, however, shows that the outlay of that money would not have resulted in our premier league survival. The gamble wouldn't have paid off. We would then have been left with a very significant financial hole to fill, a situation that would have been exploited by predator clubs knowing that we were desperate for cash. But of course we didn't make that gamble and followed the cautious approach of the second perspective. Thus not only did we not blow huge amounts of money, but also by remaining financially stable we have been able to resist exploitation by predator clubs and obtain the true value for players we choose to sell. 

So for me, the cautious approach of the second perspective wins hands down. 

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

17 minutes ago, Canary Wundaboy said:

Ok, so we started last season with a debit of £35m. We then had last season in the EPL earning many millions, and leaving us with a pre-COVID profit of £25m. So despite a whole season in the EPL, earning £100m, we're still £10m in debt from the year before? And then we sell Jamal, and Godfrey, and because of COVID we're expected to believe that we're just about even and have no money to spend? I'm not disputing it, I'm genuinely asking. Because what we're saying is unless we get promoted at the first time of asking, financial we're back to square one: utterly ****ed. 

I wouldn't say we're utterly ****ed. A lot of that £35m arose due to promotion bonuses to the players and in fees like the extra money we had to pay for Emi because we went up. We then negotiated new contracts for most of the playing staff which in some part has helped to secure decent fees for a couple of players. Yes, we got a huge amount from Sky but we also spent an enormous amount on wages. And we brought in 3 loan players that failed. 

We were hoping for a profit of £25m which will have been seriously affected by Covid. We also brought in around 10 new players early in the window. Hugill in particular cost a lot of money but there were fees attached to some of the others. And agent's fees on top.  That leaves little or nothing to spend but that may change in the next few days. Unless the club intends to build a new stand I would expect money to be spent if any or all of Max, Emi and Todd are sold. 

This season will also be seriously affected by Covid. I have no idea of the cost but we're unlikely to bring in any ticket money, we'll lose all match day spending and I would guess that merchandise will also take a huge hit. That probably adds up to around £15m but that's just my back of a fag packet guess. I know the players all took a relegation wage cut but the Sky money goes down as well. 

There is another discussion to be had about whether Delia should sell to someone rich. You can argue that all you like but in the current environment no one is likely to want to buy a football club even if she did want to sell it. 

Obviously we won't know the full position till the accounts are released but they will only go up to 30 June. And of course we may have sold 3 more players by this time next week. Personally I can't see any point in keeping any of them if they want to go. 

[TIL 1010 4,717]

7 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

 

Obviously we won't know the full position till the accounts are released but they will only go up to 30 June. 

Just a point of order dylan, the accounting period for this last year was extended by a month until 31st July.

[dylanisabaddog 4,841]

2 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Just a point of order dylan, the accounting period for this last year was extended by a month until 31st July.

Thanks, I missed that. It will make it much easier to assess the position. It doesn't really make sense to have accounts running to 30 June in the current situation. I can't remember now when we restarted and finished but 31 July is better than 30 June 

[Uncle Fred 526]

I hear Farke has just trotted out the new COVID black hole in the finance nonsense 

we will not be spending any money and god knows where the money will have gone

just the same old same old with the stowmarket 2 

[Mr.Carrow 376]

18 minutes ago, horsefly said:

The loans of Amadou and Duda provide an interesting way to consider the two different perspectives trading on this thread.

Broadly speaking, one perspective says we should have thrown a lot more money at signings in trying to stay up, the other perspective says Weber and co were right to proceed more cautiously in order to protect the financial security of the club. 

Both Amadou and Duda are considered high quality footballers (and I certainly don't recall anybody on this site saying otherwise when we contracted them on loans). So let's imagine we had bought those players outright instead of loaning them. At the time they arrived their combined (estimated) values would have involved a layout of something around £30m+. I assume both perspectives would agree that such an outlay would have pretty much maxed out our budget and shown the "ambition" craved for by the first perspective. The actual subsequent performance of those players, however, shows that the outlay of that money would not have resulted in our premier league survival. The gamble wouldn't have paid off. We would then have been left with a very significant financial hole to fill, a situation that would have been exploited by predator clubs knowing that we were desperate for cash. But of course we didn't make that gamble and followed the cautious approach of the second perspective. Thus not only did we not blow huge amounts of money, but also by remaining financially stable we have been able to resist exploitation by predator clubs and obtain the true value for players we choose to sell. 

So for me, the cautious approach of the second perspective wins hands down. 

Exactly. If it wasn't for Covid these people would at least have a reasonable position. In current conditions we are in a much healthier position than almost all of our competitors. In January we may well be able to pick up young players for a fraction of fees being demanded now. Thank god we didn't blow millions on Roberts, Fahrman, Amadou and Duda and would now be tied to their multi million contracts.

[birchfest 397]

Reading through this is depressing, largely because it appears there are some fans that STILL think you get given a £100 million check on promotion to the premier league. Like literally, that amount transferred to the accounts in one go. 

[Nuff Said 5,078]

8 minutes ago, birchfest said:

Reading through this is depressing, largely because it appears there are some fans that STILL think you get given a £100 million check on promotion to the premier league. Like literally, that amount transferred to the accounts in one go. 

See also, when we sell Ben for £25 million, someone from Everton arrives at Carrow Road with all the money in a carrier bag before we hand him over. As opposed to the reality that we are getting the cash on the drip over several years (which goes some way to address the ‘tax problem’ that keeps getting raised).

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

5 hours ago, Rich T The Biscuit said:

Completely agree but as I said that's just one part of his job and the other part is key and that part is making us competitive to challenge for the title and not just the play offs 

Do you feel he is being given the tools to carry out both tasks? I don’t personally, but get shot down on this message board when speaking out!

[paul moy 235]

22 minutes ago, birchfest said:

Reading through this is depressing, largely because it appears there are some fans that STILL think you get given a £100 million check on promotion to the premier league. Like literally, that amount transferred to the accounts in one go. 

Funnily enough that is what my Leeds mate thought before I explained that they will actually get around 37m at the outset and have to wait for the rest.

[seanthecanary 168]

1 minute ago, paul moy said:

Funnily enough that is what my Leeds mate thought before I explained that they will actually get around 37m at the outset and have to wait for the rest.

Wrong!  Being promoted to the PL instantly gives you the financial power to buy both Messi and Ronaldo with change for 67 other players.  We just didn't want to.

[Dr Greenthumb 746]

5 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

If we are giving out credit for the sale of players isnt more due to the people who brought him (and the others) in and gave them coaching and game time?

Absolutely! Never said Webber did it all. But I’d imagine he was the one negotiating the money aspect of the players transfer.

[Rich T The Biscuit 562]

4 minutes ago, Dr Greenthumb said:

Do you feel he is being given the tools to carry out both tasks? I don’t personally, but get shot down on this message board when speaking out!

No, the first one is forced on him and therefore the second one is more difficult. 

[birchfest 397]

14 minutes ago, paul moy said:

Funnily enough that is what my Leeds mate thought before I explained that they will actually get around 37m at the outset and have to wait for the rest.

I still cant figure out if people choose not to listen when its explained over and over again, or simply don't understand. £100 million is how much you will have roughly made if you add the amount your given for one seasons worth of TV rights etc to the parachute payments you get for the following 2 years if immediately relegated, as we were. Now if you take into account we were something like 35 million in the red, still had to carry on paying our players on now increased wages, brought in a couple of new faces (Drimic on a free cost about 2.5 million in wages) and then you start to see how far off that £100 million in your back pocket sounds, especially as math day and TV revenue was effected by Covid.