'We lack ambition.. when will Delia open her pockets?'

[cambridgeshire canary 5,817]

Given we have now spent over 40 million this window (Which will soon rise to just over 50 with our incoming Greek wonderkid) is there anyone left with that old viewpoint? Would love to hear from them

[TIL 1010 4,285]

Am i not correct in thinking that Gibson and Giannoulis were budgeted for this last years accounts whilst on loan with a view to buy upon promotion ?

[Fuzzar 1,632]

Delia's hambag must be enormous! (Not a euphemism).

[ncfcstar 282]

11 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Am i not correct in thinking that Gibson and Giannoulis were budgeted for this last years accounts whilst on loan with a view to buy upon promotion ?

That's my understanding too.

[hogesar 8,585]

I'm not sure which years accounts its budgeted for is relevant. On top of that circa £40 million spend is the contractual obligations of wages which I said elsewhere Is likely to be circa £20-£25 million over the next 3 years.

[pearsos 56]

11 minutes ago, Fuzzar said:

Delia's hambag must be enormous! (Not a euphemism).

Her handbag is pretty big too

[Uncle Fred 526]

17 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Am i not correct in thinking that Gibson and Giannoulis were budgeted for this last years accounts whilst on loan with a view to buy upon promotion ?

Yes and the £38 from Emi net the spend is next to zero 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,055]

I'm not against the model at all, nor do I remotely want Delia to leave the club, but we did sell our best player to fund most of these transfers - our net spend will still be quite low at this point. I think if we get Tzolis and another small signing or loan then we could be looking at a £15 million ish net spend (?), which will still be fairly good given the damage caused by COVID, but hardly bank breaking levels of spending (which some clearly desire).

However a previous complaint has been that we always sell and only partially reinvest all of the proceeds - well that certainly cannot be argued this window. It is a very visible progression from the Maddison sale 4 years ago where we saw little directly going back in to the team, and whilst we haven't gotten away totally from the need to sell players (yet - perhaps after this season if successful?), we are clearly now much better equipped to strengthen off the back of such a sale than we were back then. 

Edited August 10, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[ncfcstar 282]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I'm not sure which years accounts its budgeted for is relevant. On top of that circa £40 million spend is the contractual obligations of wages which I said elsewhere Is likely to be circa £20-£25 million over the next 3 years.

It's relevant in the sense that it changes the size of the 'transfer budget' for this season if those funds rolled over.

[Thirsty Lizard 2,777]

36 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Am i not correct in thinking that Gibson and Giannoulis were budgeted for this last years accounts whilst on loan with a view to buy upon promotion ?

So........... and?  Does the fact that they might have been budgeted in last years accounts mean that we haven't spent real money on them? 

[TheGunnShow 5,198]

"When will Delia open her pockets?"

"That's the problem with a self-funded model".

Well, yeah, and not understanding what "self-funded" means explains a bit.

[PurpleCanary 5,267]

4 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

Yes and the £38 from Emi net the spend is next to zero 

It is £33m. If you want to include the potential add-ons we might receive for Buendia then the much greater amount of add-ons we might have to end up paying for Rashica, Gunn, Lees-Melou, Sargent and Tzolis has to be taken into account when assessing our summer spending.

[Hairy Canary 579]

32 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

Yes and the £38 from Emi net the spend is next to zero 

A self funding model requires the net spend to be zero doesn't it? That's why we chose to sell EMI because it allowed a broader strenghtening to benefit the team overall.

[king canary 6,849]

Whichever way you look at it we're certainly 'going for it' a bit more this season and while I wish we hadn't sold Emi, I prefer this strategy to trying to improve the squad with only loans and freebies. 

Even if we go down this season you'd like to believe at least one of Sargent, Tzolis or Rashica will have impressed enough to have increased their value moving forward.

[TIL 1010 4,285]

36 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

So........... and?  Does the fact that they might have been budgeted in last years accounts mean that we haven't spent real money on them? 

Remember we got well in excess of £30million for Buendia so this £40million spend is somewhat slanted don't you think Thirsty ?

[Felixfan 53]

You have overlooked the £35 million COVID loss.

[Badger 2,326]

15 minutes ago, Hairy Canary said:

A self funding model requires the net spend to be zero doesn't it?

No - not at all. Why do you think that?

[Alex Moss 2,165]

5 minutes ago, Felixfan said:

You have overlooked the £35 million COVID loss.

Exactly. The sale of Emi roughly covers this, we have spent around £40mil this summer and we’re not even done yet. We would have to be scraping the barrel to knock the club for this in fairness. Personally, it’s surprised me, the level of spending, and I applaud Webber for going for it in this window. 

[Hairy Canary 579]

4 minutes ago, Badger said:

No - not at all. Why do you think that?

Probably didn’t express it too well as it reads that transfer activity alone needed to balance. Trying to point out that in the absence of a benefactor willing to add in their cash you can only spend generated income?

[Duncan Edwards 1,980]

1 minute ago, Alex Moss said:

Exactly. The sale of Emi roughly covers this, we have spent around £40mil this summer and we’re not even done yet. We would have to be scraping the barrel to knock the club for this in fairness. Personally, it’s surprised me, the level of spending, and I applaud Webber for going for it in this window. 

I applaud Delia for allowing Webber to go for it. Well done, Delia! 

[Badger 2,326]

Just now, Hairy Canary said:

Probably didn’t express it too well as it reads that transfer activity alone needed to balance. Trying to point out that in the absence of a benefactor willing to add in their cash you can only spend generated income?

Yes that's it - we don't have a benefactor giving us money but the net spend can be positive (or negative). How much we spend depends upon our revenues, so it is our own hands, which is not necessarily the case with  other models.

[hogesar 8,585]

16 minutes ago, TIL 1010 said:

Remember we got well in excess of £30million for Buendia so this £40million spend is somewhat slanted don't you think Thirsty ?

Not when you also factor in additional spend of likely £20 million plus in wages over the next 3 years.

[sgncfc 1,158]

My understanding is that the Lewis money paid for last summer's spending and the Godfrey money paid for Gibson and Gianni, so we have spent some (not all) of the Emi fee so far. Our net spend to date since relegation is virtually nil, and we should be able to cover the Covid loss with TV receipts relatively comfortably.

I'm not complaining - as someone else has already pointed out, reinvesting the proceeds into making more progress on the field is the model and in Rashica, Sargent etc we have every chance of another £30m player.

The club is being very well run - survival this season though is absolutely vital for that progress to continue, otherwise we are almost back to square one again.

[Petriix 2,550]

Let's assume that the books were just about balanced at the end of last season. It has been widely stated that the Gibson and Giannoulis transfers were budgeted for last season, but they were obviously contingent on promotion. There will also have been significant bonuses across the players and staff for the success on the pitch as well as most basic wages doubling.

As well as spending the ~ £45m on transfer fees, we've also released a bunch of players at significant expense. So, with the new players' wages, that's the majority of the the Premier League windfall accounted for. We've likely got a contingency fund for January or one or two additions in the next few weeks but we don't have to blow every penny now if we can't identify decent players that represent good value. This has been a decent transfer window so far.

Edited August 10, 2021 by Petriix

[BarclayWazza 90]

Just love the accounting of some on here:

Last season we received roughly £15m for Lewis, £25m for Ben Godfrey and £40m in parachute payments.  Assuming the Gibson and Giannoulis deals were from last seasons budget, that paid for Sorensen, Placheta, Mumba, Dowell, Hughil, Gibson and Giannoulis.  I would wager that we are in credit from the Lewis and Godfrey money.

Equally, if the reported fees for Gunn, Lees Melou, Rashica and Sargent are as suggested, we're still in credit from the Buendia money.  We still have the approximately £100m PL money to come.

What's happening is the bare minimum that can be expected from a policy which allows the sale of your best players, reinvestment into the playing squad.  But don't be hoodwinked, some would have us believe that these purchases means that Delia is great and wonderful.  Her contribution to this is zero.  We sat on the 2018-19 PL money and as it stands, no 2021-22 PL money has gone on players. 

Currently, our net spend is less than that before the 2018-19 PL season.

 

[Mello Yello 2,139]

9 minutes ago, BarclayWazza said:

Just love the accounting of some on here:

Last season we received roughly £15m for Lewis, £25m for Ben Godfrey and £40m in parachute payments.  Assuming the Gibson and Giannoulis deals were from last seasons budget, that paid for Sorensen, Placheta, Mumba, Dowell, Hughil, Gibson and Giannoulis.  I would wager that we are in credit from the Lewis and Godfrey money.

Equally, if the reported fees for Gunn, Lees Melou, Rashica and Sargent are as suggested, we're still in credit from the Buendia money.  We still have the approximately £100m PL money to come.

What's happening is the bare minimum that can be expected from a policy which allows the sale of your best players, reinvestment into the playing squad.  But don't be hoodwinked, some would have us believe that these purchases means that Delia is great and wonderful.  Her contribution to this is zero.  We sat on the 2018-19 PL money and as it stands, no 2021-22 PL money has gone on players. 

Currently, our net spend is less than that before the 2018-19 PL season.

 

May I suggest you might want to put one of these on?....

[Thirsty Lizard 2,777]

1 hour ago, TIL 1010 said:

Remember we got well in excess of £30million for Buendia so this £40million spend is somewhat slanted don't you think Thirsty ?

I just don't get what you're trying to say TIL. How many times do we have to spend the Buendia money before you're satisfied?

[Uncle Fred 526]

1 hour ago, Hairy Canary said:

A self funding model requires the net spend to be zero doesn't it? That's why we chose to sell EMI because it allowed a broader strenghtening to benefit the team overall.

Indeed but all that lovely money from sky this year has yet to be spent so loads of wonga still left in the kitty 

[Thirsty Lizard 2,777]

12 minutes ago, Mello Yello said:

May I suggest you might want to put one of these on?....

No need. He's clearly already wearing one of these!

 

[cambridgeshire canary 5,817]

2 minutes ago, Uncle Fred said:

Indeed but all that lovely money from sky this year has yet to be spent so loads of wonga still left in the kitty 

Why would you remind me of those horrifying  nightmare fuel adverts