January Transfer Window..

[1st Wizard 0]

Glenn Roeder has done absolute wonder since taking over here, but I have to say even though it is often criticised on here our defence is actually our strongest area at the moment. This makes me wonder whether Taylor at £1 million may be sound investment or not especially when the funds are limited. Instead the real areas that need to be looked at is a Centre Forward and a Left Winger.

As much as he bleeds yellow and green, Cureton has been pretty poor by all acounts this season with only 7 goals in 23 appearances. A fact that is hardly suprising when he failed miserably in Korea and at QPR and Swindon. This along with Dublin''s legs getting older, Evans lack of consistency that comes with inexperience and Brown and Strihavka seeming to be the biggest waste of over £1 million pounds that has ever been spent means a new Centre Forward is vital. Ameobi on loan is the obvious choice, he isn''t getting a look in at Newcastle and Roeder knows him and rates him highly but wages could be a stumbling block. Another option is the lower league talent, Aaron Mclean being the most obvious of such, but with Mcleod failing at Charlton do we want to gamble on a player who would cost at least £500,000. The next option is splashing the cash and signing another team''s star forward, Andy Gray at Burnely really does the business at this level and would be available for about £1 million or even spend bigger and go for Varney or Sharp for £1.5 million each.

Next is a Left Winger, Huckerby is only showing flashes of his former self  and there seems little point keeping one of the clubs top earners on next season so a quality replacement is needed. Pattison is much more of a midfielder than an out and out winger and so he would not be a direct replacement. Someone like Wes Hoolahan, that Sheffield United are looking at, is available for about £250,000 with his contract up at the end of the season or Brian Howard at Barnsley who is having a storming season but would perhaps cost that little bit more. The loan option in this area is a little bit more difficult with not many teams having two left wingers and so looking at perhaps Arsenal''s or Man United''s youth teams may be more viable.

As well as this I would keep Mo Camara on loan until the end of the season as he seems a decent, solid and if not better left back Drury. I would also keep Smith and give him a run in his preferred position of Centre Mid and see if he can inject a bit more spark into midfield. I would also look at extending Pattison and Evans'' loans. Then if there is money left over think about spending it on Taylor.

Ameobi - Loan

Hoolahan - £250,000

Pattison - Loan

Evans - Loan

Camara - Loan

Smith - Loan

Taylor - £1 million

                        Marshall

Otsemobor   Taylor   Shackell   Camara

Chadwick   Smith   Fozzie/ Russell   Hoolahan

              Ameobi   Cureton/ Evans

Subs: Gilks, Doherty, Russell/ Fozzie, Pattison, Evans

[First Wizard 0]

As long as we end up with Tiny I''ll be happy.

[missing in action? 0]

hoolahan 250k?? u must be joking evans hopefully, camara maybe, i reckon pattison is 250k deal.smith will be bought, but only at the end of the window due to lamps being injured etc.and taylor...will get him for 750k, brum won''t want to pay his wages for 2 and 1/2 years whilst he negotiates a deal to come to us for free...

[kick it off 2,062]

[quote user="buddhaboy"]hoolahan 250k?? u must be joking evans hopefully, camara maybe, i reckon pattison is 250k deal.smith will be bought, but only at the end of the window due to lamps being injured etc.and taylor...will get him for 750k, brum won''t want to pay his wages for 2 and 1/2 years whilst he negotiates a deal to come to us for free...[/quote]Hoolahan is out of contract at the end of the season and refusing to sign a new deal. £250 000 is a realistic price tag. Pattison will be between £150k and £250k as he is reserve team player and out of contract.Smith won''t come here permanently imo, i don''t really want him back on loan, id rather save his wages for a different player. Agree on Taylor - it''s a done deal, he''s using player power and refusing to sign elsewhere. Bham have little option but to sell to us at our price as it looks like we are playing hardball.I think we can afford the extra £250k. More to do with not needing to payit when it can be better spent elsewhere, and Taylor coming anyway.

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="kick it off"][quote user="buddhaboy"]hoolahan 250k?? u must be joking
evans hopefully, camara maybe, i reckon pattison is 250k deal.
smith will be bought, but only at the end of the window due to lamps being injured etc.

and taylor...will get him for 750k, brum won''t want to pay his wages for 2 and 1/2 years whilst he negotiates a deal to come to us for free...
[/quote]

Hoolahan is out of contract at the end of the season and refusing to sign a new deal. £250 000 is a realistic price tag. Pattison will be between £150k and £250k as he is reserve team player and out of contract.

Smith won''t come here permanently imo, i don''t really want him back on loan, id rather save his wages for a different player.

Agree on Taylor - it''s a done deal, he''s using player power and refusing to sign elsewhere. Bham have little option but to sell to us at our price as it looks like we are playing hardball.
I think we can afford the extra £250k. More to do with not needing to payit when it can be better spent elsewhere, and Taylor coming anyway.
[/quote]

A rather rosey view of the transfer kitty KIO

Do you know something we don''t because I can''t find all this spare cash in the accounts?

 

[kick it off 2,062]

No, i''m just working on what Roeder has said and reading between the lines. i think we have between £1.5mill and £2mill plus whatever we can make out of player sales...Strihavka has secured a move to the Bundesliga according to cheepshot.co.uk so that''ll be around £500 000 as we wont want to sell at a massive loss....Not really a rosy view - just realistic. We know that we have a set budget, we know that Roeder wants to get 3 or 4 players in permanently and we know that Taylor is available for a mill but we are only willing to pay £750k. It also looks very likely we will pick Pattison up on the cheap as one of the permanents. He will cost the aforementioned £150-250k. Which leaves roughly a mill for two more players, if my figures are correct.In total, i think we''ll spend about £2.5mill plus a couple of loans. How much do you think we have Ricardo? and what are you basing your figures on?

[Indy_Bones 444]

Strihavka has so far been given just under 6 hours of playing time since his arrival, in a totally new country and culture, with a very different style of play than he''s used to. On this 6 hours he''s suddenly become a waste of money or rubbish to some fans. Well, at least you''ve given the guy a fair chance then...

Brown hasn''t performed from a goalscoring perspective, that can''t be denied, however, on a number of occasions he''s provided very good hold-up/build-up play, which has been wasted either through a lack of support, or a lack of finishing from the striker partner.

Cureton''s 7 goals in 23 games equates to just over a goal every 3 games, meaning a season return would be expected of 15 goals - this is not pretty poor, this is a very solid tally. Considering his apalling lack of service and our general play, it sometimes makes this seem quite impressive!

The lower league talent you mention is pretty uninsprining if I''m being honest, and there''s no way Varney or Sharp are going to leave, and being fair, both of them have been dire so far this season.

Ameobi would be an excellent signing if Roeder can pull it off, and he''d likely walk all over most of the defences in this league.

Out of the loanees we presently have, I''d be expecting perm deals for Pattison and Smith (and would welcome both signings), Evans will likely extend to the end of the season, although Camara may be recalled by Jewell who is desperately trying to do something to change things at Derby.

I''d also expect Taylor to be confirmed in Jan, at a likely fee just above the £750k we apparently offered initially. This signing, along with Smith, Pattison and maybe Ameobi will probably take up every last penny of our potential budget, possibly along with extra funds from the sales of players like Murray and Gallacher.

I''d be happy with that for now, and look for further options in the summer.

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="kick it off"]No, i''m just working on what Roeder has said and reading between the lines. i think we have between £1.5mill and £2mill plus whatever we can make out of player sales...

Strihavka has secured a move to the Bundesliga according to cheepshot.co.uk so that''ll be around £500 000 as we wont want to sell at a massive loss....

Not really a rosy view - just realistic. We know that we have a set budget, we know that Roeder wants to get 3 or 4 players in permanently and we know that Taylor is available for a mill but we are only willing to pay £750k. It also looks very likely we will pick Pattison up on the cheap as one of the permanents. He will cost the aforementioned £150-250k. Which leaves roughly a mill for two more players, if my figures are correct.

In total, i think we''ll spend about £2.5mill plus a couple of loans. How much do you think we have Ricardo? and what are you basing your figures on?
[/quote]

Basing my figures on what the financial people said at the meeting after the AGM.

It was made pretty clear that we had no money for transfers.

I hope you are right about Strihavka going for half a mil. The guy just hasn''t settled.

If your 2.5 mil is going to be correct then it will only happen if the Turners have put some cash up.

City were  poor today but then Wolves have always been a bogey side to us. More than glad to take a point today and pleased for Jamie. It was a well taken goal.

[kdncfc 0]

According to Munby on Radio Snorfolk before todays game there is a million pounds avaliable to spend on Tiny if Glenn Roeder sees fit and there will still be money left for permanent and loan signings. Sounds like 2.5 million may be about right the way Munby was talking.

[Chunky Norwich 0]

I''d love to see Kris Commons here. He''s another who''s out of contract at the end of the season. He does love Forest though which may make things tricky. £300,000 may be enough.

I''m not a big fan of short-term loans. They cost a lot of money and the player either does badly and it''s a waste (Lisbie, Benjamin, Boyle etc), or they do well and get recalled and their value goes through the roof (Taylor, Parker, nearly Huckerby etc).

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="ricardo"]

Do you know something we don''t because I can''t find all this spare cash in the accounts?

[/quote]

 

From page 18 of the NCFC Accounts to 31st May 2007 relating to the Consolidated Balance Sheet:

Cash at bank and in hand       £3,158,286

 

 

 

[T 191]

May or may not be spare cash though as the cash balance merely represents the cash at bank and in hand at a moment in time and not what is available. The spare cash is normally the headroom between the maximum cash available under loan agreement covenants and the cash that is already committed which can only be assessed by looking at cash flow projections.

[Mister Chops 7]

Ins and Outs for 2008:

 

Brellier - out

Murray - out

Strihavka - out

R Jarvis - loan

R Jarvis - loan

Camara - back to Derby

Smith - back to Chelsea

- - -

Ramage - in

Taylor - in

Evans - loan extended until end of season

Pattison - in

 

[Barry Brockes 157]

I just hope we get on with it early in January and have a few new players in place by the Barnsley game. Too many times, presumably in the interests of penny-pinching, we have left our moves until the very last minute and missed out on the good players whilst Doomcaster is having a cup of tea with his Mum leaving us with the end of sale bargains that no-one else wants, usually for a very good reason.

[missing in action? 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]

Ins and Outs for 2008:

 

Brellier - out

Murray - out

Strihavka - out

R Jarvis - loan

R Jarvis - loan

Camara - back to Derby

Smith - back to Chelsea

- - -

Ramage - in

Taylor - in

Evans - loan extended until end of season

Pattison - in

 

[/quote]ramage is injured....and out of contract next season so sign him on a free when fit i presume...

[Buncey 1]

Hoolahan or howard would be good signings. Personally, although people won''t like me saying this, Matty Holland. He''s not playing very regularly for chalton and even though he''s getting on he''s the type of player we need to fix our centre midfield. Get taylor in in defence. Maybe extend camara''s and pattison''s loan deals too. We need to let smith go and I''d think that both brellier and murray will go and probably lappin will go too, even though I actually think he can do a job for us. Upfront we do need somebody big and a good target man, anyone really, nobody springs to mind. Lastly another personal player I''d like to see in is michael boulding. He is on fire in league two and shouldn''t even be at that level, he is a very talented footballer and he might be the little form player we need to get us rocking and rolling.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="T"]

The spare cash is normally the headroom between the maximum cash available under loan agreement covenants and the cash that is already committed which can only be assessed by looking at cash flow projections.

[/quote]

1) We have already drawn down the loans in full.

2) We have spent it all (on the Jarrold stand, ex LSE land purchase, office in Jarrold stand etc.)

3) We have £3.1m cash spare probably sourced from the Prem season and parachute receipts (although I haven''t checked).

4) While I accept we have some £247k of capital commitments (note 30 on page 40 of the NCFC Accounts to 31st May 2007), I dont "buy" that none of the £3.1m cash is available. 

 

[T 191]

The balance sheet is just one particular moment in time and therefore the cash balance can vary signigicantly from one day to the next, for example because of tax, transfer payments or TV money.

In respective of whether the loans are drawn down or not they will still normally contain covenants which restrict the money we can spend. It is the loan agreements which automatically detemine how much cash we can afford to spend rather than as failure to comply with the loan agreements gives rise to the risk of administration. Consequently, the directors have limited discretion in practice as to how much we should spend as this is governed by the loan agreements like any business.

In additional to capital commitments recorded in the notes to the accounts the staff/players contracts are effectively the most significant commercial commitments.

Consequently, to assess the avialbale cash you would need to look at the projected cash inflows and outflows to work out how much we can afford to spend. The cash in the balance sheet is just one part of the equation.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="T"]

In additional to capital commitments recorded in the notes to the accounts the staff/players contracts are effectively the most significant commercial commitments.

[/quote]

And the staff / players wages being costs are paid from revenue be it season ticket sales, casual seat sales, TV revenue, merchandising, sponsorship, commercial revenue and catering profits etc.

The capital commitments are of a different nature being one off costs.

 

 

[T 191]

CN - just checked the accounts and you are right there was 3.1m of cash at 31 may but the net current liabilities at that date were a disturbing 3.4m! so you could argue we actually needed to generate 3.4m of cash from player sales to meet the current liabilities. I suspect not entirely coincidentally a 3.3m net profit was made on player sales post balance sheet. So yes there was cash but it would be misleading to say it was necessarily available cash.

Furthermore, there is still the 7m parachute shorfall that needs to be made up to get the business back to break even. 3.9m is non-cash depreciation, 2m from the Turners and the 3.3m transfer profit would leave cash still to spend of 2.2m. I suspect a fair chunk of this has gone on the loan players so it is difficult to see that the club has mcuh room for large transfers unless new cash is put into the club. Roeder I seem to recall has talked about keeping the loan players, 2/3 new players maybe dutch and still talking about Taylor but it is unclear how we can afford this.

[ricardo 8,034]

[quote user="Canary Nut"][quote user="ricardo"]

Do you know something we don''t because I can''t find all this spare cash in the accounts?

[/quote]

 

From page 18 of the NCFC Accounts to 31st May 2007 relating to the Consolidated Balance Sheet:

Cash at bank and in hand       £3,158,286

 

 

 

[/quote]

Indeed it does Nut.

However I am sorry to inform you that this is not spare cash for a transfer fund.

It is simply cash in hand at the time of the audit and is earmarked for wages, debt repayments and general running of the club.

The NCFC financial people were quite categorical at the meeting in saying we had no spare cash for transfers.

If we do have a pot it can only have come from new money provided by loans or from the Turners.

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="T"]

CN - just checked the accounts and you are right there was 3.1m of cash at 31 may but the net current liabilities at that date were a disturbing 3.4m! [/quote]

There was also £5.1m of current debtors (money owed to NCFC.) as at 31st May 2007.

[T 191]

6.6m of debtors I believe but 13.4m of current liabilities hence the 3.4m net current liabilities. Basically without the loan from the Turners and the sale of the players we would have gone into administration.

[Mello Yello 2,572]

[quote user="T"]6.6m of debtors I believe but 13.4m of current liabilities hence the 3.4m net current liabilities. Basically without the loan from the Turners and the sale of the players we would have gone into administration.[/quote]

Complete and fabricated  UTTER TOSH!

Sorry, but to me personally chum, you''re only an unqualified assumptive accountant - and therefore in my eyes, hold no credibility on this forum as much as myself or any other......Unless you can prove otherwise that is......Stop makin'' it up and change the drained fuel cells on your wayward calculator.....Go and get a pat off the Chief Exec and beg for a biscuit. 

Honestly, what''s next.........The Moon''s a balloon?

Yup! And how about this one: British troops and the Taliban, downed arms on Christmas Day morning - grabbed a football and had a knockabout in some "no-man''s land" barren battleground in Afghanistan....Then exchanged pleasantry''s and gifts - and returned to their battle-lines.......

Now, that seems more credible, believable and plausible......Does it not?

[T 191]

 excellent MY, I am particularly partial to ginger snaps although I confess the unqualified bit is sadly wrong. The info.is on page 18 of the accounts, although as I indicated before the balance sheet only gives part of the equation. I suspect the balance sheet at May gives an unusually grim snapshot because of the timing of season ticket sales. All of us would need to see the cash flow projections and know whether the directors are putting more dosh to really what is going on but you can make some reasonable assumptions. We broke even and are income is set to go down from 24m to 17m due to the loss of parachute payments. I''m afraid, those dull old accounts do have four legs, have a wagging tail and bark. I can''t see us being able to generate 5.5m from selling players again either so with out further cash donations I would be calling for the vet.

[Hog 0]

Neill Adams expects around 8 players to arrive. Unless he knows something we don''t I can''t see how we could afford that, even if 7 of them are Free Transfers!   But then again maybe we will have some players leaving too....

[Mello Yello 2,572]

[quote user="T"] excellent MY, I am particularly partial to ginger snaps although I confess the unqualified bit is sadly wrong. The info.is on page 18 of the accounts, although as I indicated before the balance sheet only gives part of the equation. I suspect the balance sheet at May gives an unusually grim snapshot because of the timing of season ticket sales. All of us would need to see the cash flow projections and know whether the directors are putting more dosh to really what is going on but you can make some reasonable assumptions. We broke even and are income is set to go down from 24m to 17m due to the loss of parachute payments. I''m afraid, those dull old accounts do have four legs, have a wagging tail and bark. I can''t see us being able to generate 5.5m from selling players again either so with out further cash donations I would be calling for the vet.[/quote]

"Toot Parp!"[8] (I''ll blow it for you). And you being a Qualified Accountant....... The accounts you quote - aren''t actually current are they. You will also be fully aware on how figures can be manipulated and mixed......(and all the other things that occur in business and accounts that can be spread around, adjusted and signed off etc).....All of us would need to see the cash flow projections and know whether the directors are putting more dosh to really what is going on but you can make some reasonable assumptions. <= Lookee - it''s your favourite word again......Throw in a few ''hind-sights'' and you''ve got all your avenue''s covered....Yapee![&] 

Oh, and it''s not only the accounts that are dull...Arff Arff!..[&][;)]......[|-)]

 

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

Interesting comment by Roeder on page 39 (right hand column) of the Norwich Evening News dated 1st January 2008:

''It would be uncomfortable to find ourselves minus those four players (that was about the loan players). I''m positive about all four at the moment still being with us and adding three or four players.''

 

OTBC!