Money money money

[P M 0]

I''ve been thinking about our transfer funds and i''m confused.  The money currently in the transfer kitty has been in effect raised by the fans.

But...

• We were after a striker before the end of the last transfer window, but failed (i.e. Scrowscroft was heavily mentioned by worthy).  As far as I remember, this was before the £1.2m was "raised" by the fans.
  
  How was the board planning to buy the striker(s)? I know we got Doc, but I''m pretty sure Worthy said after we bought Doc he still wanted a striker.
  
• Whats happened to the Malky money? Its not a lot, but I think it was around £350k? Why hasn''t this been added on to Worthys kitty?
  

Also...

• Why have we only spent a couple of million of promotion money on transfer fees?
  
  I know we have debts, money spent doesn''t include wages and we have to be frugal, but a couple of million is ridiculous! This season is unique in that the points needed for survival will likely be very very small... usually teams need over 40, but this year it''ll probably be around 34pt mark
  
  Surely the board can see that and should take a slight risk... it might take another 10years to get back in the premier, so why blow it now!
  
  They could consider spending some of the "relegation" money now (ie get a loan and pay it back if we get relegated). or the likely Green money when he goes.
  

I''m no banker, but it doesn''t make sense to me... why is the board scared of taking a small risk that has massive rewards? Even as a business, that is non-sensical.

Buying Huckerby last season was a much greater risk than say buying Ashton now, but they were willing (in the end!) to do that.  I''m not expecting them to buy superstars, but giving a couple of million more to Worthy to get an actual goalscorer who would likely keep us up seems reasonable!

[DTT 0]

im sure the board can see things how i can....

We buy dean ashton for 3 million.he does his best to keep us up... we get 20 million for staying up. he makes us 17 million profit.

We fail to stay up... he''s proved to be an excellent championship striker, and would seriously help us in a push for promotion again. his transfer fee could then be covered by parachute payments (no loss). Should his championship goals get us promoted again, we get another 20 million.

all i can see here is a win win situation. someone please find holes in it, because i cant!

[no1canary 0]

also green is guarenteed to leave, most likely in the summer. so the board know that they are guaranteed ateast £4m in 6 months time. banks would surely accept this and wud give us another £2m to spend. nothing makes sense. we have got to have the money.

even man city-a club who are £50m in debt have a bigger budget than us. now wot is up with that?

[nycanary 1]

the hole is the wages we have to pay him.

i think it''s more of a broader negotation problem where demand for his services far outstrips supply.

we could buy him for 3 million. that works.

but we may have to pay him 25,000+ per week to keep him. we would make the claim that if we got relegated, he goes down to 10,000 per week but if we stayed up, he would get 40,000 per week or something like that.

but why would he do that when he can go to someone else who will pay him 40,000 per week in all circumstances?

maybe he loves the atmosphere at the club; loves the fact that he would be THE GUY and not fighting for his place; that rivers and gradi have told him norwich is a great place; point to hux''s experience etc etc. even THEN, he will say "ok fine...but if you get relegated, i need a release clause in the contract".

and THAT, i think, is where the problem lies. even if get crewe to buy off on our bid, the problem is that we might spend 3 million, still get relegated AND lose him.

ok...so we can recoup some of the money by selling him then but everyone would know he wanted out and the price would come down.

as the best paid player on the team; plus a potential loss of 1 million pounds on the transfer fee (if we get relegated, it most likely means he didn''t set the world alight so his value goes down more) AND we lose him at the end of the season.

this is one path. the other path is spend 1.5 on an OK to good player and be confident he agrees to the variable wage contract as well as sticking around for a difficult championship battle next year, should that situation arise.

i think that''s where the dilemma lies for the board.

from my point of view, it''s a pure business person''s approach...this current thinking that they seem to have. what is missing is a stark reality-check that unless we make a big change, it''s better than 50% odds that we WILL get relegated. i think that they believe the odds are better than they actually are.

SOMEONE should be making this stark point clear as day to the board. and that person should be Nigel. he may be doing that already and giving us the silver tongue in public which is fine. but if he''s not, then he''s not doing his job.

someone needs to change the board''s analysis of the risk/reward profile of making a significant investment in a player like ashton.

my two cents.