Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
First Wizard

Hammers 6 million bid for Holt!

Recommended Posts

[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

Andy  - But where you say ''you get NO points for running a club free of debt'' I say you don''t have a club if you have too much debt.

Im not saying that we should carry too much debt though, I am suggesting that the middle ground of some manageable debt, ie £9million with a 3-5yr payment schedual which may cost £2million more than paying it off in 12 months but would allow us to make the wages we pay now abit more competative. Our expenditure should still stay within our £75m turnover. While virtualy every other team in the division can offer our players triple wage increases any manager is going to find it hard to build an established premier club.

 

Morty - again, im not suggesting we run at a deficit just that the self imposed desire to be debt free is contributing to the situation this thread is discussing. If we had longer to pay off the existing debt we would be able to offer current players better terms and attract the calibre of player which will take us forward. If we get 6 million upfront for Holt thats the easy part, now find a £6million pound striker that will get out of bed for £15k per week. not so easy. You say if we get debt free at the end of this season then the borrowing for the new stadium will not effect the wage budget going forward because the extra seats will pay for themselves. Thats great, but what happens if we find ourselves in the championship again, could we fill it still every game so in my view, the rush to be debt free is a bigger gamble by the board than restructing our existing debt over a longer term if there is an option to do this.

 

 

[/quote]

 

IT.IS.NOT.SELF.IMPOSED.WE.HAVE.NO.CHOICE.MESSAGE.ENDS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"].....restructing our existing debt over a longer term if there is an option to do this.[/quote]As far as I''m aware there is no option to do this. The loans have to be repaid by 2013 and that is final. Nohow, noway not never!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, we have had this dicussion before Purple, although someone stated eariler that they thought it would be easy to restructure the existing debt but we are choosing not too. Ive choosen not to argue that point currently as im not 100% convinced that there is no private indiviual or corporate entity out there in the big wide world who would not lend £9million (or whatever is left to pay) with say £11million to pay back over 3 years to a company with a £75million turnover. we are a different kettle of fish since we last renogiated our debt. You may be right but my argument is.. if we can, we should while the prevailing opinion seems to be lets be debt free and all will be great.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lappinitup"][quote user="Son Ova Gunn"].....restructing our existing debt over a longer term if there is an option to do this.[/quote]As far as I''m aware there is no option to do this. The loans have to be repaid by 2013 and that is final. Nohow, noway not never![/quote]I think what S O G was referring to was the opportunity to ''re-mortgage'' so to speak the existing loans. Therefore taking out another loan (with a longer term) to repay the existing one early.I am not clued up on corporate finances deals of the scale of Norwich''s but I find it extremely unlikely that they''ll be unable to repay their loan early. If they can''t they can still refinance they would just use the new finance to make the repayments on the old loan.The club would find it easier to get finance now than they did in league 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Son Ova Gunn I cant agree with you I am afraid. We are in the grip of a worldwide recession. Banks are very nervous right now. They have been responsbile for some very reckless lending which is partly responsbile for the situation we are in today. If you were to talk to one of our creditors tomorrow and ask them to restructure the debt because you wanted to buy a couple more players they would laugh you out of the place and quite rightly so. They are guaranteed to get all the money they lent plus the interest back. Some which was possibly unthinkable in 2009 when adminstration was a possibility. They will want to get out as soon as possible and count themselves lucky that one man''s mangerial genius saved them millions of pounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there a news embargo in Norfolk?

If you pick up a newspaper, watch the news or go on a news site then you will will see that there is a very serious Europena debt crisis that will take a generation to fully resolve. The lendors accelerated the debt repayments for a reason. Most lenders are trying to recapitalise their balance sheets after the recession as they are required to do hence the credit crisis. Renegotiation the debt repayments was unlikely to be an option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

T, Jacko, and several others are spot on with this. But there is a not inconsiderable number of contributors to this site who, put quite simply, seem to live in some sort of economic La-La land . To these people either they have not even countenanced the fact that there is a huge fiscal and banking crisis going on, or, at the very best, they somehow think that it does not apply to or impact on Norwich City FC.

 

The fact is that everyone, everywhere is being required to rein in their debt. The few like Man City, Chelsea, and further from home, Malage, PSG and Real Madrid , who are bankrolled by people who, candidly, have more money than sense, are fortunate to be immune from this, but even the Liverpools, Villas, and ManU''s of this world are seeing debt pressure, so the idea that a club like Norwich could rack up more (a euphemism being "restructure") their debt is risible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"]

T, Jacko, and several others are spot on with this. But there is a not inconsiderable number of contributors to this site who, put quite simply, seem to live in some sort of economic La-La land . To these people either they have not even countenanced the fact that there is a huge fiscal and banking crisis going on, or, at the very best, they somehow think that it does not apply to or impact on Norwich City FC.

 

[/quote]13 years of "Gordon Brown and the Magic Money Tree" seems to have brainwashed more than a few.[;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was really hoping Holt would be staying with us but i can''t see it happening . Holt was on 15,000 a week,has been offered double that on a 2 year deal which he has rejected . West ham have offered him 60,000 and for that reason i think he will be on his way i''m sorry to say .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="T"]

Is there a news embargo in Norfolk?

If you pick up a newspaper, watch the news or go on a news site then you will will see that there is a very serious Europena debt crisis that will take a generation to fully resolve. The lendors accelerated the debt repayments for a reason. Most lenders are trying to recapitalise their balance sheets after the recession as they are required to do hence the credit crisis. Renegotiation the debt repayments was unlikely to be an option.

[/quote]Not strictly true. My brother is an investment banker who specialises in corporate finance and he''s never been so busy.If Norwich wanted to refinance they could. But I''m guessing they don''t want to. It''s not like we''re skint; the board have said we''ll have more money to spend this season than last season. Besides why is everyone insisting that the club refinance to have more cash? We could just take on more loans.. Refer to the sentence above as to why I don''t think we will^.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the long term though loaning money or restructing debt has to be a false economy. Money you are generating is being swallowed up by paying interest on the debt. There is also no guarantee that £10 million or whatever amount of money people are suggesting would guarantee you Premiership survival. And if it didn''t then what? You have blown all the fine work done in the last 3 years and we are back to square 1. Clubs that chase the dream invariably get found out. That is the lesson you can take from Leeds, Portsmouth, Huddersfield, Ipswich and numerous other clubs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Eric Pickles Pie Supplier"]

T, Jacko, and several others are spot on with this. But there is a not inconsiderable number of contributors to this site who, put quite simply, seem to live in some sort of economic La-La land . To these people either they have not even countenanced the fact that there is a huge fiscal and banking crisis going on, or, at the very best, they somehow think that it does not apply to or impact on Norwich City FC.

 

[/quote]13 years of "Gordon Brown and the Magic Money Tree" seems to have brainwashed more than a few.[;)][/quote]

Exactly the buy now pay later culture. Or if you are Ipswich Town you just never pay anyone at all (including St Johns Ambulance)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Son Ova Gunn"]

I know, we have had this dicussion before Purple, although someone stated eariler that they thought it would be easy to restructure the existing debt but we are choosing not too. Ive choosen not to argue that point currently as im not 100% convinced that there is no private indiviual or corporate entity out there in the big wide world who would not lend £9million (or whatever is left to pay) with say £11million to pay back over 3 years to a company with a £75million turnover. we are a different kettle of fish since we last renogiated our debt. You may be right but my argument is.. if we can, we should while the prevailing opinion seems to be lets be debt free and all will be great.

 

 

[/quote]

 

SOG, I am not an expert on the subject. It is possible that we could find someone willing to lend us £9m, or whatever it is now, to be repaid over three or five years or whatever. But that would potentially mean we were then doubly in debt - to one lender to the tune of £9m plus interest for the current Axa and BoS debt, and to another lender (or the same one) to the tune of £20m plus interest for the stadium capacity increase that will be considered if we stay up this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of it, it seems laudable to pay off all your debts and live within your means.   If its feasible - why wouldn''t you?    Free of debt, money coming in - its a win win situation.       No more worries of going bust,  able to build a strong club with a good fanbase that will help ensure good money coming in, allied to tv money etc etc.     

 

 

No sugar daddies necessary.   No debts to banks.    Simple really - but very few clubs achieve it.       We are lucky here and each season in the premiership will see us stronger and stronger.       Even if we went down, the club would still be one of the strongest in the league - ensuring a good chance of  returning.     

 

 

That''s the key for me.   A strong club, well run, not carried away with the hype that surrounds the premiership, living within it''s means.   Wouldn''t want it any other way.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"]

On the face of it, it seems laudable to pay off all your debts and live within your means.   If its feasible - why wouldn''t you?    Free of debt, money coming in - its a win win situation.       No more worries of going bust,  able to build a strong club with a good fanbase that will help ensure good money coming in, allied to tv money etc etc.     

 

 

No sugar daddies necessary.   No debts to banks.    Simple really - but very few clubs achieve it.       We are lucky here and each season in the premiership will see us stronger and stronger.       Even if we went down, the club would still be one of the strongest in the league - ensuring a good chance of  returning.     

 

 

That''s the key for me.   A strong club, well run, not carried away with the hype that surrounds the premiership, living within it''s means.   Wouldn''t want it any other way.

 

 [/quote]

Well, that''s the heart of the issue, isn''t it?

You can''t have the scenario above and pay the going rate in transfers and wages, because clubs who pay the "going rate" are all running at huge losses and/or are bankrolled by incredibly wealthy owners.

You will therefore not attract proven quality players and will have to continue to rely on finding

unpolished gems from the lower leagues,  selling them on when they feel

the time is right for them to leave (or losing them on a free).

So by accepting your club will live within its means, you are effectively saying finishing 17th in the PL every season is the key achievement and anything else is a bonus.  That works from a pragmatic financial point of view, but is it what the fans want to see?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two things - It does have to be cash upfront, as I have said I do not think with appearances we would get that extra 2 million.I am afraid Carlton Cole will start ahead of him and Holty would not be guaranteed the second striker spot and certainly in the 2013-14 season he would be a bench warmer. Which brings me on to the second point he would be a bench warmer on 60k a week and double what he is here.We will see his true colours. Basically he can be a starter here for another 2 seasons, even if we bring in a new number 1 striker if he beats of vaughan and Morison or he can move for more money and play less games for a club that will not have the love for him.For me the ball is firmly in Holty''s court. McNally has done the right thing, the next two years is still a great package for a club like NCFC.Lets see what happens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="lake district canary"]

On the face of it, it seems laudable to pay off all your debts and live within your means.   If its feasible - why wouldn''t you?    Free of debt, money coming in - its a win win situation.       No more worries of going bust,  able to build a strong club with a good fanbase that will help ensure good money coming in, allied to tv money etc etc.  No sugar daddies necessary.   No debts to banks.    Simple really - but very few clubs achieve it.       We are lucky here and each season in the premiership will see us stronger and stronger.       Even if we went down, the club would still be one of the strongest in the league - ensuring a good chance of  returning.      That''s the key for me.   A strong club, well run, not carried away with the hype that surrounds the premiership, living within it''s means.   Wouldn''t want it any other way.

 

 [/quote]

Well, that''s the heart of the issue, isn''t it?   You can''t have the scenario above and pay the going rate in transfers and wages, because clubs who pay the "going rate" are all running at huge losses and/or are bankrolled by incredibly wealthy owners.  You will therefore not attract proven quality players and will have to continue to rely on finding unpolished gems from the lower leagues,  selling them on when they feel the time is right for them to leave (or losing them on a free).    So by accepting your club will live within its means, you are effectively saying finishing 17th in the PL every season is the key achievement and anything else is a bonus.  That works from a pragmatic financial point of view, but is it what the fans want to see?


[/quote]

 

 

Therein lies the conundrum, Mr C.      Boxing clever in the transfer market, selling on if necessary,  running a tight ship.      Being satified by achieving the best we can achieve, given our means.     An acceptance we are doing the best we can - without succumbing to the pressures of the market.     Actually, I think that is right, even if it means we finish 17th - even if it means relegation and then trying again.     It''s being realistic - and it is showing a good example.     Champion''s league may be beyond us because of that, but you can still hope....................

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''d be gutted if we started paying stupid money for players (like anything above 6m for Holt), if every other stupid club wants to play russion roulette with their finances let them. West Ham and other clubs money issues may be such that they feel that literally ''have to Survive'', lets not be to eager to join that club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="drurys testamonials mark 15"]If it was for £6 mill without the add-ons, we would be foolish to reject it. I can see it''s the add-ons as being the stumbling block.[/quote]How do you replace Holt with £6m?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="yoda"]I was really hoping Holt would be staying with us but i can''t see it happening . Holt was on 15,000 a week,has been offered double that on a 2 year deal which he has rejected . West ham have offered him 60,000 and for that reason i think he will be on his way i''m sorry to say .[/quote]

Not unless west ham also stump up the cash we want for him . It''s all very well saying holt would get a better contract elsewhere, in which case he shouldn''t have signed a new contract last year, the club gambled and won, grant and his agent lost. Throwing their toys out of the pram doesnt mean norwich will cave and if grants still here at the end of the summer he will have to try and maintain his form to ever justify a bigger contract. I could see west hams interest waning before they meet anywhere near McNallys valuation. At which point Grants pretty much in limbo unless someone else comes in for him. I''m not sure why so many think the clubs position is bad and grant will be gone, we don''t want to sell and if he''s still here come august he will have to continue playing out of his skin or it''s career suicide, no big money move, no big contract, footballers are very often valued only by there last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this summer is the last chance for a big move for Holt as age will be very much against him next summer and imo i cannot see him having such a successful season next year . Will he play out of his skin or will he sulk , no new manager will want an unhappy player on board and its been printed in the press again today that he is desperate to get away . It will be best for eveybody if he is sold and replaced asap , hopefully with something better than Leon Best .After all £6 million for Holt is great business , lets not forget until he joined City he had been kicking around the lower leagues all his career without making a ripple let alone a splash , £6 million should be more than enough to replace a 32 year old who cost £400,000 and has one seasons top flight experience . At the end of the day if we want to keep improving in the Premiership we really need better than Holt , West Ham are welcome to him , lets take their money and run .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="AndyCanary"][quote user="drurys testamonials mark 15"]If it was for £6 mill without the add-ons, we would be foolish to reject it. I can see it''s the add-ons as being the stumbling block.[/quote]How do you replace Holt with £6m?[/quote]You ask for it in pound coins and build a really large wall in front of our goal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different size bid same thread!!!!!!!!!

 

Holt has been a fantastic player for us!

 

If West Ham are willing to pay 45K a week there is no way we should pay that amount for another 3 years to a 31 year old striker with one season in the premiership! If it''s about the money and Holt wants to go, let him go!

 

Better 6 million spent on two younger strikers like Ince and Rhodes than keep a pleyr who just does not want to be here with the potential to cause unrest.

 

If Holt decides that what Norwich are offering is enough to stay than great!

 

One way or the other get it sorted Hughton / MacNally!

 

Personally I would take the 6 million and buy Rhodes and Ince, both young hungry and have a point to prove!

 

6 million is a fantastic sum for a player who only is not guaranteed to bang in 15 goals next year!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No probably not, but for 3 million and add ons to 5 million each and they would also kick up like Holt to move!

 

So it''s a no brainer for me, sell Holt and line up Ince and Rhodes.

 

But I''m not the manager so I will wait to see what happens, but get it done.

 

Either way Holt has been a great player for us and deserves his choices, if that''s to leave and get a big payday then great, thank you and good bye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="AndyCanary"][quote user="drurys testamonials mark 15"]If it was for £6 mill without the add-ons, we would be foolish to reject it. I can see it''s the add-ons as being the stumbling block.
[/quote]

How do you replace Holt with £6m?
[/quote]

 

We wouldn''t pay the wages that a new £6M striker demanded either.

Holt is far more valuable to us than £6M - if he could be tempted to stay we should push the boat out to snare him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mister Chops"]So by accepting your club will live within its means, you are effectively saying finishing 17th in the PL every season is the key achievement and anything else is a bonus.  That works from a pragmatic financial point of view, but is it what the fans want to see?[/quote]I have three main ''wants'' as a supporter:1) The club to remain stable and not fall into the debt trap that many others have, nor go the way of Leeds/Pompey et al.2) To see good quality, entertaining football each week3) For that football to provide good results, including cups and or titles.I''d be happy to forego number 3 if 1 and 2 were being provided, as I''d rather watch good football and finish 17th, than finish 10th playing dross like Stoke do...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don''t forget here that whatever we would get for Holt, his former club will get a pay out from us.....anyone know the percent they''d get?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it were possible to buy a replacement for Grant Holt, who costs less than £6 million, demanded less pay than Grant Holt, had proven goalscoring experience like Grant Holt, was as influential as Grant Holt, wouldn''t West Ham have already bought him?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...