Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
GrantsMoustache

Are we a selling club again then?

Recommended Posts

A lot of people saying that £8m was fantastic business because Snodgrass only had one year left on his deal.

We also have these two facts though:

1. Snodgrass was not offered a new deal.

2. We had to agree a financial settlement with him because he didn''t ask for a transfer, which will be an owed loyalty bonus (which are waived if a player asks to leave).

McNally said that we didn''t need to sell any players. That doesn''t look true does it?

Not knocking anybody really, £8m is a lot of money, our revenue has halved, our wage bill hasn''t halved and there are areas of our team that need strengthening so I''m not saying that we shouldn''t have sold him.

But it looks like we are certainly not a club with the muscle to hold on to whoever we like, we are very much willing to listen to offers and now have an every player has their price mentality?

Hooper, Fer, Redmond, Ruddy will all have their price too.

Just hope that we don''t end up with 11 obviously not Prem quality players like Lafferty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is what McNally said in January:

“Our focus this January, as with every transfer window, is very much on improving the squad.”

This transfer window, after relegation, clearly not one where we are going to be improving our squad.

So for me selling your best player without offering him a new deal probably now makes us a club looking to sell.

We weren''t looking to retain him were we.

I still expect us to lose a few more, Fer is a near certainty I should think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No idea skijumptoes, depends on his contract.

Should imagine it would just be the one year of outstanding loyalty bonus rather than three years, don''t really know how they work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This phrase ''selling club'' is nonsensical and totally meaningless. Spurs and Man U were a selling club when Real Madrid came calling for Bale and Ronaldo. Atletico Madrid are a selling club because they''ve just sold Diego Costa to Chelsea.As someone else said, anyone will sell if the price is right.Over the last few years we haven''t sold anyone for big money because, firstly, we''ve been on a largely upward trajectory and have been strengthening the squad, and, secondly, frankly we have not had anyone who others covet for a  big fee.We are both sellers and buyers, much as pretty much any football club you care to name.It''s a bit like saying Tesco''s are a ''selling company''. They have to buy stuff in the first place to sell in their supermarkets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn''t there also a percentage sell on payable to Leeds due?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That Tesco analogy is awful.

As for Spurs and Bale, their transfer spend was higher than their transfer fees received that season.

Man Utd spend far more than they receive too.

So have we as a Premier League club.

This summer we will probably need to sell players to support our running costs, and will spend less than we receive.

That would be the sensible persons definition of a selling club. Which admittedly is pretty much every club outside of the Premier League.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GrantsMoustache"]Also Bale and Ronaldo WANTED to leave.

Snodgrass did not hand in a transfer request, and was not offered a new contract.

So we WANTED to sell him.[/quote]Have you considered that this was maybe for footballing reasons, and not purely financial ones?Maybe has a different way of playing, and Snodgrass doesn''t fit into that?Maybe Snodgrass is a Billy Big bollocks who considers himself too big to play in the Championship?But the long and skinny of it is that the deal suits both parties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GrantsMoustache"]That Tesco analogy is awful.

As for Spurs and Bale, their transfer spend was higher than their transfer fees received that season.

Man Utd spend far more than they receive too.

So have we as a Premier League club.

This summer we will probably need to sell players to support our running costs, and will spend less than we receive.

That would be the sensible persons definition of a selling club. Which admittedly is pretty much every club outside of the Premier League.[/quote]Tesco''s was the first firm that came to mind GM. ! Any better ideas ?I can see that some seasons have net profit and others a net loss on transfer dealings. But are we saying that a club who say, produces a lot of its own youngsters(very costly in the grand scheme of things), but purchases the odd big money signing to bolster things is a ''buying club'' ?  Perhaps Southampton up till recently ? Now they are a ''selling club'' with the exodus of Shaw, Lallana and Lambert. As I say misleading and meaningless phrases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are Southampton a selling club? Look at the players (internationals!) who have been on their books over the years and have been sold, but they''re doing ok.

It''s not a bad thing, as long as you have youth, or some kind of feed coming in to replace that talent. I think we''re getting there, for the first time in years we''ve got some proper promising young players. So tripling our money on a player we have cover for is simply good business.

It''s when your selling the core of your team to pay off the bills is the worry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course we are. Little ole norwich syndrome has kicked in. I bet by the end of the transfer window half of our regular first team players will have gone.

Only Paul Lambert was ever really capable of managing a squad and keeping them all happy.

Neil Adams has no experience at managing big time Charlie played which showed at the end of last season.

We are doomed mark my words we are doomed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Skijumptoes"]Are Southampton a selling club? .[/quote]Under GM''s definition they are...certainly now.I''m not really sure where the relevance of whether the player or the club initiates the transfer is, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="GrantsMoustache"]Also Bale and Ronaldo WANTED to leave. Snodgrass did not hand in a transfer request, and was not offered a new contract. So we WANTED to sell him.[/quote]

 

Bale didn''t hand in a transfer request either - he just kept saying he wants to leave.

 

Snodgrass wasn''t offerred a contract post relegation, but he was almost certainly offered one earlier - Norwich renewed the contracts of both Howson and E. Bennett last season (both due to end in 2014), I can''t see why they wouldn''t have offered one to Snodgrass at the same time. I imagine he and his agent made it fairly clear that after being relegated Snodgrass would not be signing an extension.

 

The ''loyalty'' bonus to Snodgrass will probably be in the region of £100k - £250k and I wouldn''t be surprised if Norwich made Hull pick up the bill. Snodgrass said Norwich rejected a few bids for him - its clear the club were only prepared to sell for a high price and there was no desperation to push the player out. Let''s judge the transfer window on 1st September, not 2nd July. I''m pretty certain Norwich will look to make profit on sales - as lost revenue needs to be covered - but making a profit does not mean a reduction in quality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We were offered close to £8m for a half decent winger who struggles to cross, take corners, take penalties and beat defenders. If that makes us a selling club, then I''m happy being a selling club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="GrantsMoustache"] 1. Snodgrass was not offered a new deal. 2. We had to agree a financial settlement with him because he didn''t ask for a transfer, which will be an owed loyalty bonus (which are waived if a player asks to leave). [/quote]

 

how do you know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have always remained a selling club - very few clubs are not - certainly none in the champs.

 

The difference is that we now sell when we want (our terms and needs,  eg no longer want a player or the offer is simply too good) rather than having to sell to balance the books.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Bethnal Yellow and Green"]

 Let''s judge the transfer window on 1st September, not 2nd July.

I''m pretty certain Norwich will look to make profit on sales [/quote]

 

Spot on,  for both of these;    we will have a summer of significant change (I predicted 14 early on,  Fox, Nash, Lafferty, Grabban and Snoddy so far) and its only once the dealing are done that the picture will become clearer whcih for me is Mid/end Aug.   And we will have the advantage of being able to make loan signings all year from English clubs - I am sure we will utilise that during the autumn too.

 

We are selling prem players and likely to be signing less experienced ones,   so a net income with a younger squad should not be a surprise.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what ridiculous old sh ite !every club is a selling clubplayers get sold, players get bought......  depending on how they and other clubs see they abilitythat is professional football

sadly football, with all it''s publicity and hype, has dragged in far too many of the terminally dim for who even the most basic of concepts seem to be beyond their lowly mental abilities

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
Don''t you love it when people make up contrived scenarios purely as an excuse to criticise the club?

The key point is that we are not a club that needs to sell due to financial reasons - e.g. unsustainable wage structures. Therefore I can''t see how we can meet anyone''s definition of a "selling club".

In this individual scenario, Snodgrass has said himself he wanted to be in the Premier League at all costs - as Bethnal said, it is likely he did not want to sign an extension last season as other players have. In order to bounce back, we need everybody to be pulling together in the squad, and if there is a player who clearly doesn''t want to be here then providing the offer meets the club''s valuation it would be ridiculous to hold onto them.

I was a big fan of Snodgrass, but there is no doubting we got an excellent deal, on our terms, for a player who would walk for nothing in 12 months. Great bit of business, and hopefully gives us a nice lump sum of cash to invest into transfer fees for a replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When Liverpool sell Suarez to Barca for 70 million will that make them a "selling club"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
@

GrantsMoustache
I think you need to re-read the pinkun article. http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/robert_snodgrass_no_bad_blood_at_manner_of_norwich_city_exit_1_3663630Just because a player does not hand in a transfer request, doesn''t mean they don''t want to leave.Quote from Snodgrass in said article:“They wanted to keep me and I can totally understand that. It’s business

for both sides,” he said. “Their business was to try to keep me but the

whole point for me was to target the Premier League. Norwich knocked

back a couple of offers which I didn’t agree with."Says it all to me. Didn''t need to hand in a transfer request, made it clear he didn''t want to stay and wanted premier league football. As I have said before, if he made that clear by being disgruntled about knocking back offers why would they offer him a new contract knowing that he was likely to reject it. They may even have asked him if he wanted to stay - in those chats Adams had. This one seems to have been rumbling on for weeks now so that coupled with what Snodgrass has said, I think the club did very well to maximise his value if you ask me.So that sort of blows away most of your questions.

Share this post


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

GrantsMoustache
I think you need to re-read the pinkun article. http://www.pinkun.com/norwich-city/robert_snodgrass_no_bad_blood_at_manner_of_norwich_city_exit_1_3663630Just because a player does not hand in a transfer request, doesn''t mean they don''t want to leave.Quote from Snodgrass in said article:“They wanted to keep me and I can totally understand that. It’s business

for both sides,” he said. “Their business was to try to keep me but the

whole point for me was to target the Premier League. Norwich knocked

back a couple of offers which I didn’t agree with."Says it all to me. Didn''t need to hand in a transfer request, made it clear he didn''t want to stay and wanted premier league football. As I have said before, if he made that clear by being disgruntled about knocking back offers why would they offer him a new contract knowing that he was likely to reject it. They may even have asked him if he wanted to stay - in those chats Adams had. This one seems to have been rumbling on for weeks now so that coupled with what Snodgrass has said, I think the club did very well to maximise his value if you ask me.So that sort of blows away most of your questions.[/quote]Yet again people reading what they want to see, into something.Lol, even he thinks we have done a good bit of business!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is reading what they want to see and there is just not reading anything at all . . . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="chicken"]There is reading what they want to see and there is just not reading anything at all . . . . .[/quote]I actually mentally picture some posters here being a bit like that Ipswich crazy chap.And likely having to buy a new keyboard every 3 weeks, because of dribble damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Almost all clubs are both buying and selling clubs. The relevant factor is whether a club is a net buyer or a net seller. Recently we have been the former, with purchases outweighing sales. What remains to be seen is whether that will continue.

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...