Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Shock horror, have you been to any of the warm up games?
Vincelot joins Bradford (12 Viewers)
- Thread starter I_Saw_Shaw_Score
- Start date
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Yea but isn't it their job to sort this crap out.
Say it is genuine and we needed the Maddison money to cover costs, for arguments sake say it is £1.5 million up front. We really are in the shitter going forward if we were £1.5 million over budget after it being forecast that we needed 11,000 attendance to sustain our budget.
Sterling Archer
Well-Known Member
I didn't realise Romain Vincelot was the League One Paul Pogba. Funny none of you lot had this opinion when he was still our player.
I'm more worried about the lack of depth in the squad rather than losing a "fantastic player" or "spine of the team".
I'm more worried about the lack of depth in the squad rather than losing a "fantastic player" or "spine of the team".
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
I repeat... Why are we being told CCFC are self sufficient and have been for the last 18 months/2 years?
covmark
Well-Known Member
No, but I'm not on here announcing my one man boycotting crusade, whilst moaning about player transactions you fool.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Don't you realise your lack of monetary investment in SISU FC...errr sorry, CCFC makes YOU look as bad as what YOU think I am!..... Fucking irony or what!!!!!!!!
bawtryneal
Well-Known Member
Trust in TM and MV. They are fully aware of the finances and have stayed at CCFC for a reason. If they sold Vincalot it is because they have a backup plan which will improve the first team squad.
Nick
Administrator
They have all been away games haven't they? How much are the club earning from those games?
Are you really that surprised that a 3rd division club, especially one in our predicament, has to use transfer receipts to help cover running costs? We only turnover £7 million a year ffs.
Are you also forgetting the 400k we paid for Jones? I would love it if they'd have a punt, but if the club does need to be self-sufficient then thsee sort of deals are to expected unfortunately.
covmark
Well-Known Member
Dear god, you don't get it do you, you really are beyond help.
Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Is that reason that Rotherham didn't want them?
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Do you mean SISU fc don't get a cut of the gate money
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
There Is aside of financial reasons every possibility of a change in formation.
The thing for me relates to what he was brought here for, to do the Donkey work allowing Fleck to thrive, Fleck has exited, so the requirement may have changed.
stupot07
Well-Known Member
We won't know until the accounts come through.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
ashbyjan
Well-Known Member
Just my opinion but I believe initial Maddison money went to pay off the loan that SISU had provided to the club towards the end of last season. Assuming the total fee was £2m (which I actually find hard to believe) we probably got £750k intially which paid SISU back, £250k would have been his loan back fee and the remainding £1m will be paid over next couple of years and is probably all tied up with appearances etc. And if it does transpire it will be kept in reserve to offset need for any future loans from SISU.
As for Vincelot going I think its a shame as he was a good solid midfielder who provided some much needed bite (more of a loss than Fleck imho) but it shows just how paltry the budget must now be if we have to sell a player for £50-75k so we can bring others in. I am not romanticising and expecting Robbie Keane style signings but this smacks of real small time existence. Just hope Mowbray might be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat and unearth another gem like Armstrong or potentially Jones.
As for Vincelot going I think its a shame as he was a good solid midfielder who provided some much needed bite (more of a loss than Fleck imho) but it shows just how paltry the budget must now be if we have to sell a player for £50-75k so we can bring others in. I am not romanticising and expecting Robbie Keane style signings but this smacks of real small time existence. Just hope Mowbray might be able to pull a rabbit out of the hat and unearth another gem like Armstrong or potentially Jones.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
I think you missed the point I was making anyway.
If the people misjudged it so badly that we were £1 million short after previously saying 11,000 attendances would provide enough revenue then we really are fucked going forward.
Don't want us to risk taking a punt, have no problem with trying to be self sufficient. If we can be self sufficient, then great I won't have to worry about our financial future ever again. But the people in charge are not delivering on there promise of self sufficiency.
In the last accounts we lost £2 million, this was despite returning to the Ricoh and selling Wilson for £2.5 million and cutting wages, that isn't self sufficiency. The previous season we were told we needed 11,000 to sustain our budget and other spin like we are cash flow positive for the first time in year, then we sell Maddison for a large fee and told it is needed to cover losses as we were over budget, that isn't being self sufficient.
Relying on selling a player for £2-3 million every year isn't a good plan for self sufficiency, especially more so now with the perilous position of the academy.
standupforcity
Well-Known Member
Good luck RV....
JulianDarbyFTW
Well-Known Member
Before everyone gets their knickers in a twist lets wait and see who comes in. For all we know, this may prove to be a masterstroke.
The wilson money was used to cover the massive losses during the sixfields exile and gates of 2000.
I don't think anyone has said we are break even just yet, but heading in that direction. There are plenty of football clubs in the lower leagues who have to use the transfer market to help balance the books, and it is not yet clear if this is purely about cash flow or has been done for footballing reasons.
The club is a car crash at the moment, but on its own this deal is not all that alarming. I just find the claims of some that money is disappearing to the Cayman islands silly and baseless.
bawtryneal
Well-Known Member
Maybe RUFC did want them but they choose to stay at City.
Colin Steins Smile
Well-Known Member
TM has to work within the resources he's given. Unfortunately, he's got £3 and a bag of chips to work with. The sad state of affairs is that we're selling players to teams with greater resources than us, who a few years ago were 2 - 3 levels of football below us. It is beyond depressing and currently I doubt if we will ever be competitive ever again at a high level. Pub football here we come!
Hobo
Well-Known Member
And lets hope most our fans prefer chips without any salt and vinegar.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
Wilson was sold the preseason of our return to the Ricoh, the accounts show a 2 million loss in that period and that is with the Wilson cash received and the return to the Ricoh. Without the Wilson sale the losses would have been over 4 million in the last set of accounts which covers the season we returned to the Ricoh.
Don't see any strong evidence we are heading in the right direction financially, the last set of accounts show a 2 million loss and that is with a transfer profit of £2.7 million and a return to the Ricoh within that time frame. This season just passed we had to sell Maddison to cover losses for the season after it was said 11,000 crowds would sustain the budget for the season.
lifeskyblue
Well-Known Member
V surprised and v disappointed. I just hope there is a plan and that TM wanted to sell rather than he was forced to see Vincelot go.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The only thing that would convince me to trust these hedge fund scum bags would be a completely open and honest set of accounts with all the detail involved that a layman could understand. If the devious turds haven't got anything to hide why don't they do this as best they can without actually revealing the salaries of individuals. They won't though will they ?! I think in truth they will always somehow ensure a black hole in our finances and one that will need to be filled with yet more 'cost adjustments', sale of anyone saleable and short termism in player dealings.
We cannot progress in reality because ultimately they will make sure that we don't !
chiefdave
Well-Known Member
Once again you've just jumped to a completely wrong conclusion.
What I was posting about was the faux-outrage at the 'revelation' that the Maddison money was used to offset losses when this is clearly stated in the accounts that have been available on the club website for months.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
We have till Sept 1st. Of he brings 7 players in thrn who cares. If he wants to spend fees it's prob for good players
Any1 truly raging about this is a council lover.
Any1 truly raging about this is a council lover.
Sky Blue Kid
Well-Known Member
Any 1 that thinks a Bare Bones team will go a whole season without injuries is a SISU cock sucker!
better days
Well-Known Member
It seems that the move was orchestrated by Vincelot's representatives
I suppose TM could have refused the offer and made him stay but it's normally better to let players move in such circumstances i I guess especially with only a year left on the contract. Sad for us but it's the way football is these days
I suppose TM could have refused the offer and made him stay but it's normally better to let players move in such circumstances i I guess especially with only a year left on the contract. Sad for us but it's the way football is these days
Otis
Well-Known Member
If it was his decision then good riddance. We only want players who want to play for Coventry City.
Would be entirely wrong to keep him if he didn't want to be here.
Happy_Martian
Well-Known Member
Think you're about 148 replies too late with that one. Seems every footballing thread on this forum starts amicably but by page 2, its either SISU, CCC or WASPS fault. And if the thread gets to page 4, we'll have at least 2 members at each others throats. This thread improves on that with 2 disputing parties :banghead:
hill83
Well-Known Member
Yeah, see my edit. I've had a few newcy browns and misread