Gyokeres (14 Viewers)

djr8369

Well-Known Member
If that’s right, good deal.

It seems the club know more about negotiation than those who were desperate to sell to the first reported offer…

Here’s hoping we get at least half of that to reinvest in acquisitions over the next couple of years.
With a percentage going to Brighton, some to cover running losses, some saved for same reason next year, infrastructure investment etc I think MR will be lucky to have a third of it to play with and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s far less than that. It’s possible DK will need to take money out to cover however he purchased the club.

Still, there will be enough to fix the broken window.
 

ccfc1234

Well-Known Member
If that’s right, good deal.

It seems the club know more about negotiation than those who were desperate to sell to the first reported offer…

Here’s hoping we get at least half of that to reinvest in acquisitions over the next couple of years.
Where do you think the other half is going?
 

Happy_Martian

Well-Known Member
Doesn't it give you a good feeling when our club start playing hardball over the sale of one of our assets ? Can't remember the last time this happened in our favour. Normally, it's been the buying club dictating to us and we'd have just bowed over to their minimum offer.

As said, if €24m is the final accepted offer, that would normally have been a bumper sum to rebuild the team. My only concern is that this protracted saga has been in the press so much, any player we approach to sign will have had their values doubled by the owning club, each looking for their own payday and knowing we've got the funds to play with.
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Doesn't it give you a good feeling when our club start playing hardball over the sale of one of our assets ? Can't remember the last time this happened in our favour. Normally, it's been the buying club dictating to us and we'd have just bowed over to their minimum offer.

As said, if €24m is the final accepted offer, that would normally have been a bumper sum to rebuild the team. My only concern is that this protracted saga has been in the press so much, any player we approach to sign will have had their values doubled by the owning club, each looking for their own payday and knowing we've got the funds to play with.

I’m relaxed about how this will be viewed by players, most will recognise we’re not being unreasonable, especially as Sporting have just sold a couple of players for 60m ! …probably the bigger issue is the higher the fee, the more other clubs try to push up their prices when we come calling

Sporting/agent playing everything out in the media is poor form and surely they’ll be tapping up issues for them if they don’t do deal. For what it’s worth I’m still happy enough with anything around £18-19m with massive sell on (30%) if that’s on the table.
 

Yorkshire SB

Well-Known Member
With a percentage going to Brighton, some to cover running losses, some saved for same reason next year, infrastructure investment etc I think MR will be lucky to have a third of it to play with and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s far less than that. It’s possible DK will need to take money out to cover however he purchased the club.

Still, there will be enough to fix the broken window.

Possibly but if Doug wants to have a sustainable club for more than just the next couple of years he’ll need to invest in the play squad. As evidenced, that’s how you can actually make money.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
We shouldn’t be funding operating losses with assets sales.
Absolutely worst way to run a business.

All of that money needs to be used on infrastructure or transfer fees. Nothing else.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Doesn't it give you a good feeling when our club start playing hardball over the sale of one of our assets ? Can't remember the last time this happened in our favour. Normally, it's been the buying club dictating to us and we'd have just bowed over to their minimum offer.

As said, if €24m is the final accepted offer, that would normally have been a bumper sum to rebuild the team. My only concern is that this protracted saga has been in the press so much, any player we approach to sign will have had their values doubled by the owning club, each looking for their own payday and knowing we've got the funds to play with.

It’s a comment on twitter - no one knows what the state of play is
 

djr8369

Well-Known Member
Possibly but if Doug wants to have a sustainable club for more than just the next couple of years he’ll need to invest in the play squad. As evidenced, that’s how you can actually make money.
Of course but the reality is there are holes to plug in the day to day running costs and I’m sure there lots of further infrastructure improvement that MR would like.

Hopefully the season ticket sales go some way to covering the running costs but then we are hoping the wage budget rises to, so…
 

Sick Boy

Super Moderator
With a percentage going to Brighton, some to cover running losses, some saved for same reason next year, infrastructure investment etc I think MR will be lucky to have a third of it to play with and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s far less than that. It’s possible DK will need to take money out to cover however he purchased the club.

Still, there will be enough to fix the broken window.
Apparently it’s 10% of the fee.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
What should fund operating losses? Or should wage bill be cut?

Well shouldn’t Doug have had a plan for that when buying the club?

How would the losses have been funded if Vik didn’t want to leave?
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
yeh this... the low expectations placed on our new owner do my head in.

The problem with Sisu really was no plan at this level. L1/2 they could keep costs down and sell the odd player for a profit. PL they could maybe make it work due to the sheer amount of cash and commercial interest. In this division the average wage bill to be competitive is significantly more than the sum of TV and ticket sales. You have to be willing to either go big bang Forest style or set an acceptable level of losses you’ll fund with a set timescale.

I’m pretty sure King is the latter, everything seems set up for a five year push. The question is what level of budget is he willing to fund for those five years? He’s just about to be handed £18m or so as well.

I’d guess he’s got a number in his head he’s willing to let the club run up in debt in five years before trying to sell up.
 

San Francisco

Well-Known Member
With a percentage going to Brighton, some to cover running losses, some saved for same reason next year, infrastructure investment etc I think MR will be lucky to have a third of it to play with and I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s far less than that. It’s possible DK will need to take money out to cover however he purchased the club.

Still, there will be enough to fix the broken window.

Extremely likely IMO. King already told us he’s essentially unwilling to put his own money in. I don’t think he bought the club for the reasons most fans think, definitely some ulterior motive.
 

SBT

Well-Known Member
Extremely likely IMO. King already told us he’s essentially unwilling to put his own money in. I don’t think he bought the club for the reasons most fans think, definitely some ulterior motive.
Does he even have much of his own money to put in?
 

AFCCOVENTRY

Well-Known Member
Extremely likely IMO. King already told us he’s essentially unwilling to put his own money in. I don’t think he bought the club for the reasons most fans think, definitely some ulterior motive.

Pretty sure he’s here to stabilise the club financially and infrastructure wise and then the club will sold on. He’s more hands on to get a job done that Sisu couldn’t. Just my hunch.
 

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
His plan seems to be increase revenue and presumably plug the holes with player sales as we have always done.

Plugging the holes with player sales is considerably more difficult at this level as fundamentally you have to have a consistently pipeline of talent which requires investment in the initial.

Baring in mind gap to bridge per season is also likely to be north of £5m.
 

bigfatronssba

Well-Known Member
His plan seems to be increase revenue and presumably plug the holes with player sales as we have always done.

Then what is the point of owning us?

Selling assets to fund losses just results in the club being worth less, and he won’t get his money back
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top