The club doesn't make much money so has to rely on producing and selling on young players to survive, just like the majority of clubs at our level. What's so difficult to understand.
Do we though? Weren't we supposed to be self sustaining and not loss making any more?
I like what CA had to say on the whole. Didn't shy away from the mistakes of the past and was keen to say that they won't happen again which was the biggest thing for me. Let's hope he proves to be a man of his word.
Although I understand and accept what he had to say on the Madison transfer I still think we pissed on our chips. At the end of the day he isn't a player that owes us a transfer fee or years of silly wages. Yes there's his development costs to consider but them costs are part of the bigger picture of the academy. In other words we'd still have them costs with or without James Madison so how much of a gamble would it have been to wait until the summer? Certainly I feel we've lost more than we've gained from the initial payment if not the add on's. I suspect that if we'd held out to summer Norwich wouldn't have been in the frame as they couldn't/wouldn't have matched what others would be willing to gamble. For that reason alone it was a good piece of business by Norwich and for that reason it can only be bad business for us.
That includes selling developing players to fund subsequent year budgets.
Do we though? Weren't we supposed to be self sustaining and not loss making any more?
Which is why we sold Maddison.
Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
Self sustaining.You lost me.
We aren't losing money, so we had to sell Maddison?
What?
Let me put this another way. Had Madders not come good, or broken his leg, or whatever. Are you saying we'd be in admin this summer?
Self sustaining.
Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
Ah, a business plan up there with the underpants gnomes.
Seriously, you can't budget based on "hope that 11 year old turns out good".
That's like saying my budget is balanced, once you take into account my lottery winnings I'm bound to get.
You lost me.
We aren't losing money, so we had to sell Maddison?
What?
Let me put this another way. Had Madders not come good, or broken his leg, or whatever. Are you saying we'd be in admin this summer?
But surely to run the club incurs bills and costs, which if we are self sustaining we can pay, but then when we want to keep someone like Armstrong or TM wats to bring in another player or loan, then we need extra revenue for the budget from somewhere, and sadly this is where a club like ours will make it.
Sorry you'll have to help me out here. Where did i mention anything about going into administration?Yeah, you're going to have to break out the full sentences I'm afraid.
I'll ask again, are you saying that had Maddison's injury been serious the club would have been out of business this summer as no more money is coming from Sisu?
Tangental: How does this tally with the idea that we didn't have to sell and it was about strengthening the team, not sustaining it?
That includes selling developing players to fund subsequent year budgets.
Mowbray was saying as recently as 21st January that as far as he was aware we had no need to sell.
This leaves two options:
1) Our budgeting was so poor that despite increasing crowds roughly 40%, we were short of cash.
2) Mowbray was lied to.
Neither of which fill me with confidence in our leadership team.
Mowbray was saying as recently as 21st January that as far as he was aware we had no need to sell.
This leaves two options:
1) Our budgeting was so poor that despite increasing crowds roughly 40%, we were short of cash.
2) Mowbray was lied to.
Neither of which fill me with confidence in our leadership team.
He said exactly that. It's not just to buy player x or y but to keep the club going.Didn't Anderson say in the interviews after the sale of Maddison that the sale was more about next season and the season after rather than a funding gap this season?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
The club doesn't make much money so has to rely on producing and selling on young players to survive, just like the majority of clubs at our level. What's so difficult to understand.
Chipfat it's a buyers market mate, a player wants to go and more importantly for career reasons wants to go to Norwich, they have dosh we don't a fact. Yesterday a report in the papers said the average wage in the Prem is £1.7 million a year, just over £30k a week, the championship average is £320k a year just over £6000 a week, division 1 lower again. How the hell are we going to stop a young player going from perhaps £2k a week to over £30k a week
Self sustaining.
Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
The bit I am really relieved about is he said that it is not the case that this model falls down if we get to the championship.
So if we can agree a long term feral at the Ricoh not only will our future be secured but we also don't have to face instant rekegation it financial ruin.
We will not have one if the poorest budgets as it stands. I also feel if he secures longer term to the Ricoh he will get us an even better deal than we have now.
However to mount a challenge we would need a madfison or Wilson getting sold for 7-10 million unfortunately.
Long term feral?
Its also about getting market value for an in demand player, this i dont think was achieved....short term a cpl mill in someone's bank....long term another player sold to cheap and too soon.Sorry you'll have to help me out here. Where did i mention anything about going into administration?
Im saying selling players is part of being a club that runs itself. We're not going to go far on small crowds and little revenue.
Sent from my SM-N910F using Tapatalk
short term a cpl mill in someone's bank....long term another player sold to cheap and too soon.
Who's pocketed the money then?Its also about getting market value for an in demand player, this i dont think was achieved....short term a cpl mill in someone's bank....long term another player sold to cheap and too soon.
The bit I am really relieved about is he said that it is not the case that this model falls down if we get to the championship.
So if we can agree a long term feral at the Ricoh not only will our future be secured but we also don't have to face instant rekegation it financial ruin.
We will not have one if the poorest budgets as it stands. I also feel if he secures longer term to the Ricoh he will get us an even better deal than we have now.
However to mount a challenge we would need a madfison or Wilson getting sold for 7-10 million unfortunately.
I don't believe what he said about the championship. One one hand he's saying only Millwall are more reliant on ticket sales than we are in league one but if we get in the championship everything will be a.o.k. We know from the last few accounts that our turnover was one of the lowest 3-4 in the league, this deal at the Ricoh doesn't particularly change that fact.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors
Lol.I don't care what he said i will ignore it and be negative.
Did somebody talking basing things on fact.confuse you?Lol.I don't care what he said i will ignore it and be negative.
LOL. Out of 168 posts he quotes one from Stu. What were the chances of that?
Did somebody talking basing things on fact.confuse you?
I think what you are was recorded a while agoOk you are in Anderson out camp. That has been recorded
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?