O'Hare bids (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
robbiekeane

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
Colin Steins Smile said:
This story is fast moving for Burnley. They’ve just taken the next three instalments on Popes transfer fee from MacCrorie Bank, which is the equivalent of a payday loan.
Today, they’ve pulled out of a transfer for an Anderlecht player and the remainder of the £65m loan is payable at circa 10%.
If they don’t get straight back to the PL … life could get very “interesting “ for them
Click to expand...
Not the equivalent of a payday loan. Invoice financing very common across many industries
 
Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
robbiekeane said:
Not the equivalent of a payday loan. Invoice financing very common across many industries
Click to expand...
There is some equivalence. They've basically got someone to give them the money now (at a cost) intending to pay it back when they actually get paid.
 
S

Skybluebeliever

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
There is some equivalence. They've basically got someone to give them the money now (at a cost) intending to pay it back when they actually get paid.
Click to expand...
This is now a normal in most transactions , clubs pay very little up front for a player , the selling club then agree to pay over 3/5years often back ended , the buying club then go and forward finance against this agreement , the selling club will often pay the fees associated to get the loan for the buying club
 
robbiekeane

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:
There is some equivalence. They've basically got someone to give them the money now (at a cost) intending to pay it back when they actually get paid.
Click to expand...
No. One is an unsecured high interest predatory loan for people with poor credit and in the shit with no options.

The other is selling future invoices/contracted payments for a discount to increase available cash which is a very common financial instrument inside and outside of football.

They are not the same thing
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Skybluebeliever said:
I’m not sure the it can be kicked as far as January to be honest , think it could be more immediate than that
Click to expand...

Surely not - we can play hardball and not sell at all I thought
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
giphy.gif


Boddy off again to find some takers
 
K

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
Skybluebeliever said:
I’m not sure the it can be kicked as far as January to be honest , think it could be more immediate than that
Click to expand...

What's the club's strategy with the remaining key players going into the final year of their contracts next summer? Assuming they don't sign new deals I assume the club have to look to sell one in January to ensure both don't go for cut price deals?

I noticed buying clubs are taking advantage of that now more than ever in this window. Bournemouth for instance reportedly tabled just a £1m bid for Josh Bowler a few weeks ago, despite submitting a £3m bid in January, and there are reports Blackpool would accept just £2m.
 
Sky Blue Harry H

Sky Blue Harry H

Well-Known Member
Bit surprised at the ITK's access to the precise details of our financial situation. i also find it odd that if things are so precarious we are still able to take on salaries like Kasey Palmer's, secure PL loans and increase other players contracts etc. Time will tell, I guess. Hopefully a bit of TTV coverage and increased gates may help. Love to be a fly on the wall.
 
Last edited:
K

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
Sky Blue Harry H said:
Bit surprised at the ITK's access to the precise details of our financial situation. i also find it odd that if things are so precarious we are still able to take on salaries like Kasey Palmer's, secure PL loans and increase other players contracts etc. Time will tell, I guess. Hopefully abit of TTV coverage and increased gates may help. Love to be a fly on the wall.
Click to expand...

Is it that precise? All that's really been repeated is that the club needs a sale this summer.

I wouldn't read too much into the signings either. I'd imagine a proportion of Palmer's wages would've been covered by the exits of Shipley + fee, Drysdale + fee, Pask and Jones. Despite the rumours we certainly won't be matching his wages at Bristol.

If anything the fact that other than Palmer we only seem to be signing loans, despite Boddy claiming the club is trying to distance itself from that market, is pretty telling.

The exits of JCS, Maatsen and Dacosta (albeit we'll still be paying the majority of his wages) probably would've more than facilitated the signings of Panzo and Doyle.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Sky Blue Harry H said:
Bit surprised at the ITK's access to the precise details of our financial situation. i also find it odd that if things are so precarious we are still able to take on salaries like Kasey Palmer's, secure PL loans and increase other players contracts etc. Time will tell, I guess. Hopefully abit of TTV coverage and increased gates may help. Love to be a fly on the wall.
Click to expand...

The calcs are pretty straightforward- we will just about cover wages on a 20,000 crowd and there are other costs of circa £5 million - so we need a sale in that region to prevent issues
 
S

Skybluebeliever

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Our profit on player sales in the last published accounts was £2 million versus nearly £4 million the year before - our gross wage bill was £13 million against turnover of £11 million - remember the structure of past deals from McCallum Wilson and Maddison have contributed to the accounts for several years. Unless Maddison is sold on again that well is now dry

We now have a black hole of turnover against wages alone of at least £5 million per annum as well as all other costs - there’s no magic money tree under the owners as they freely admit
Click to expand...
I’m unsure we have benefited much from McCallum the same as Bayliss and McNulty , they have not kicked on with their clubs triggering further payments

Really Wilson and Maddison have been crucial ,the fact they are in the premiership and played for England since leaving has resulted in continuous income for the club
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Skybluebeliever said:
I’m unsure we have benefited much from McCallum the same as Bayliss and McNulty , they have not kicked on with their clubs triggering further payments

Really Wilson and Maddison have been crucial ,the fact they are in the premiership and played for England since leaving has resulted in continuous income for the club
Click to expand...

Yes fair point - McCallum was not the £3 million fee nothing like it - from what I see it’s something like £750k upfront.

I assume the mcnulty upfront was around a million and paid easily for godden
 
K

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
Grendel said:
Yes fair point - McCallum was not the £3 million fee nothing like it - from what I see it’s something like £750k upfront.

I assume the mcnulty upfront was around a million and paid easily for godden
Click to expand...

McNulty was sold a year prior to Godden being brought in.

I'd imagine his fee would've been used for Chaplin, Hiwula, Bakayoko and JCH.
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
robbiekeane said:
Well would you prefer they just bend over and take the first offer?

If only we had master negotiator grendel in charge of the sales
Click to expand...

If we take the last fee it will inevitably be lower as we start to panic
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
KenilworthSkyBlue said:
McNulty was sold a year prior to Godden being brought in.

I'd imagine his fee would've been used for Chaplin, Hiwula, Bakayoko and JCH.
Click to expand...

Yes fair enough. Though most of those cost nowhere near what was claimed - Clarke Harris was £125k

The season we sold mcnulty we made £5 million profits on player sales
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
robbiekeane said:
time also puts pressure on the buyers too
Click to expand...

It’s a buyers market I don’t think clubs are that desperate to buy as we have no stand outs other than Gyokeres I guess
 
robbiekeane

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
KenilworthSkyBlue said:
Not really. If push comes to shove they'll just look elsewhere or settle with what they currently have and see what options become available in the next window.

The club seemingly doesn't have the luxury of that kind of flexibility.
Click to expand...
The buyers want to buy the player, we want to sell the player. You can just flip your argument around and say we could talk to other buyers or wait until the next window. Its also not important whether that’s true, it’s important whether they think it’s true
 
Grendel

Grendel

Well-Known Member
robbiekeane said:
The truth is we have no idea who is interested and who is not.
Click to expand...

We do know we can’t afford not to sell or we have to take extra loans out

We also won’t know until the next series of accounts (we won’t even know then fully) the amount we actually get for the sold player

As stated the fee for McCallum was nothing like the quoted amount at all. Maddison and Wilson have kept the club going by the way the deals were constructed - Boddy is no Chris Anderson - he’s not even a Steve Waggott
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top