• Participation within this 'World Football' is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Other clubs summer transfers 2023

Status
Not open for further replies.
kenada_blue said:
A one off payment that would've been tendered out anyway (and still is I believe) compared to £30mill a year are different scales.
Click to expand...
It is the principle and not the scale that I am referring to. Yes, Newcastle is on a bigger scale than Everton but the magnitude of the scale doesn't make the principle right
 

Villa_Fan said:
It is the principle and not the scale that I am referring to. Yes, Newcastle is on a bigger scale than Everton but the magnitude of the scale doesn't make the principle right
Click to expand...

Would that be the same principle that saw Villa sell their stadium to a company owned by their owners to beat breaching EFL Profit and Sustainability Rules?
 
Wat Tyler said:
Would that be the same principle that saw Villa sell their stadium to a company owned by their owners to beat breaching EFL Profit and Sustainability Rules?
Click to expand...
Close but not the same. Selling the stadium to yourself should never have been permitted, it is completely against the essence of FPP in the EFL. Villa did it as the rules permitted and they saw that it could be advantageous to the club. I would postulate that if you were searching for an issue with Villa to throw at me, you would have chosen better if you had of raised the choice of shirt sponsor. Villa recently signed a new sponsorship deal with a gambling company which was again exploiting a loophole as gambling sponsors on the shirt are to be banned but also a company with marketing strategies that many people find offensive. You could also have mentioned that Norwich City terminated their agreement with the same company as a result of the backlash they received. Villa knew this and still went ahead and signed with them. That shows that the club is more concerned with money than keeping to a higher level of principles and self governance.
 
Wat Tyler said:
£40m for a back up right back and another £40m for Gordon, eventually you won’t be able to keep spending, so the signings you’ve made have to be good. something we have found out
Click to expand...
Not just a backup. There is no way Trippier can play all the league games, domestic cup games and Champions League games Newcastle could have. Getting in his successor early for 32m (not 40m) is absolutely the right thing to do from a footballing perspective if the finances allow it. Livramento will get lots of game time this season and has the opportunity to learn from one of the best. I would love to see my club adopting that type of strategy
 

Pabbers said:
For a first season at a struggling club...yes its very decent.

As you know, your value is not based on 1 season....but your whole package, contract, lenght of contract, history, stature in the game, and potential - And he ticks all those boxes....he is 23 !!!!
Click to expand...
Struggling club? They were in champs league places before the points deduction.
 
DanB90 said:
What made you pick Everton out of all the clubs to support if you don’t mind me asking?

Was it the Howard/Donovan thing?

We seem to embody everything you hate about football.
Click to expand...
Honestly I can’t remember exactly what did it. It wasn’t those two specifically. There was a match somewhere and looking through I think it was when Gibson scored against City that got me thinking this club was a bit different. The 4-4 game at Old Trafford was when I was truly hooked.

Back then it wasn’t like that with us. We’ve really swung into a pattern I don’t like since Moshiri came in and it’s gotten progressively worse.
 

Villa_Fan said:
Close but not the same. Selling the stadium to yourself should never have been permitted, it is completely against the essence of FPP in the EFL. Villa did it as the rules permitted and they saw that it could be advantageous to the club. I would postulate that if you were searching for an issue with Villa to throw at me, you would have chosen better if you had of raised the choice of shirt sponsor. Villa recently signed a new sponsorship deal with a gambling company which was again exploiting a loophole as gambling sponsors on the shirt are to be banned but also a company with marketing strategies that many people find offensive. You could also have mentioned that Norwich City terminated their agreement with the same company as a result of the backlash they received. Villa knew this and still went ahead and signed with them. That shows that the club is more concerned with money than keeping to a higher level of principles and self governance.
Click to expand...

Principal and scale isn't it?

But let's not get petty. If there's loopholes, there's loopholes that every club exploit. No clubs are saints.

However we're getting into territory where clubs are hamstrung and punished because their pockets aren't deep enough.
 
Villa_Fan said:
It is the principle and not the scale that I am referring to. Yes, Newcastle is on a bigger scale than Everton but the magnitude of the scale doesn't make the principle right
Click to expand...

The only principle is that it went to his mate rather than another sponsor. Buts that business. It also doesn't exist anymore and the club is looking for a new naming rights deal.

Newcastles principals are the owners are paying themselves £30mill a year from a previous £7mill a year sponsorship deal. In 1 and a half seasons they club have the 7th biggest commercial deal in the league, a couple mill shy off Spurs.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top