Everton Summer transfers 2021

[TheBigIguana]

Don't read the Internet; trust me he's a left forward. Properly crap as a centre forward.

Properly crap wide left too. Richarlison is a good comparison. He's a player between positions the exact same way.

 

[Nymzee]

Properly crap wide left too. Richarlison is a good comparison. He's a player between positions the exact same way.

I don't mind him and if he's makeweight for Rodriguez least we're getting something in return. Not a position needed though but it seems only the Internet knows me need a RB.

 

[TheBigIguana]

I don't mind him and if he's makeweight for Rodriguez least we're getting something in return. Not a position needed though but it seems only the Internet knows me need a RB.

I think we need to learn from Richarlison though and focus on making him one thing or the other or it'll be pointless. You have to set up in a very specific way to make use of these types of players out wide.

 

[Bluestar]

No, it doesn’t

Well we can’t spend what we would like. It’s sell to buy, so I cant see that it any different to being skint.

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

Well we can’t spend what we would like. It’s sell to buy, so I cant see that it any different to being skint.

We have money, we need to trim the squad and free up wages according to the rules

 

[Bluestar]

We have money, we need to trim the squad and free up wages according to the rules

We have a financial limitation imposed on us which is preventing us spending.

I am happy we are trimming the squad, but selling to buy is back to our old situation.

 

[danny147]

Well we can’t spend what we would like. It’s sell to buy, so I cant see that it any different to being skint.

Huge difference to being skint and being unable to add more players to the wage bill without removing them and ending up paying out your entire turnover in wages which isn’t allowed.

we aren’t skint, we have a ridiculously high wage bill in comparison to turnover and team ability. We was 85%+ wages/turnover last season, we could have 500 million in the bank and be unable to buy players without getting rid of the deadwood first as we need to lower the wage bill before buying.

 

[Bluestar]

Huge difference to being skint and being unable to add more players to the wage bill without removing them and ending up paying out your entire turnover in wages which isn’t allowed.

we aren’t skint, we have a ridiculously high wage bill in comparison to turnover and team ability. We was 85%+ wages/turnover last season, we could have 500 million in the bank and be unable to buy players without getting rid of the deadwood first as we need to lower the wage bill before buying.

We have to reduce losses. We are allowed £105m over three years, we have declared £240m losses over the last two years.

We have to reduce wages and sell players for more than their book value.

Sell to buy.

 

[carolinablue232]

Any chance Dumfries is just being delayed so he can help them through the Champions League qualifiers?

 

[danny147]

We have to reduce losses. We are allowed £105m over three years, we have declared £240m losses over the last two years.

We have to reduce wages and sell players for more than their book value.

Sell to buy.

So not one bit of that points to the fact we’re skint but more we have to follow guidelines set for all clubs.

we aren’t skint, we have been ran terribly to the point now we’re finally seeing the realities of being so disorganized with our transfer policy over the last five years.

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

We have to reduce losses. We are allowed £105m over three years, we have declared £240m losses over the last two years.

We have to reduce wages and sell players for more than their book value.

Sell to buy.

It is not sell to buy. Sell to buy implies that we only have the money from sales, it is obvious, given our owners, new manager and previous 5 years, that we have some money.

We have to free up squad space and wages in order to comply, then we can spend the money we have

 

[jamieni]

So not one bit of that points to the fact we’re skint but more we have to follow guidelines set for all clubs.

we aren’t skint, we have been ran terribly to the point now we’re finally seeing the realities of being so disorganized with our transfer policy over the last five years.

It’s all semantics though. The net result is we can’t spend willy nilly without generating some revenue.

 

[UTFT79]

We have to reduce losses. We are allowed £105m over three years, we have declared £240m losses over the last two years.

We have to reduce wages and sell players for more than their book value.

Sell to buy.

Why is sell to buy such a bad thing every club in world football bar Man City / Psg has to sell to buy otherwise you end up with a Barry fry sized squad of 50 players

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

So not one bit of that points to the fact we’re skint but more we have to follow guidelines set for all clubs.

we aren’t skint, we have been ran terribly to the point now we’re finally seeing the realities of being so disorganized with our transfer policy over the last five years.

Halleluiah

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

It’s all semantics though. The net result is we can’t spend willy nilly without generating some revenue.

No, we can spend if we free up wages. We are not allowed to spend any more, regardless of the fact we have money. It NOT about revenue