Aiden McGeady

[bluestevon]

So I'm supposed to be alarmed that we're not spending tens of millions we don't have on overpriced ****e?
Why should we throw our money down the pan just because other clubs do?

Whatever we do, we should spend within our budget. It may or may not be enough but it's a better plan than eventual bankruptcy.

so in other words any team in the league that spends greater than they bring in transfer wise is flirting with bankrupcy?
Am i saying we should buy the players those teams bought mate? no im saying we should at least break even transfer wise not run at a 12m surplus and then excuse it away with the pitiful excuses of wages and loan fees etc, the same thing that all other clubs are dealing with btw

Although apparently our budget somehow and mysteriously is like on average 12m less than the rest of the league teams manage to have...

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

When you don't have a lot of money it's reasonable to expect that you wouldn't bring in a player without first making absolutely sure that he was the right person to bring in

That includes whether he will mess up the harmony in the dressing room

I don't think that's really the case here with McGeady, but you never know

 

[bluestevon]

Aye, but you can only spend it if the right players are available.

Despite what was said, the money wasn't available until Fellaini was sold, I think that's clear now. There wasn't much time in which to do business. I agree, if that money is now available to spend, as long as the right player is available then spend it. Could be the difference between 5th and 4th.

Totally agree mate, and their needs to be serious questions asked as to why their is no money available if their isn't (which i suspect theirs not), not investing at this time is bloody criminal imo, and shows the ambition of blue bill and the board

 

[bluestevon]

When you don't have a lot of money it's reasonable to expect that you wouldn't bring in a player without first making absolutely sure that he was the right person to bring in

That includes whether he will mess up the harmony in the dressing room

I don't think that's really the case here with McGeady, but you never know

It would take 2 minutes and would involve, seamus, darron, mccarthy what ya think of mcgeady - decent lad or an arse

 

[bluejock]

Totally agree mate, and their needs to be serious questions asked as to why their is no money available if their isn't (which i suspect theirs not), not investing at this time is bloody criminal imo, and shows the ambition of blue bill and the board

Spot on, which is the point Davek is striving at. I have a feeling he'll be proved correct again. It's not the first time he's been bang on about the board.

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

Another way to phrase what we have done mate is sold 12m more than we have invested, now imagine if we had just broke even net spend this year and what 12m more worth of that shrewd martinez investments could have done for us, and that would still place us as one of the bottom three net investors in the squad this season in the league so hardly breaking the bank like

?? but that's just ****e though. we've replaced one players wage with three and added a bunch of loan signings. Loan signings aren't free you know, we'll be paying the majority if not all of their wages and will have paid a fee to get them in the first place.

Your view of how budgets are run at a Football Club are far two simplistic.
It's not just a case of (Transfer fee in = Transfer fee out = break even)

 

[maccavennie]

In an ideal world we get players in early but it never works out like that for whatever reason in the transfer windows. What I'm not going to do though is be utterly pissed off as we are only 10 days into the window and let's be honest none of us have a clue who Martinez may be after. I think we should wait until the window is shut and see where we stand then tbh. If by the close of the window Martinez brings in the players he wants and shipped out anyone who doesn't want then that's great. If the opposite happens and we don't strengthen then that's the time to be pissed off. I totally understand what the likes of Davek are saying as we have form for this kind of caper every window but its still early days so let's see what Martinzes gets to do first before jumping the gun. That's just my opinion of course, and I will be just as livid as anyone if we don't strengthen as I firmly believe 3rd and 4th spot are easily up for grabs this season.

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

so in other words any team in the league that spends greater than they bring in transfer wise is flirting with bankrupcy?

How can anything survive long term spending more than it brings in?

Am i saying we should buy the players those teams bought mate? no im saying we should at least break even transfer wise not run at a 12m surplus and then excuse it away with the pitiful excuses of wages and loan fees etc, the same thing that all other clubs are dealing with btw
Although apparently our budget somehow and mysteriously is like on average 12m less than the rest of the league teams manage to have...

so wages/Loan fees don't count as money? Transfer fees (in and out) are only a part of the Managers budget, it all has to Balance.

Bolton Wanderers (for instance) have debts up to £163.8m ffs! is that what you really want?

 

[Yeldah]

I have to admit, it does look as if the money has disappeared...Billy is quite the little *******...[enter word of your choice here]...

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/everton-fc-hopeful-darron-gibson-6490004

 

[bluejock]

?? but that's just ****e though. we've replaced one players wage with three and added a bunch of loan signings. Loan signings aren't free you know, we'll be paying the majority if not all of their wages and will have paid a fee to get them in the first place.

Your view of how budgets are run at a Football Club are far two simplistic.
It's not just a case of (Transfer fee in = Transfer fee out = break even)

The fees we paid for the loan deals were to cover the player's wages with his parent club. in the case of Barry, it's about half.

This isn't speculation, this is confirmed by people who know a lot more about the inner working of you or me.

 

[bluestevon]

?? but that's just ****e though. we've replaced one players wage with three and added a bunch of loan signings. Loan signings aren't free you know, we'll be paying the majority if not all of their wages and will have paid a fee to get them in the first place.

Your view of how budgets are run at a Football Club are far two simplistic.
It's not just a case of (Transfer fee in = Transfer fee out = break even)

No mate we didn't replace one players wage with 3, in fact we added 4 permanent players in the window, kone, alcaraz, robles and mccarthy

but we in fact had 5 players leaving, anichebe, fellaini, mucha, neville, and hitzlperger

not sure on the exact figure but i seem to remember neville was on like 50k and fellaini was on about 70k, the 4 we added combined will likely be on around 120k total, leaving us a net surplus on wages of anichebe, mucha and hitz call it 40k or their abouts to be conservative, combine the fact that martinez is on a lot less than moyes was and net wages are like 75-80k down on last year, so theirs 75% of barry's wages payed from what hes on at city, and we wont be paying more than that mate

so that leaves lukaku and his wage coming out and delefou, neither will be on astronomical wages at this point in their careers and neither will we likely to be paying the full amount either

delefou no fee has been payed and wont be if he makes a certain target of games played so thats not even a factor atm
barry - a minimal fee if anything will have been payed - at most 1-2m more likely nothing, city wanted his wages off not to make a tidy profit
Lukaku probably has cost 2-3m loan fee although its unclear exactly the amount

So yeah i have a decent grasp that footy isnt all about transfer in transfer out and those costs alone mate, but as i've gone through and listed, to suggest like some not you i dont think) that we should just subtract mccarthy from felli's fee then add all the wages for the loans and fees on top of that without factoring in other areas where we actually saved money by letting players leave is wrong

 

[SpurtingLesbian]

The fees we paid for the loan deals were to cover the player's wages with his parent club. in the case of Barry, it's about half.

This isn't speculation, this is confirmed by people who know a lot more about the inner working of you or me.

correct, they are not free, they have to come out of the playing budget somewhere.
Half of his wages is still £50,000 a week, or £2million for 40 weeks

 

[mkrudden]

I have a lot of time for Davek on here, but I do think January is alot more complicated a window than many think. Were this the Summer then I would be more inclined to agree that the board have dealt us another atrocious hand.

Lets say that the 10m surplus is about right in terms of the figure (I must confess that I find it difficult to accept this as dont players get signing on fees, arent there agent fees to be considered, plus if a player doesnt ask for a transfer (Anichebe) then doesnt he get a hefty loyalty bonus?...surely all of these items need to be compensated from somewhere?) then I do think that to improve us is going to be a extremely difficult on that sort of budget.

January is considered by all to be an inflated month transfer fee wise, plus the only players which are available for the money we can afford are likely to have questionable attitudes, which I think is what Roberto is getting at with his repeated warning that he isnt interested in buying for the sake of it and that its more important not to lose what we have in the dressing room.

We dont want to be taking a risk on a player, like Cardiff have done, who has never played in an elite league. We need to remember that we are 5th, and therefore somehow we need to find 2 players, for a total of 10m who are going to improve our first team or improve the competition in the team.

I cant see who, from the top teams around europe, would be willing to part with one of their star players for such a small sum.

I have to agree with Davek that I wouldnt be surprised to see no incomings, however I am of the mind-set that it isnt as important as some believe. Last season, the reason we NEEDED a new CM, and consequently our inability to get one in cost us, was that our CM consisted of Osman and Phil Neville. We are nowhere near that this year. We have Barry, McCarthy, Osman for the 2 CM, Barkley, Naismith, Pienaar, Kev, Del, Oviedo all competing for the ACM and 2 wide places.

Theres a slight worry over CF, but again, its not as if we are without one of the best forwards in the league as our main starter. If Niki Jelavic leaves then we need an able replacement as a back up, thats all.

Have faith blues, Roberto will steer us right.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

It's not just about whether he's a "dick" or not either, in regards to harmony

To be honest though, this strikes me as Martinez just trying to give a non commital answer to the press. All managers do that

 

[bluejock]

correct, they are not free, they have to come out of the playing budget somewhere.
Half of his wages is still £50,000 a week, or £2million for 40 weeks, what about the other two? I bet they both wanted a loan fee on top of wages.

No, the loan fee IS the wages (or 50% of Barry's), with a small amount over the top.