Budget

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

I’m taking about 5/6 years ago mate the original reason the prince showed up was because he was desperate for someone to take over the club hence why he sold half the club for the price Of a loaf of bread.
Hence why it stipulated in the contact the prince can buy him out which is why we have a court battle right now

A multi million pound loaf of bread you mean?
 



Sheffield United have done it the hard way once already so I expect the players we retain will have Premiership bonus written into their contracts ie extra to their weekly wages payable only whilst in the Prem. Players we sign will have this too therefore should we get relegated the wage bill will drop to the 19 million quid (or whatever) it currently is. This may limit the players we can sign but will protect the club whilst leaving the parachute payments as a means of attempting to regain Prem status without bankrupting the club. (IMO)
 
You’re both arguing about a potential £1.3m when we’re going to receive £100m. It’s a pittance and neither of you can back up your arguments with facts. Why bother?
1.3m is giving Coutts another year. Or not.

It's not a pittance fella.

Don't go all lardy dah on us :)
 
I didn’t see it but I’m guessing these ‘experts’ are just academics i.e. they know a lot about something they’ve never actually done.

What they’re trying to get across, which I very much agree with, is that a promoted club shouldn’t be carrying a wage bill much more than £40m, because that’s roughly what the parachute payments will cover if you go down. So the rest can be spent on transfer fees or upgrades to infrastructure.

At some point in the future, the club will be under pressure from the fans to ‘progress’ and will be tempted to keep increasing the wage bill to bring in ‘better players’. Once it gets to a certain level, it can be catastrophic if a club gets relegated as they can’t cover the wage bill and may be stuck with lots of overpaid shit that no one wants.

That’s what’s happened to the likes of Stoke, Villa etc.

Yes that's why it was 'experts', however to be fair they must be basing their opinions on credible data.

Perhaps I'm being naive about it, but I can't understand why players contracts can't be more performance related, so while you're playing in the Premier League you can expect to earn x, but if we get relegated, it will go down to y.... I suppose that would mean players not being as enthusiastic to sign than another club that will just pay them whatever they want. In some ways I think that getting promoted to the Premier League makes it even harder to strike a balance between trying to be competitive in a crazy market and not gambling with the future of the club.
 
Yes that's why it was 'experts', however to be fair they must be basing their opinions on credible data.

Perhaps I'm being naive about it, but I can't understand why players contracts can't be more performance related, so while you're playing in the Premier League you can expect to earn x, but if we get relegated, it will go down to y.... I suppose that would mean players not being as enthusiastic to sign than another club that will just pay them whatever they want. In some ways I think that getting promoted to the Premier League makes it even harder to strike a balance between trying to be competitive in a crazy market and not gambling with the future of the club.
You’ve answered your own question. It’s a lot harder. That’s why so many clubs get it wrong.
 
I can’t see any potential new owner being interested in a 50% share...Unless both parties are willing to sell.
 
You don’t get secondary sell on clauses surely? We made our money on his move to Leicester
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom