We’re performing as expected

[BiggerBladeThanThou]

According to this graph. Apologies if already posted.

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

According to this graph. Apologies if already posted.

View attachment 198489

Seems also to show we are overachieving as we are well ahead on PPG compared to ones with a bit lower expenditure. Needs a £ / PPG graph..

 

[Harry's Game]

Overachieving according to that graph

 

[LurkerBladeS2]

£28m of that is Brewster - definitely over achieving!

 

[Cappy]

Good chart but just a warning to anyone thinking it's an inclusive representation of our on-field spend compared to other teams.

Hate to sound like one of Roy's view froms, but this doesn't include wages, and unlikely loan fees.

If wages were included, we'd be significantly higher than a lot of the others we appear to be spending similar to, of course, and it's absolutely fine.

Just a little example of our operational spending power, to emphasise a point, if all the payment clauses are met on JRS' loan, we will have paid £4m in total for his loan. We all know this, but have you worked that out as a weekly outgoing? Over 45 weeks, that's £89k per week on an unproven youngster. Love it, BTW

 

[AWetFlannel]

Good chart but just a warning to anyone thinking it's an inclusive representation of our on-field spend compared to other teams.

Hate to sound like one of Roy's view froms, but this doesn't include wages, and unlikely loan fees.

If wages were included, we'd be significantly higher than a lot of the others we appear to be spending similar to, of course, and it's absolutely fine.

Just a little example of our operational spending power, to emphasise a point, if all the payment clauses are met on JRS' loan, we will have paid £4m in total for his loan. We all know this, but have you worked that out as a weekly outgoing? Over 45 weeks, that's £89k per week on an unproven youngster. Love it, BTW

Agree with most of what you've said, but the £4mill loan fee often touted is surely BS.

 

[SGBlade]

Interesting for a conversation starter but a a bit of an over-simplified chart. It doesn’t look at net spend, loan fees, nor take into account the quality/worth of the current squad. As mentioned above, wage budget is a much more accurate way of predicting success over the long term, and therefore better to show who is under / over performing in a given season.

If you did want to include transfer fees in an analysis, something like ‘net expenditure on playing staff’ would be better.

TBF, I reckon you’d find that chart wouldn’t look too different this season, except that we’d be much closer to Burnley, Leeds would look better due to player sales, and Luton would look even worse.

Although even that measure wouldn’t consider existing strength/cost of the squad, hence why just taking wages is probably a simpler and more useful comparison of performance.

 

[Cappy]

Agree with most of what you've said, but the £4mill loan fee often touted is surely BS.

Came direct from the palace reporter on the evening standard when it was being finalised: @mrdomsmith

 

[Carlton Blade]

According to this graph. Apologies if already posted.

View attachment 198489

About 30% of that United investment is Brewster, a purchase made 4 1/2 years ago

 

[BiggerBladeThanThou]

About 30% of that United investment is Brewster, a purchase made 4 1/2 years ago

Yep, which pushes down to the Hull City mark

 

[JJBlade]

We're doing exactly what I've been hoping we'd do for years.
Spend practically nothing on fees but pay bigger wages

Free signings like O'Hare and we'd have been blasted out of the water by a dozen other Championship clubs, but at least the club is now an attractive proposition for players.

Loan players like Souttar and Rak Sakyi would never have come here a few years ago

Burrows and Cooper show that you don't have to break the bank for players