Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
I want to be proved wrong 02:25 - Aug 22 with 3714 viewsLoyal

So where is the investment to keep us in the premier league ?
Survival just isn't good enough.
The Sunderland strategy only lasts for a few years.

Nolan sympathiser, clout expert, personal friend of Leigh Dineen, advocate and enforcer of porridge swallows. The official inventor of the tit w@nk.
Poll: Who should be Swansea number 1

0
I want to be proved wrong on 18:48 - Aug 22 with 1005 viewsPozuelosSideys

Other than the initial takeover part where arguably the sellers did the dirty and not the Americans, im struggling to see much wrong in what theyve done so far. Bradley was a mistake, granted, but they resolved that in the nick of time.

They have less than 9 days to upgrade the squad, and as of 1st September, we will see what their agenda is

"Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper."
Poll: Hattricks

0
I want to be proved wrong on 19:18 - Aug 22 with 970 viewsDr_Winston

I want to be proved wrong on 18:41 - Aug 22 by longlostjack

You spin doctor you ! Watch out Landon Donovan he's after your job !


Just a simple statement of fact.

Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.

0
I want to be proved wrong on 21:20 - Aug 22 with 924 viewslonglostjack

I want to be proved wrong on 19:18 - Aug 22 by Dr_Winston

Just a simple statement of fact.


Interesting fact but pretty irrelevant given the increased TV revenues and certainly no measure of Yanks generosity.

Poll: Alcohol in the lockdown

0
I want to be proved wrong on 21:33 - Aug 22 with 892 viewsDr_Winston

I want to be proved wrong on 21:20 - Aug 22 by longlostjack

Interesting fact but pretty irrelevant given the increased TV revenues and certainly no measure of Yanks generosity.


Data concerning how much the Yanks have spent on players is irrelevant to a thread about how much the Yanks are spending on players. OK.

For the record I have no real axe to grind either way with the Yanks. They've made some big mistakes so far (Bradley, keeping Dineen and Jenkins around) but a lot of the criticism is based more on people's preconceptions about what they're going to do rather than what they've actually done.

If come the end of the window they've pocketed the Sigurdsson cash and done a runner back to Washington DC then fine, I'll be slagging them off along with everyone else. So far though they've put basically everything back into the squad, and show every sign of continuing to do so.

Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.

0
I want to be proved wrong on 21:54 - Aug 22 with 862 viewslonglostjack

I want to be proved wrong on 21:33 - Aug 22 by Dr_Winston

Data concerning how much the Yanks have spent on players is irrelevant to a thread about how much the Yanks are spending on players. OK.

For the record I have no real axe to grind either way with the Yanks. They've made some big mistakes so far (Bradley, keeping Dineen and Jenkins around) but a lot of the criticism is based more on people's preconceptions about what they're going to do rather than what they've actually done.

If come the end of the window they've pocketed the Sigurdsson cash and done a runner back to Washington DC then fine, I'll be slagging them off along with everyone else. So far though they've put basically everything back into the squad, and show every sign of continuing to do so.


Fair enough "irrelevant" was the wrong choice of word, "misleading" would have been more accurate. Let's see how much of revenue raised from transfer fees and savings from salaries is reinvested in the squad. I really hope that you are right but I can't see it myself. They are not in it for the long term and will hope to do just enough to sell on in the short term. That's an assumption I know and they may be looking for long term investment returns for their clients but don't hold your breath.

Poll: Alcohol in the lockdown

0
I want to be proved wrong on 22:00 - Aug 22 with 852 viewsDr_Winston

I want to be proved wrong on 21:54 - Aug 22 by longlostjack

Fair enough "irrelevant" was the wrong choice of word, "misleading" would have been more accurate. Let's see how much of revenue raised from transfer fees and savings from salaries is reinvested in the squad. I really hope that you are right but I can't see it myself. They are not in it for the long term and will hope to do just enough to sell on in the short term. That's an assumption I know and they may be looking for long term investment returns for their clients but don't hold your breath.


I don't doubt for a second that they're not in it for the long term. Sadly since the old board shat on us from a great height that's the world we're living in now.

Ultimately they make more money if SCFC are a well established PL club, ideally with a thriving commercial operation and control over the ground they play in. Skimping on squad investment is a poor way to realise that aim, and one which wouldn't make a whole lot of sense if they were to do it.

Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.

0
I want to be proved wrong on 22:50 - Aug 22 with 807 viewsMyFinalHeaven

I want to be proved wrong on 07:09 - Aug 22 by Dr_Winston

When the Clucas deal goes through it'll be the third time they've sanctioned an eight figure transfer fee. Potentially it's the second time they've broken the transfer record. In just over a year. Funny way to profiteer.


And guess what? Even if that deal goes through we'd still have a transfer surplus of +22m.

Since these Yanks took over we've sold 100m worth of players but spent just 63m of it.

Come on you Swans.

0
I want to be proved wrong on 22:53 - Aug 22 with 803 viewsMyFinalHeaven

I want to be proved wrong on 14:08 - Aug 22 by builthjack

What's the ins and outs totals over the last year, including Ashley and Ayew?
[Post edited 22 Aug 2017 14:10]


According to Transfermarkt--the most accurate source for transfer fees around--we've received £100.17m since Levien and Kaplan took over but spent just £63.63m. Still over £36m to spend until we break even.

Come on you Swans.

0
Login to get fewer ads

I want to be proved wrong on 22:56 - Aug 22 with 795 viewsDr_Winston

I want to be proved wrong on 22:53 - Aug 22 by MyFinalHeaven

According to Transfermarkt--the most accurate source for transfer fees around--we've received £100.17m since Levien and Kaplan took over but spent just £63.63m. Still over £36m to spend until we break even.


Does that £100m include Sigurdsson?

Pain or damage don't end the world. Or despair, or f*cking beatings. The world ends when you're dead. Until then, you got more punishment in store. Stand it like a man... and give some back.

0
I want to be proved wrong on 00:51 - Aug 23 with 732 viewsawayjack

I want to be proved wrong on 21:33 - Aug 22 by Dr_Winston

Data concerning how much the Yanks have spent on players is irrelevant to a thread about how much the Yanks are spending on players. OK.

For the record I have no real axe to grind either way with the Yanks. They've made some big mistakes so far (Bradley, keeping Dineen and Jenkins around) but a lot of the criticism is based more on people's preconceptions about what they're going to do rather than what they've actually done.

If come the end of the window they've pocketed the Sigurdsson cash and done a runner back to Washington DC then fine, I'll be slagging them off along with everyone else. So far though they've put basically everything back into the squad, and show every sign of continuing to do so.


Why look at transfers in without context of players sold? Fact remains yanks have not invested a bean in transfers or anything else to go with club. All they do is decide how we spend the huge windfalls from Sky and player sales. So far this window we've got £60m from player sales and slashed our wages by getting rid of over 15 players. What's the point in spinning that the yanks have spent £11m on Mesa? Odd.
1
I want to be proved wrong on 02:56 - Aug 23 with 702 viewsPozuelosSideys

I want to be proved wrong on 22:53 - Aug 22 by MyFinalHeaven

According to Transfermarkt--the most accurate source for transfer fees around--we've received £100.17m since Levien and Kaplan took over but spent just £63.63m. Still over £36m to spend until we break even.


You think all incoming transfer fees received are available for outgoing transfers?

For a start there is tax paid which can only be reclaimed at the end of year. There are also all sorts of other fees, bonuses, agents etc. Gylfi never handed in a transfer request so gets his cut, plus the balance on his signing bonus over the course of his contract which is probably outstanding.

Dont forget we have to stump all this up with our inbound transfers too. ie 20% VAT on top of say £10m transfer (reclaimed)

We are also paying off debt and have poor cashflow issues. £100m in does not = £100m out
[Post edited 23 Aug 2017 3:03]

"Michu, Britton and Williams could have won 3-0 on their own. They wouldn't have required a keeper."
Poll: Hattricks

0
I want to be proved wrong on 08:27 - Aug 23 with 635 viewsWhiterockin

I want to be proved wrong on 02:56 - Aug 23 by PozuelosSideys

You think all incoming transfer fees received are available for outgoing transfers?

For a start there is tax paid which can only be reclaimed at the end of year. There are also all sorts of other fees, bonuses, agents etc. Gylfi never handed in a transfer request so gets his cut, plus the balance on his signing bonus over the course of his contract which is probably outstanding.

Dont forget we have to stump all this up with our inbound transfers too. ie 20% VAT on top of say £10m transfer (reclaimed)

We are also paying off debt and have poor cashflow issues. £100m in does not = £100m out
[Post edited 23 Aug 2017 3:03]


Exactly.

Many see only in and out transfer fees, take one away from the other and that is how much they think we have to spend. The net income is far less and the gross spend is far higher narrowing the margin.

We have also had spiralling running costs that were out of control. Add to that we have one of the highest players wages to turnover ratio, plus a dept of around £15M. The commercial side had underperformed for years and we have bought expensive players not suitable for our playing style or just plain poor. All this has been sanctioned by the previous board.

If the Americans are able turn this around, they can sell at a profit, without taking a dividend in the process.
1
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2024