| At the end of the day 21:45 - Mar 8 with 6580 views | swan65split |
When it's all said and done,...............a little bit of investment,..............then again we have a hedge fund. |  | | |  |
| At the end of the day on 06:34 - Mar 9 with 741 views | jack247 |
| At the end of the day on 23:14 - Mar 8 by The_E20 |
We have had investment though.
In fact we spent more this season than we ever have at this level in our history. What you are saying is you “wanted even more”.
Every clubs supporters no doubt want even more. Unfortunately it is often unrealistic. |
That’s a very misleading stat though. We’ve never brought in £40odd million at this level in our history either.
Obviously we had to cut our cloth and move a lot of the higher earners out, but dressing up a minus £35m net spend as investment is a little fallacious. |  | | |
| At the end of the day on 06:42 - Mar 9 with 734 views | The_E20 |
It’s not even the least bit misleading. We are a club in a deficit, it would have been understandable if we invested zero into the playing staff, instead we broke our record of spending at this level.
The fact we had to sell £40m of players to service a massive black hole is completely irrelevant unless you are implying we should have become insolvent in order to spend even more?
They don’t even belong in the same sentence as to how irrelevant they are to each other. Some fair questions were asked regarding the OP wanting even more investment, questions that clearly can’t be answered. There is a reason for that.
On one hand people blame the board for over-stretching in order to survive yet again in the PL then on the other they complain the club isn’t being put in danger in order to invest even more.
It’s attidudes like that we need to protect this club from, which is ironic considering the view of most of those that make the most noise. |  | | |
| At the end of the day on 07:25 - Mar 9 with 704 views | jack247 |
| At the end of the day on 06:42 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
It’s not even the least bit misleading. We are a club in a deficit, it would have been understandable if we invested zero into the playing staff, instead we broke our record of spending at this level.
The fact we had to sell £40m of players to service a massive black hole is completely irrelevant unless you are implying we should have become insolvent in order to spend even more?
They don’t even belong in the same sentence as to how irrelevant they are to each other. Some fair questions were asked regarding the OP wanting even more investment, questions that clearly can’t be answered. There is a reason for that.
On one hand people blame the board for over-stretching in order to survive yet again in the PL then on the other they complain the club isn’t being put in danger in order to invest even more.
It’s attidudes like that we need to protect this club from, which is ironic considering the view of most of those that make the most noise. |
I’m not denying for a second that we needed to get rid of those players or raise those funds. Mismanagement over the last couple of seasons made it an absolute necessity.
I’m simply stating that if you sell £40m worth of players and sign £5m worth of players, it’s hard to swallow as record investment.
If for arguments sake (though it’s far from beyond the realms of possibilitiy) we sell Rodon, James and McBurnie this summer and bring in another Declan John, would you class that as a summer we have invested in the playing staff?
Cue Darran with another helpful comment.
Edit - speaking personally, but I think it goes for a lot of others on here, I don’t blame them for spending the money they did in the PL, I blame them for spending it on Bony, Clucas, Borja, Tammy and Mesa.
The only time I’d question how much they were spending was when they spunked £20m on Ayew, when we were odds on to go down at the time, knowing how much damage that would do to the club if we were relegated. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 7:32]
| | | |
| At the end of the day on 08:18 - Mar 9 with 663 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 07:25 - Mar 9 by jack247 |
I’m not denying for a second that we needed to get rid of those players or raise those funds. Mismanagement over the last couple of seasons made it an absolute necessity.
I’m simply stating that if you sell £40m worth of players and sign £5m worth of players, it’s hard to swallow as record investment.
If for arguments sake (though it’s far from beyond the realms of possibilitiy) we sell Rodon, James and McBurnie this summer and bring in another Declan John, would you class that as a summer we have invested in the playing staff?
Cue Darran with another helpful comment.
Edit - speaking personally, but I think it goes for a lot of others on here, I don’t blame them for spending the money they did in the PL, I blame them for spending it on Bony, Clucas, Borja, Tammy and Mesa.
The only time I’d question how much they were spending was when they spunked £20m on Ayew, when we were odds on to go down at the time, knowing how much damage that would do to the club if we were relegated. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 7:32]
|
Hard to swallow or not, it’s just the facts. The £40m is an irrelevance. It would only be hard to swallow if you thought that £40m was surplus, but I trust being the sensible poster you are you would not even claim that for a second. So how much money we had to raise to service a debt we had has no baring on anything with regards to our investment, that money was never ours - it was earmarked to stop the club going under. So to spend €7-8 million is not something I ever expected to see us do at this level, especially with such a financial deficit.
As for your question, if we had to sell Rodon, James and McBurnie to service huge debt then I would regard it as us investing 200k in the playing staff or whatever it is your Declan John character costs. I don’t understand how you would even attempt to say otherwise. To suggest so implies a choice, we had no choice - no realistic choice anyway.
We can always go back and moan about signings that didn’t come off in the PL, it’s facetious tnhough as there was also an awful lot that did. What we are discussing is the here and now and what the owners have invested is more than expected, or that should be reasonably expected given the circumstances. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 8:24]
| | | |
| At the end of the day on 08:56 - Mar 9 with 635 views | sg1912 |
| At the end of the day on 23:14 - Mar 8 by The_E20 |
We have had investment though.
In fact we spent more this season than we ever have at this level in our history. What you are saying is you “wanted even more”.
Every clubs supporters no doubt want even more. Unfortunately it is often unrealistic. |
We have a lot more money since we were last at this level and you're forgetting the inflation of player prices - which probably means we have spent less in reality. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 08:59 - Mar 9 with 630 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 08:56 - Mar 9 by sg1912 |
We have a lot more money since we were last at this level and you're forgetting the inflation of player prices - which probably means we have spent less in reality. |
No we don’t. In fact we have a lot less.
Last time we were here we pretty much broke even and spent around £1.5m max. This time I’m sure we will post record breaking losses and yet have spent £7m.
Inflation or not, there is no way our spend this season equates to less than last time. Not even close. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 9:00]
| | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:00 - Mar 9 with 627 views | sg1912 |
| At the end of the day on 08:18 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
Hard to swallow or not, it’s just the facts. The £40m is an irrelevance. It would only be hard to swallow if you thought that £40m was surplus, but I trust being the sensible poster you are you would not even claim that for a second. So how much money we had to raise to service a debt we had has no baring on anything with regards to our investment, that money was never ours - it was earmarked to stop the club going under. So to spend €7-8 million is not something I ever expected to see us do at this level, especially with such a financial deficit.
As for your question, if we had to sell Rodon, James and McBurnie to service huge debt then I would regard it as us investing 200k in the playing staff or whatever it is your Declan John character costs. I don’t understand how you would even attempt to say otherwise. To suggest so implies a choice, we had no choice - no realistic choice anyway.
We can always go back and moan about signings that didn’t come off in the PL, it’s facetious tnhough as there was also an awful lot that did. What we are discussing is the here and now and what the owners have invested is more than expected, or that should be reasonably expected given the circumstances. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 8:24]
|
Are you telling us it's a coincidence that the 'black hole' is near enough identical to what the Americans have invested into the club | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:03 - Mar 9 with 623 views | sg1912 |
| At the end of the day on 08:59 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
No we don’t. In fact we have a lot less.
Last time we were here we pretty much broke even and spent around £1.5m max. This time I’m sure we will post record breaking losses and yet have spent £7m.
Inflation or not, there is no way our spend this season equates to less than last time. Not even close. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 9:00]
|
Record breaking losses over 1 year does not equate to losses over a 7-8 year period, I feel like you're being deliberately disingenuous.. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| At the end of the day on 09:10 - Mar 9 with 616 views | magicdaps10 |
| At the end of the day on 23:14 - Mar 8 by The_E20 |
We have had investment though.
In fact we spent more this season than we ever have at this level in our history. What you are saying is you “wanted even more”.
Every clubs supporters no doubt want even more. Unfortunately it is often unrealistic. |
Can you prove this aside from you just typing it?
Genuine question that I would be interested to see your point actually proven with something solid. |  |
| |
| At the end of the day on 09:15 - Mar 9 with 608 views | magicdaps10 |
| At the end of the day on 23:58 - Mar 8 by Elmo |
If the OP was the owner: how much would you invest, in what areas and what return would you expect on that investment ? |
This summer, we lose Narsingh, Olsson and Routledge. We aim to get some dough for our out on loan guys.
These lads have not really made a dent in the squad this season and we aim to tie more of our youngsters down for longer, get our scouting network to get a couple of young strikers and an experienced cm player.
Investment needs to be looked at what a successful team can achieve rather than what we can flip a new player for down the line. | |
| |
| At the end of the day on 09:18 - Mar 9 with 605 views | magicdaps10 |
| At the end of the day on 08:59 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
No we don’t. In fact we have a lot less.
Last time we were here we pretty much broke even and spent around £1.5m max. This time I’m sure we will post record breaking losses and yet have spent £7m.
Inflation or not, there is no way our spend this season equates to less than last time. Not even close. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 9:00]
|
Our assets are a lot higher than they were last time.
Infact, take that into consideration and my opinion would be that we are very much on a par. | |
| |
| At the end of the day on 09:20 - Mar 9 with 600 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 09:00 - Mar 9 by sg1912 |
Are you telling us it's a coincidence that the 'black hole' is near enough identical to what the Americans have invested into the club |
“The Americans” are a consortium essentially. Levien and Kaplan are just 2 shareholders. The black hole is essentially the difference between the income of the Pl club and a Championship club - assuming of course we were running at an even keel in the Premier League. There is nothing coincidental about TV income going down by £40m+... It’s just basic mathematics. | | | |
| At the end of the day (n/t) (n/t) on 09:21 - Mar 9 with 596 views | swan65split |
| At the end of the day (n/t) (n/t) on 00:45 - Mar 9 by Elmo |
You have no substance. Yet another twp bully boy, hired to post propaganda.
Next time before posting such threads, get some clearer instructions so you can front up to simple questions. |
No substance twp? 
Made my Day this, someone who sees themselves above anyone else on here, actually thinks someone has hired stupid old Moi to post propaganda
if anyone who is twp it is you to believe that , never mind state it ,
in similar words used by your egotistical mate , innocent until proved guilty.
Twp Elmo, has a nice ring about it.
Go and feed your self inflated ego, along with the other one elsewhere. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:22 - Mar 9 with 592 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 09:10 - Mar 9 by magicdaps10 |
Can you prove this aside from you just typing it?
Genuine question that I would be interested to see your point actually proven with something solid. |
You want me to prove it without typing it?
Ok, look at how much we spent on transfer fees this season and then look how much we spent on transfer fees last time we were here. You can then work it out and I won’t have to type it. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:26 - Mar 9 with 585 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 09:03 - Mar 9 by sg1912 |
Record breaking losses over 1 year does not equate to losses over a 7-8 year period, I feel like you're being deliberately disingenuous.. |
I have no idea what you are talking about.
You said we have more money this time round. No we don’t. Can you show me how we have more money to spend (liquid, spendable non owed, surplus cash).
There is nothing disingenuous about it, we are skint. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:33 - Mar 9 with 571 views | sg1912 |
| At the end of the day on 09:26 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
I have no idea what you are talking about.
You said we have more money this time round. No we don’t. Can you show me how we have more money to spend (liquid, spendable non owed, surplus cash).
There is nothing disingenuous about it, we are skint. |
We have made substantial profits since our time in the Premier League, you do not need to be an accountant to understand that money has been siphoned from our club to investors and previous owners...
It’s common knowledge that we use sub contracts as a form of payment to board members, the likes of MM and LD has it down to a fine art, if two bit businessesmen can find loopholes.. I’m sure international businessmen like the Americans can too. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:36 - Mar 9 with 565 views | clloy2 |
| At the end of the day on 21:56 - Mar 8 by Brynmill_Jack |
Will never happen though. Jenkins lied through his f*cking teeth to all of us |
Let's do a comparison between Norwich and Swansea, after all there must be some similarities.
Norwich- wealthy local owner continues to back team through thick and thin.
Swansea - Wealthy local owners shaft club by selling to a hedge fund- enough said !!! | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:38 - Mar 9 with 560 views | clloy2 |
| At the end of the day on 23:12 - Mar 8 by QJumpingJack |
Jenkins has now been gone over a month.
Why has he not been replaced? |
Why does anyone expect him to be replaced.
A DOF's prime function is to concentrate on ALL matters related to football within the club. Our owners have no interest in football !!! | | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:39 - Mar 9 with 558 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 09:33 - Mar 9 by sg1912 |
We have made substantial profits since our time in the Premier League, you do not need to be an accountant to understand that money has been siphoned from our club to investors and previous owners...
It’s common knowledge that we use sub contracts as a form of payment to board members, the likes of MM and LD has it down to a fine art, if two bit businessesmen can find loopholes.. I’m sure international businessmen like the Americans can too. |
No we haven’t.
The figures since we got to the PL largely was a book balancing exercise. For example we posted a £13.4m profit in 2017 which offset a £14.6 loss the year before. So on and so forth.
What you are talking about regards to contracts is payments for services. So for example we paid MM’s company as it was the cheapest in the business tender process, the same goes for Dineen and Cooze.
If you are to bring a case against syphoning monies then you would need to find payments where services have not then been provided. Otherwise all your complaining about is cheap labour, which is odd considering that’s exactly what we as a club want. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 9:43]
| | | |
| At the end of the day on 09:43 - Mar 9 with 553 views | magicdaps10 |
| At the end of the day on 09:22 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
You want me to prove it without typing it?
Ok, look at how much we spent on transfer fees this season and then look how much we spent on transfer fees last time we were here. You can then work it out and I won’t have to type it. |
Got a link to actually back that claim up?
No offence E20 but like many on here, I cant actually take your opinion or view as fact and would like you to show actual proof. | |
| |
| At the end of the day on 09:46 - Mar 9 with 546 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 09:43 - Mar 9 by magicdaps10 |
Got a link to actually back that claim up?
No offence E20 but like many on here, I cant actually take your opinion or view as fact and would like you to show actual proof. |
You want me to show you a link to the undisputable fact that we spent more this season than any other Championship season... or you won’t believe it?
That shows the depth of your Swansea City knowledge then doesn’t it. I won’t be providing you any links, it is something as a fan, you should know. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 10:01 - Mar 9 with 518 views | sg1912 |
| At the end of the day on 09:39 - Mar 9 by The_E20 |
No we haven’t.
The figures since we got to the PL largely was a book balancing exercise. For example we posted a £13.4m profit in 2017 which offset a £14.6 loss the year before. So on and so forth.
What you are talking about regards to contracts is payments for services. So for example we paid MM’s company as it was the cheapest in the business tender process, the same goes for Dineen and Cooze.
If you are to bring a case against syphoning monies then you would need to find payments where services have not then been provided. Otherwise all your complaining about is cheap labour, which is odd considering that’s exactly what we as a club want. [Post edited 9 Mar 2019 9:43]
|
How have you drawn the conclusion that they offered the cheapest tender?
We only made a loss in 1 season, you’re deliberately picking certain timeframes to justify your argument, | | | |
| At the end of the day on 10:02 - Mar 9 with 515 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 09:36 - Mar 9 by clloy2 |
Let's do a comparison between Norwich and Swansea, after all there must be some similarities.
Norwich- wealthy local owner continues to back team through thick and thin.
Swansea - Wealthy local owners shaft club by selling to a hedge fund- enough said !!! |
It’s probably best to compare once they sell it.
You can guarantee Norwich won’t be sold to another group of local wealthy owners who will “back it” through thick and thin. They will be sold to an individual or group that want to profit from it.
The fact fans still can’t grasp this is gobsmacking. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 10:08 - Mar 9 with 504 views | The_E20 |
| At the end of the day on 10:01 - Mar 9 by sg1912 |
How have you drawn the conclusion that they offered the cheapest tender?
We only made a loss in 1 season, you’re deliberately picking certain timeframes to justify your argument, |
That’s what tender is. It’s a blind bidding process where the best deal offered to the club gets the job - our shareholders were able to offer the services cheaper than the competitors. It’s a positive not a negative.
I am not picking and choosing anything, I don’t have access to all the figures. But know them roughly and with this years certsin massive loss will hopefully offset. It would probably help the discussion if you stopped accusing me of things.
Now it seems you are informed of the figures, so could you post them (including the loss incurred as a result of initial promotion) and we can go from there. | | | |
| At the end of the day on 10:08 - Mar 9 with 503 views | mahoss |
| At the end of the day on 09:36 - Mar 9 by clloy2 |
Let's do a comparison between Norwich and Swansea, after all there must be some similarities.
Norwich- wealthy local owner continues to back team through thick and thin.
Swansea - Wealthy local owners shaft club by selling to a hedge fund- enough said !!! |
Also West Brom and Stoke were relegated,both about the same size as us,why haven't they lost all their best players ?
The bottom line is,we can speculate about figures all day long but you have to ask why 27 anonymous people from the US would invest in a Welsh football club,for the love of Swansea ?,I don't think so..........
It doesn't look very good does it ?,it's very hard to defend. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
