| Transfer window - time running out 11:52 - Jan 28 with 1741 views | Chief |
I'd left it a while because there was still ample time.
But we're now at the Thursday before the window shuts on Monday and so far we've brought in 2 loans and a free transfer back up keeper while losing 3 loans&letting some of ours leave.
Are we done? Is Cooper happy?
Few weeks ago he said he wanted to replace the lost loans&more, also referencing some permanent signings. There was talk of a 'big' off the radar signing that i assume just turned out to be Hourihane that was a loan& far from secret.
I'll probably get pelters again but surely with the Rodon sale&the loans from the Americans there should be money to invest in the squad at this opportune time!?
|  |
| |  |
| Transfer window - time running out on 13:31 - Jan 28 with 1026 views | onehunglow |
Why should you get pelter.
We have received millions and it seems to have vanished
AGAIN.
People should be asking the Owners/Chairman those questions |  |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 13:47 - Jan 28 with 1017 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 13:31 - Jan 28 by onehunglow |
Why should you get pelter.
We have received millions and it seems to have vanished
AGAIN.
People should be asking the Owners/Chairman those questions |
Well I'm not jumping to any conclusions as to where the money we should probably has vanished to, if indeed it has at all.
We have it seems bid some money for at least one player this window, so it seems it is available.
So is it a case that we can't identify players needed, they aren't for sale or we unwilling to pay what clubs want for them? | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:04 - Jan 28 with 995 views | onehunglow |
| Transfer window - time running out on 13:47 - Jan 28 by Chief |
Well I'm not jumping to any conclusions as to where the money we should probably has vanished to, if indeed it has at all.
We have it seems bid some money for at least one player this window, so it seems it is available.
So is it a case that we can't identify players needed, they aren't for sale or we unwilling to pay what clubs want for them? |
We have received money ,big money.
NOW,bearing in mind we have a Swans Trust to oversee and protect the club,are they not able to ascertain where the proceeds of James and Rodon go or are we to imply accept it's nothing to do with us.
Looking at some of the posters,we seen to have legal lumineries,financial experts ,and CEOs all over the place yet we know very little about what goes on,the very thing the Trust was supposed to do | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:11 - Jan 28 with 994 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 13:31 - Jan 28 by onehunglow |
Why should you get pelter.
We have received millions and it seems to have vanished
AGAIN.
People should be asking the Owners/Chairman those questions |
How many times do you have to be told regarding finances? You seem to make the same point every week.
If I run a company with £15m of overheads to continue trading that year without going bust. I sold an asset worth £10m to go some way to servicing that... it means I still can’t spend anything.
Receiving money that is owed elsewhere is not really your money. Nothing has disappeared, it has been redirected or earmarked for the costs of running the club. £4m of which is going to Ayew alone, every year to give one such example.
To put that into context, from memory, the last time we were in the Championship, that was about 30% of our total wage bill. That was pre Covid where we were getting match day revenue. [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 14:20]
|  |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:14 - Jan 28 with 985 views | Badlands |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:04 - Jan 28 by onehunglow |
We have received money ,big money.
NOW,bearing in mind we have a Swans Trust to oversee and protect the club,are they not able to ascertain where the proceeds of James and Rodon go or are we to imply accept it's nothing to do with us.
Looking at some of the posters,we seen to have legal lumineries,financial experts ,and CEOs all over the place yet we know very little about what goes on,the very thing the Trust was supposed to do |
We were in debt and forecasting increased debt, there has been no additional money coming into the club from (non ST holders), concours sales, corporate use of the Liberty and reduced merchandise.
Other than furloughed staff club expenses will have remained pretty the same as in a normal season except for extra H&S requirements and refunds to ST holders who took a rebate.
The club has also drastically reduced the cost of STs for next season.
Guess what, if you have to spend £200 but get paid £100 and have another £50 for selling Aunty Mary's necklace you are still £50 out of pocket - you don't get to keep using the £50. |  |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:15 - Jan 28 with 982 views | onehunglow |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:14 - Jan 28 by Badlands |
We were in debt and forecasting increased debt, there has been no additional money coming into the club from (non ST holders), concours sales, corporate use of the Liberty and reduced merchandise.
Other than furloughed staff club expenses will have remained pretty the same as in a normal season except for extra H&S requirements and refunds to ST holders who took a rebate.
The club has also drastically reduced the cost of STs for next season.
Guess what, if you have to spend £200 but get paid £100 and have another £50 for selling Aunty Mary's necklace you are still £50 out of pocket - you don't get to keep using the £50. |
Thank you for the reply | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:17 - Jan 28 with 983 views | Joe_bradshaw |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:04 - Jan 28 by onehunglow |
We have received money ,big money.
NOW,bearing in mind we have a Swans Trust to oversee and protect the club,are they not able to ascertain where the proceeds of James and Rodon go or are we to imply accept it's nothing to do with us.
Looking at some of the posters,we seen to have legal lumineries,financial experts ,and CEOs all over the place yet we know very little about what goes on,the very thing the Trust was supposed to do |
We have to sell players like Rodon and James to stand still because we are hemorrhaging money every week. |  |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:24 - Jan 28 with 969 views | Chief |
Well this thread wasn't about where previous money has gone over the past few years.
However, judging by the responses, is it the consensus despite us selling Rodon (and others but let's confine it to the short term) and receiving loaned money from the shareholders, that once again, the cupboard is bare? And there is basically no money to invest in the squad in this window? [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 14:25]
| |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:33 - Jan 28 with 956 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:24 - Jan 28 by Chief |
Well this thread wasn't about where previous money has gone over the past few years.
However, judging by the responses, is it the consensus despite us selling Rodon (and others but let's confine it to the short term) and receiving loaned money from the shareholders, that once again, the cupboard is bare? And there is basically no money to invest in the squad in this window? [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 14:25]
|
It’s the last year of our parachute payments. Which means next season we are going to have to find that from somewhere else to keep the club going. It can either mean selling more players, or earmarking some excess money this year to ease the burden next year. So it’s not really about how much cash we have, but how much is sensible for us to spend.
My guess would be it wouldn’t be seen as sensible to spend much, if any of it until we are self sufficient and are sustainable without sales and parachute payments. Important to note also that free transfers and loans aren’t free, there are payments involved in all of them. Whether it is signing on fees, wages, agent fees or loan fees, these are all something these deals will involve - even all of the above.
So while it may not feel like we are spending because we aren’t bringing in high price tag players, we are still spending to strengthen the team. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:43 - Jan 28 with 949 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:33 - Jan 28 by Dr_Parnassus |
It’s the last year of our parachute payments. Which means next season we are going to have to find that from somewhere else to keep the club going. It can either mean selling more players, or earmarking some excess money this year to ease the burden next year. So it’s not really about how much cash we have, but how much is sensible for us to spend.
My guess would be it wouldn’t be seen as sensible to spend much, if any of it until we are self sufficient and are sustainable without sales and parachute payments. Important to note also that free transfers and loans aren’t free, there are payments involved in all of them. Whether it is signing on fees, wages, agent fees or loan fees, these are all something these deals will involve - even all of the above.
So while it may not feel like we are spending because we aren’t bringing in high price tag players, we are still spending to strengthen the team. |
Yes of course frees and loans are never actually free. But the money spent is completely dwarfed by money the club has received from. Especially when you consider the club should and surely would have budgeted for MGW, Palmer, Gyorkeres to be here all season&we've got some others out. Morris is apparently very cheap&id be amazed if Hamer is on much. So this window, we should be positive so far. Is that a stretch?
Im just going off Winter, he stated back in the Autumn that we had no debt, so we were essentially self sufficient then. And have since had an cash injection. A considerable one.
So i disagree we are essentially 'spending' or have so far this window 'spent' to make up for loans going back. We're not really strengthened at all. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:47 - Jan 28 with 942 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:14 - Jan 28 by Badlands |
We were in debt and forecasting increased debt, there has been no additional money coming into the club from (non ST holders), concours sales, corporate use of the Liberty and reduced merchandise.
Other than furloughed staff club expenses will have remained pretty the same as in a normal season except for extra H&S requirements and refunds to ST holders who took a rebate.
The club has also drastically reduced the cost of STs for next season.
Guess what, if you have to spend £200 but get paid £100 and have another £50 for selling Aunty Mary's necklace you are still £50 out of pocket - you don't get to keep using the £50. |
We weren't in debt according to our CE. There has been additional money coming into the club from player sales and loans. Non ST can and have been buying streams. We've already been receiving cup prize money.
So your neckless analogy doesn't apply. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:53 - Jan 28 with 934 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:43 - Jan 28 by Chief |
Yes of course frees and loans are never actually free. But the money spent is completely dwarfed by money the club has received from. Especially when you consider the club should and surely would have budgeted for MGW, Palmer, Gyorkeres to be here all season&we've got some others out. Morris is apparently very cheap&id be amazed if Hamer is on much. So this window, we should be positive so far. Is that a stretch?
Im just going off Winter, he stated back in the Autumn that we had no debt, so we were essentially self sufficient then. And have since had an cash injection. A considerable one.
So i disagree we are essentially 'spending' or have so far this window 'spent' to make up for loans going back. We're not really strengthened at all. |
We may not have debt.
Put it this way. If your rent was £1000 a month and your income took a hit and only earned £500 a month after paying bills and food etc.
You then sold a car for £6000 which covers the yearly shortfall and what you will owe.
You are now in a position where you have £6000 sat in the bank. You have no debt... yet that money isn’t technically yours. As soon as you spend £1, it is guaranteeing debt in the future as you can no longer afford to see out the year without defaulting on a payment.
It’s the same situation here. Selling Rodon for £11m, even though we have no debt currently, doesn’t mean we can spend that money because as soon as we do then it will likely be guaranteeing debt in the future. Our projected yearly outgoings will be outstripping our income.
It’s important you make the distinction between being not on debt (not CURRENTLY owing anything) and having yearly overheads that you will owe down the line. Being currently not in debt doesn’t mean you can afford to pay future debts. Hence why any lump sums received that cover the projected years outgoing cannot be spent on anything else. [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 15:00]
| |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:05 - Jan 28 with 903 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:53 - Jan 28 by Dr_Parnassus |
We may not have debt.
Put it this way. If your rent was £1000 a month and your income took a hit and only earned £500 a month after paying bills and food etc.
You then sold a car for £6000 which covers the yearly shortfall and what you will owe.
You are now in a position where you have £6000 sat in the bank. You have no debt... yet that money isn’t technically yours. As soon as you spend £1, it is guaranteeing debt in the future as you can no longer afford to see out the year without defaulting on a payment.
It’s the same situation here. Selling Rodon for £11m, even though we have no debt currently, doesn’t mean we can spend that money because as soon as we do then it will likely be guaranteeing debt in the future. Our projected yearly outgoings will be outstripping our income.
It’s important you make the distinction between being not on debt (not CURRENTLY owing anything) and having yearly overheads that you will owe down the line. Being currently not in debt doesn’t mean you can afford to pay future debts. Hence why any lump sums received that cover the projected years outgoing cannot be spent on anything else. [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 15:00]
|
Well your scenario there is on the basis of never receiving more income. Which we know for a fact won't be the case, even if we aren't promoted.
And i wasn't advocating spending all proceeds, we haven't even invested a 20th maybe of what we received / are receiving.
And yes i agree, like you say if we buy a player, chances are we won't be paying up front, it will be paid over time. Plus we should be receiving installments from numerous sales prior to this season. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:10 - Jan 28 with 897 views | nantywatcher |
| Transfer window - time running out on 14:53 - Jan 28 by Dr_Parnassus |
We may not have debt.
Put it this way. If your rent was £1000 a month and your income took a hit and only earned £500 a month after paying bills and food etc.
You then sold a car for £6000 which covers the yearly shortfall and what you will owe.
You are now in a position where you have £6000 sat in the bank. You have no debt... yet that money isn’t technically yours. As soon as you spend £1, it is guaranteeing debt in the future as you can no longer afford to see out the year without defaulting on a payment.
It’s the same situation here. Selling Rodon for £11m, even though we have no debt currently, doesn’t mean we can spend that money because as soon as we do then it will likely be guaranteeing debt in the future. Our projected yearly outgoings will be outstripping our income.
It’s important you make the distinction between being not on debt (not CURRENTLY owing anything) and having yearly overheads that you will owe down the line. Being currently not in debt doesn’t mean you can afford to pay future debts. Hence why any lump sums received that cover the projected years outgoing cannot be spent on anything else. [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 15:00]
|
"You then sold a car for £6000 which covers what you will owe" - OVER THE NEXT 12 MONTHS
You make your point Dr P.
Is this how posters on here live their lives? With no thought to the future? As a club we need to forward plan at least 12 months in advance, which, with Covid makes that planning very problematical. Money that lies in the bank a/c today WILL be spent tomorrow just keeping the boat afloat.
Some posters on here sound like spoilt brats going mental because they didn't get a brand new go-kart for Christmas. Man up! | | | |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:16 - Jan 28 with 889 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:05 - Jan 28 by Chief |
Well your scenario there is on the basis of never receiving more income. Which we know for a fact won't be the case, even if we aren't promoted.
And i wasn't advocating spending all proceeds, we haven't even invested a 20th maybe of what we received / are receiving.
And yes i agree, like you say if we buy a player, chances are we won't be paying up front, it will be paid over time. Plus we should be receiving installments from numerous sales prior to this season. |
Huh? I’m not with you at all. What do you mean you know the club will be getting more income?
All our income will be known in advance and we will have planned exactly how much is needed to be raised to see out the season, and possibly even forecast for next. The only income we won’t know exactly is transfer fees, but we will try and raise at least what we need to service our overheads in a forced sale.
Again, if you sold your car for £6000 (the exact amount you would be short by to see out your yearly rental contract), you couldn’t spent a single penny of it. So if we have calculated we will at some point in the near future owe the money we raised from the player sales then we also can’t spend any of it. Be that a 20th or a 100th of it.
We are spending what we think we can afford. If we are paying Hamer 5k a week over 2 years, that’s the best part of 500k + signing on fee plus agents fee. You could be looking at a 600k investment into Hamer who may not ever play. CH is apparently on 30k a week, 750k investment into him, agents fee and loan fee to Villa may be another 500k.
Just those two players alone may cost the club £1.5m - £2m. Maybe more. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:16 - Jan 28 with 888 views | Chief |
So basically then,
The consensus is that we yet again have no money to spend this window? | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:25 - Jan 28 with 875 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:16 - Jan 28 by Chief |
So basically then,
The consensus is that we yet again have no money to spend this window? |
We don’t know the finances. But it’s incredibly unlikely given the fact that our income is so small, especially with Covid.
On another thread I mentioned that last time we were in this position, our whole salary bill was £11m p/a and we were barely breaking even.
Ayew is on £4m p/a just by himself this year and we are getting next to nothing in terms of match day revenue. That’s pretty startling. That’s without mentioning the likes of Naughton, Roberts etc who will still be on somewhat of a PL salary.
I would guess £2m/£3m would have been all there was in the kitty this Jan. Most of which will have gone on BH and CH, there may be room for one more loan. But only if it’s the right player otherwise we will just be chucking much needed money away. We don’t want another Gyokeres. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:43 - Jan 28 with 851 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:25 - Jan 28 by Dr_Parnassus |
We don’t know the finances. But it’s incredibly unlikely given the fact that our income is so small, especially with Covid.
On another thread I mentioned that last time we were in this position, our whole salary bill was £11m p/a and we were barely breaking even.
Ayew is on £4m p/a just by himself this year and we are getting next to nothing in terms of match day revenue. That’s pretty startling. That’s without mentioning the likes of Naughton, Roberts etc who will still be on somewhat of a PL salary.
I would guess £2m/£3m would have been all there was in the kitty this Jan. Most of which will have gone on BH and CH, there may be room for one more loan. But only if it’s the right player otherwise we will just be chucking much needed money away. We don’t want another Gyokeres. |
Think it's being overplayed slightly to be honest. While we've undoubtedly taken a hit, considering we are still receiving TV money, parachute payments, player sale installments, sponsorship. We never had vast hospitality and got rid of the vast majority of our prem earners unlike other clubs. Plus if course we have this loan.
Ayew is by far the biggest outlay no doubt. Naughton however can't be on a lot, he wouldn't have been re-signed on anything like his prem wage. Same for Routledge.
CH / BH shouldn't have cut into any transfer budget considering we're longer paying wages / loan fees for Palmer, Gyorkeres and most notably MGW.
Agree with your last comment though. Which was my immediate thought as to maybe why we have spent virtually nothing. We've had our fair share of poor transfer buys. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:57 - Jan 28 with 838 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:43 - Jan 28 by Chief |
Think it's being overplayed slightly to be honest. While we've undoubtedly taken a hit, considering we are still receiving TV money, parachute payments, player sale installments, sponsorship. We never had vast hospitality and got rid of the vast majority of our prem earners unlike other clubs. Plus if course we have this loan.
Ayew is by far the biggest outlay no doubt. Naughton however can't be on a lot, he wouldn't have been re-signed on anything like his prem wage. Same for Routledge.
CH / BH shouldn't have cut into any transfer budget considering we're longer paying wages / loan fees for Palmer, Gyorkeres and most notably MGW.
Agree with your last comment though. Which was my immediate thought as to maybe why we have spent virtually nothing. We've had our fair share of poor transfer buys. |
It’s not being overplayed at all, under played if anything.
Receiving TV money and parachute payments is why we are able to keep the likes of Naughton and Ayew here and not have them as part of the fire sales. You are talking as if they are surplus or some sort of unaccounted for extra. Yes we are receiving amortised payments for former sales, also paying amortised payments for former purchases. Wouldn’t surprise me if we are still paying for Bony and Ayew.
Loan fees don’t get refunded, the fee is agreed and the contract signed. In MGW’s case there may have been some sort of rebate added if Wolves call him back, but the likes of Gyokeres wouldn’t have hit the required minutes and we would have forfeited any fee paid up front.
So CH and BH would be fresh expenditure. Salary may have been freed up elsewhere but new payments to club, agent and player in lump fees are most certainly new money that would need to be found. So, I disagree regarding spent virtually nothing. Loans can be very expensive indeed, and we have had a tonne of them. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:16 - Jan 28 with 805 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 15:57 - Jan 28 by Dr_Parnassus |
It’s not being overplayed at all, under played if anything.
Receiving TV money and parachute payments is why we are able to keep the likes of Naughton and Ayew here and not have them as part of the fire sales. You are talking as if they are surplus or some sort of unaccounted for extra. Yes we are receiving amortised payments for former sales, also paying amortised payments for former purchases. Wouldn’t surprise me if we are still paying for Bony and Ayew.
Loan fees don’t get refunded, the fee is agreed and the contract signed. In MGW’s case there may have been some sort of rebate added if Wolves call him back, but the likes of Gyokeres wouldn’t have hit the required minutes and we would have forfeited any fee paid up front.
So CH and BH would be fresh expenditure. Salary may have been freed up elsewhere but new payments to club, agent and player in lump fees are most certainly new money that would need to be found. So, I disagree regarding spent virtually nothing. Loans can be very expensive indeed, and we have had a tonne of them. |
Well didn't we sign those two in lieu of still being owed fees for them? So i doubt these years later we're still paying for them or anyone else from our prem years. As i say i doubt Naughton is a high earner anymore.
There would definitely either be a rebate for the loans being recalled or we'd only have paid up until January, then due another installment if they'd stayed on. They didn't so we've spent that excess / rebate on others.
Again, just like frees i agree loans aren't free, but are obviously still dwarfed by what has been brought in. Renato Sanches these loans are not. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:24 - Jan 28 with 787 views | Joe_bradshaw |
Even the wealthiest clubs are being incredibly careful in this transfer window. Only 4 permanent signings have been made by Premier League clubs so far and only one of them is likely to be a first team regular.
Fear of the unknown going forward due to COVID and to some extent Brexit is having a massive impact. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:27 - Jan 28 with 780 views | Chief |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:24 - Jan 28 by Joe_bradshaw |
Even the wealthiest clubs are being incredibly careful in this transfer window. Only 4 permanent signings have been made by Premier League clubs so far and only one of them is likely to be a first team regular.
Fear of the unknown going forward due to COVID and to some extent Brexit is having a massive impact. |
Yes absolutely and im a big advocate of that. Backed not signing Wilson, Watters etc. | |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:28 - Jan 28 with 779 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:16 - Jan 28 by Chief |
Well didn't we sign those two in lieu of still being owed fees for them? So i doubt these years later we're still paying for them or anyone else from our prem years. As i say i doubt Naughton is a high earner anymore.
There would definitely either be a rebate for the loans being recalled or we'd only have paid up until January, then due another installment if they'd stayed on. They didn't so we've spent that excess / rebate on others.
Again, just like frees i agree loans aren't free, but are obviously still dwarfed by what has been brought in. Renato Sanches these loans are not. |
We weren’t owed £36m for them, no. Enough to cover the first instalment one would imagine which would have helped with cashflow. Naughton is definitely a high earner. Again, last time we were here we broke even on an £11m salary. We are probably now at more than double that and our match day income, ticket sales and sponsorship massively down.
The rebate on MGW would pale into insignificance when it comes to the loan of CH and the fees associated with it, that’s without touching the BH or JM deal. If we paid 250k for MGW then that’s 125k of a near £2m investment. There is no way we would be getting any rebate from Palmer or Gyokeres, we didn’t play them.
It doesn’t matter that what we have spent has been dwarfed by what we have received, because what we have received is due to what is going out. Again the car and rent scenario, we cannot spend what we will owe. [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 16:33]
| |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:34 - Jan 28 with 764 views | magicdaps10 |
Why has this thread been derailed from its original point!?
Keith.... Sort this Dr P clown out will you? |  |
| |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:36 - Jan 28 with 760 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Transfer window - time running out on 16:34 - Jan 28 by magicdaps10 |
Why has this thread been derailed from its original point!?
Keith.... Sort this Dr P clown out will you? |
Which part has upset you?
The original point made by the OP is that we should have money to spend after the Rodon sale, the discussion since has been why we probably don’t.
I know it’s hard for you to follow most things but please try for the sake of everyone else.
Ta. [Post edited 28 Jan 2021 16:39]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
