Paulton Red Posted April 8, 2015 Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 I know SL does, but doesn't FairPlay or whatever it's called constrain what he can spend on transfers and wages? Tbf I don't care if SL has bought success, isn't that what the big clubs do all the time? It's just that I don't see anything that suggests we are frigging the financial restrictions...or do we now have an official logistics partner? And if he has, much credit still needs to go to the staff and players...chucking money at a football team doesn't guarantee anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted April 8, 2015 Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 I know SL does, but doesn't FairPlay or whatever it's called constrain what he can spend on transfers and wages? Tbf I don't care if SL has bought success, isn't that what the big clubs do all the time? It's just that I don't see anything that suggests we are frigging the financial restrictions...or do we now have an official logistics partner? And if he has, much credit still needs to go to the staff and players...chucking money at a football team doesn't guarantee anything. This has been covered numerous times now, but yes we are as well within the finance rules as anyone. We have chosen to assemble a small squad of the highest quality and it has been money well spent. There have been lots of teams down here with player with numbers over 30 on their back and Barnsley had a sub wearing 41! If those clubs choose to get lots of mediocre players for the same money thats their choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulton Red Posted April 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 Thanks, sorry if been covered before, just couldn't see how we could be operating outside the rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter O Hanraha-hanrahan Posted April 8, 2015 Report Share Posted April 8, 2015 I know SL does, but doesn't FairPlay or whatever it's called constrain what he can spend on transfers and wages? Tbf I don't care if SL has bought success, isn't that what the big clubs do all the time? It's just that I don't see anything that suggests we are frigging the financial restrictions...or do we now have an official logistics partner? And if he has, much credit still needs to go to the staff and players...chucking money at a football team doesn't guarantee anything. Fans and managers of other clubs don't like to admit that we have been the best side in the division this season and Steve Lansdowns personal wealth is a handy excuse to use even though we are subject to the same FFP rules as everyone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 Fans and managers of other clubs don't like to admit that we have been the best side in the division this season and Steve Lansdowns personal wealth is a handy excuse to use even though we are subject to the same FFP rules as everyone else. SL was already a very rich man hen he became involved in the club. Under he's tutleledge the club has always had his financial support. Two things have happened that have made a huge difference when Steve Cotterill and then crucially Keith Burt were appointed. Previous managers didn't utilise or take full advantage of available "resources" despite having there availability. It's just a tad irritating that other managers, opposition fans, the press and ignorant TV radio/pundits mention the fact that City have a very wealthy major share owner when that's been the case for several years. Credit should go to Steve Cotterill and wheeler dealer Keith Burt who have both done a terrific job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 We've spent 200k net on transfer fees and our wage budget is well under 60% of our turnover Other teams are just jealous that's all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 As I've mentioned before, it's not just the spend on transfer fees and wages. We had a pre-season training camp in South Africa, got a brand new luxury coach for the first team to travel in and put the players up for extra nights on away trips. These are things that most other clubs in the division cannot or will not afford and they make a big difference. The annoying thing is that relative to some of the players we've paid for they're not that expensive and yet it's taken us this long to work out it's a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 SL was already a very rich man hen he became involved in the club. Under he's tutleledge the club has always had his financial support. Two things have happened that have made a huge difference when Steve Cotterill and then crucially Keith Burt were appointed. Previous managers didn't utilise or take full advantage of available "resources" despite having there availability. It's just a tad irritating that other managers, opposition fans, the press and ignorant TV radio/pundits mention the fact that City have a very wealthy major share owner when that's been the case for several years. Credit should go to Steve Cotterill and wheeler dealer Keith Burt who have both done a terrific job. This I think there is a misconception that we've spent a fortune this summer. We made some eye catching signings, all of which have come off - therefore we've spent a lot of money There is a difference to spending a fortune, and spending some money wisely. We have done the latter, and in a game or so, should reap our rewards It's really coming over as pure bitterness now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV Tom Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 I would suggest that we have received more than we spent in transfer fees with the selling of Baldock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 I would suggest that we have received more than we spent in transfer fees with the selling of Baldock we haven't we've spent 200k net on transfers it was in this seasons accounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
screech Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 The funny thing is if Swindon had sold their most valuable asset, like we did, they could have balanced the books, like we did, and bought other players to fill the squad, like we did. Baldocks fee paid for the vast majority of Freeman, Ayling, Little, Korey Smith and Agard. Never mind Swindon, you got the November League 1 title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redredrobin5 Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 That's what was published as a loss, not what we spent!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderbeans Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 The reduction of baldock's wages would have gone some way to covering two or three players wages as well. Definately a good sell in my eyes. Remove El abd off the wage bill and it would be another tick in the good column. Will be interesting to see the approach we take for recruitment in the summer and what tactics we use in the championship. I hope we stick rather than twist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grifty Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Tel Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 I would suggest that we have received more than we spent in transfer fees with the selling of Baldock we haven't we've spent 200k net on transfers it was in this seasons accounts Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the last set of published accounts for the year to May 2014. This would have been before the summer signings and the sale of Sam Baldock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bar BS3 Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 we haven't we've spent 200k net on transfers it was in this seasons accounts They would have been last years accounts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted April 9, 2015 Report Share Posted April 9, 2015 They would have been last years accounts. No there was a note of post accounts transactions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.