Captain Grimes on his way to Coventry City?

[eteb]

He was on nearly 25k a week.
We can get 2/3 in on the wages freed up.

Bonkers

 

[Dr. Winston]

Our deal for Grimes going to Coventry should be equally over inflated.

It is.

 

[DJack]

Has anyone seen Lalolly?

ANOTHER new username incoming...

 

[cmajack]

We’ve hopefully got a clause written into the deal.

Thought you meant Lalolly then, that he was going with Grimes as part of the deal.

 

[Jdflyer]

We’ve hopefully got a clause written into the deal.

Question is, does Andy know this is something you can stipulate?

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

He was on nearly 25k a week.
We can get 2/3 in on the wages freed up.

Or, far more likely, make a significant saving on that £25k a week by bringing in a direct replacement on far less money. Then just banking the rest.

We're losing circa £20m a season, don't forget.

 

[monmouth]

Or, far more likely, make a significant saving on that £25k a week by bringing in a direct replacement on far less money. Then just banking the rest.

We're losing circa £20m a season, don't forget.

Daps doesn't understand finance or football. He just wants two 20 goal strikers, ten wingers, 4 attacking midfielders and 14 central defenders before Monday. Oh and a top class replacement for Statty Gnome. That's why we all love him.

You are bang on the money (ooh, a pun) of course, we certainly need to make a big dent in those operating costs if we are to survive, never mind prosper.

 

[monmouth]

ANOTHER new username incoming...

Andy Pandy or Loopy Loo?

 

[Dr. Winston]

Daps doesn't understand finance or football. He just wants two 20 goal strikers, ten wingers, 4 attacking midfielders and 14 central defenders before Monday. Oh and a top class replacement for Statty Gnome. That's why we all love him.

You are bang on the money (ooh, a pun) of course, we certainly need to make a big dent in those operating costs if we are to survive, never mind prosper.

Even now, after several years of PSR being in place, of clubs being deducted points or put under transfer embargoes, the fact that far too many people seem to think that football clubs can just spend whatever the hell they like is still slightly surprising.

 

[magicdaps10]

Or, far more likely, make a significant saving on that £25k a week by bringing in a direct replacement on far less money. Then just banking the rest.

We're losing circa £20m a season, don't forget.

We seem to be handing out weekly wages of around 6/8k so if we use Grimes wage to cover a replacement for him, an attacking midfielder and say a winger then that would be his wage gone.
We then would be banking the wages of Abdullai, Abbey and the others gone out on loan with one eye on another big earner out the door in the summer(Pedersen).

It's all the same as you suggest, but going down a different avenue but the same arrival destination.

 

[magicdaps10]

Daps doesn't understand finance or football. He just wants two 20 goal strikers, ten wingers, 4 attacking midfielders and 14 central defenders before Monday. Oh and a top class replacement for Statty Gnome. That's why we all love him.

You are bang on the money (ooh, a pun) of course, we certainly need to make a big dent in those operating costs if we are to survive, never mind prosper.

Only thing I read there was......that's why we all love him

 

[SwanseaJack]

Even now, after several years of PSR being in place, of clubs being deducted points or put under transfer embargoes, the fact that far too many people seem to think that football clubs can just spend whatever the hell they like is still slightly surprising.

Man city have not helped with that notion

 

[Dr. Winston]

Man city have not helped with that notion

Weirdly their net spend in the last few years puts them fairly low down on the list. They haven't gone as nuts as they did in the beginning, and having access to Champions League money every season helps.

They still need to answer for the 115 though. No doubt.

 

[Professor]

Weirdly their net spend in the last few years puts them fairly low down on the list. They haven't gone as nuts as they did in the beginning, and having access to Champions League money every season helps.

They still need to answer for the 115 though. No doubt.

It's not that weird, as despite the Abu Dhabi money, they are run better than most clubs, have a better and arguably sustainable infrastructure and an academy that generates both players and money-Palmer, Delap, Olise and Sancho sold for more than 70 million and plenty more (like Celina) for smaller fees. Contrast to their City neighbours. Of course if it were as simple as spend, spend, spend, then Stoke would be back in the PL. Interesting how many scrapes with financial issues there have been-Villa, Leicester, Blades-all on the precipice of disaster but saved by promotion.

 

[Professor]

It's not that weird, as despite the Abu Dhabi money, they are run better than most clubs, have a better and arguably sustainable infrastructure and an academy that generates both players and money-Palmer, Delap, Olise and Sancho sold for more than 70 million and plenty more (like Celina) for smaller fees. Contrast to their City neighbours. Of course if it were as simple as spend, spend, spend, then Stoke would be back in the PL. Interesting how many scrapes with financial issues there have been-Villa, Leicester, Blades-all on the precipice of disaster but saved by promotion.

I should add-despite the 'Hollywood' money, Wrexham are another example of where as much focus has been on infrastructure development as the team-though always useful when your or family companies (Aviation Gin, Betty Buzz etc.) are involved in sponsorship-which is arguably where City's 'crimes' have been but via state companies like Etihad and Etisalat. And I fully expect them to walk away unscathed.