Martin compensation still not agreed with Southampton

[A4Jack]

The compensation for Russell Martin’s move to Southampton has still not been settled as we close in on December, five months after his departure from SA1. That saga, which threatened to derail both club’s pre seasons plans, went on for weeks until the Swans finally agreed to release Martin pending...

Read more

 

[DuffleCoat]

The compensation for Russell Martin’s move to Southampton has still not been settled as we close in on December, five months after his departure from SA1. That saga, which threatened to derail both club’s pre seasons plans, went on for weeks until the Swans finally agreed to release Martin pending...

Read more

It has zero impact on Jan.

Those funds aren’t earmarked for a specific “thing”. It’s about getting what the club is rightfully owed.

Someone reported not long ago that a further £3m was invested into the club… anything the club needs gets covered, it doesn’t need to wait for such things.

The fact the club refuses to be taken for a ride is a positive, not a negative.

 

[A4Jack]

It has zero impact on Jan.

Those funds aren’t earmarked for a specific “thing”. It’s about getting what the club is rightfully owed.

Someone reported not long ago that a further £3m was invested into the club… anything the club needs gets covered, it doesn’t need to wait for such things.

The fact the club refuses to be taken for a ride is a positive, not a negative.

Absolutely. But don't think I mentioned it as a negative. Surely funds in helps spending?

Maybe it's me

 

[DuffleCoat]

Absolutely. But don't think I mentioned it as a negative. Surely funds in helps spending?

Maybe it's me

Was responding to this part really;

“But is a surprise that the issue has still not been sorted with funds for the January window desperately needed as the club eyes three or more additions to what is quickly becoming a threadbare squad lacking quality options”.

It implied that it would be impactful or that the two were related in some way.

Not suggesting that you meant to frame it that way, I am just clarifying that in no way shape or form does the compensation have any impact on Jan plans.

Funds are always helpful to every aspect of the club, transfer windows included - but all aspects are well covered and don’t rely on anything outstanding.

 

[JackSomething]

Was responding to this part really;

“But is a surprise that the issue has still not been sorted with funds for the January window desperately needed as the club eyes three or more additions to what is quickly becoming a threadbare squad lacking quality options”.

It implied that it would be impactful or that the two were related in some way.

Not suggesting that you meant to frame it that way, I am just clarifying that in no way shape or form does the compensation have any impact on Jan plans.

Funds are always helpful to every aspect of the club, transfer windows included - but all aspects are well covered and don’t rely on anything outstanding.

Out of curiosity, have you ever explained how you're so plugged into the club's financial situation?

 

[DuffleCoat]

Out of curiosity, have you ever explained how you're so plugged into the club's financial situation?

I haven’t, and won’t.

But it’s fairly obvious if you take a look at companies house just for the average layman and combine that with what we are still able to spend.

If you have £50 in your pocket to buy a £10 meal, with the security of another £1000 in your bank.

The fact someone owes you £5 is irrelevant.

 

[A4Jack]

I haven’t, and won’t.

But it’s fairly obvious if you take a look at companies house just for the average layman and combine that with what we are still able to spend.

If you have £50 in your pocket to buy a £10 meal, with the security of another £1000 in your bank.

The fact someone owes you £5 is irrelevant.

But in the same context you would be happier to spend £15 if you have £55 in the bank than £10 having £50.

At least I would

 

[DuffleCoat]

But in the same context you would be happier to spend £15 if you have £55 in the bank than £10 having £50.

At least I would

But you can spend £15 if you need to also, with £50 in your pocket and £1000 in your bank.

Like I said, the £5 is an irrelevance to the task at hand, which is an important distinction to make regarding the article.

 

[A4Jack]

But you can spend £15 if you need to also, with £50 in your pocket and £1000 in your bank.

Like I said, the £5 is an irrelevance to the task at hand, which is an important distinction to make regarding the article.

I think you're underestimating £5. Considering the money we're talking about is potentially half the budget maybe more of what we have for January.

 

[DuffleCoat]

I think you're underestimating £5. Considering the money we're talking about is potentially half the budget maybe more of what we have for January.

I’m not, I assure you.

To continue the analogy and clarify further:

The £5 is always coming our way I might add. But it’s not time sensitive, as is being suggested.

Whether it comes tomorrow or next December, it does not affect January plans. We would not be spending an “extra £3m” should it be settled prior.

Funds are already budgeted and allocated for such things, that figure does not change due to the timing of when we receive the money from Southampton.

This is the beauty of external investment.

 

[Manselton Jack]

Have we agreed the compensation figure for Key?