Transfer Window: Summer 2013

The very best posts from KUMB over the years ...

Moderator: Gnome

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby wizzo_66 on Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:42 pm

Turns to Stone wrote:
The point is that it's about wages being equivalent to club size and growth. Not about debts dropping off. This is another good reason why G and S shouldn't blow their load now, but wait until they have cleared another chunk of debt off, and can then add that to the warchest.


Unfortunately, if that was truly the case - the FFP would be a rule of representative % of your club's turnover to be spent on wages - it isn't.

It's an attempt at debt control, no matter how you package it up.
User avatar
wizzo_66
 
Posts: 9082
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:27 pm
Location: Long Live the Boleyn

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby Turns to Stone on Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:44 pm

wizzo_66 wrote:Unfortunately, if that was truly the case - the FFP would be a rule of representative % of your club's turnover to be spent on wages - it isn't.

It's an attempt at debt control, no matter how you package it up.


Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming to understand or agree with FFP particularly. Just that I can understand why it was so important for G and S to stay under that £52m barrier this season.
User avatar
Turns to Stone
 
Posts: 7868
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Tony Almeida

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby wizzo_66 on Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:48 pm

Turns to Stone wrote:
Don't get me wrong, I'm not claiming to understand or agree with FFP particularly. Just that I can understand why it was so important for G and S to stay under that £52m barrier this season.


:thup: absolutely agree.
User avatar
wizzo_66
 
Posts: 9082
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:27 pm
Location: Long Live the Boleyn

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby DaveWHU1964 on Wed Sep 04, 2013 1:58 pm

If it's right that the Daves are being clever in keeping us under this £52 million wage bill in order to give us a bit more leeway in future years then that's a sensible 'keeping our options open' type plan.

The debts we have have hampered this club for years. If our wages haven't risen stupidly this Summer then at least some of the vast increase in TV income can surely be used to take a chunk out of the debt. I said on a thread a while back that the Daves support of FFP was calculated. In the short term it dampens fans expectations regarding signings and now reading this it also apparently helps us bring down the debt. In the longer term once we are at the OS and our non-TV income significantly increases then teams that are currently around our level (Southampton, Swansea, Everton) will find it hard to remain so.

In the meantime it's a bit of a balancing act. We need to maintain a squad decent enough to stay in the league and hopefully give the cups a go, whilst at the same time managing and hopefully bringing down the debt. They seem to have achieved that balance as well as they could be expected to. Some things may seem a bit shambolic at times but overall they do have a plan.
User avatar
DaveWHU1964
 
Posts: 10015
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 11:14 am

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby bubbles1966 on Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:01 pm

The autumn loan window for Championship and Football League clubs opens on 8 September and runs to 25 November.

Aside from Spence and Henderson, I can't see us loaning anyone senior out whilst we have 3 or 4 injured. If we do, it might be McCartney or Taylor - but even then only for a month at a time and on a recall.

When Downing and Joe Cole are back that might change.
User avatar
bubbles1966
 
Posts: 42173
Joined: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:01 pm

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby buffybegood on Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:41 pm

rare as rockinghorse shat wrote:If ours now stands at £51,999,999, due to us not slightly overspending, then doesn't it mean we can very much spend big at a point in the near future, thus going above that golden line, THEN having the FFP limit placed on us when it comes into force?
Turns to Stone wrote:This is my understanding of it, RARS.


I think (although I certainly don't know for sure) that you guys have misunderstood something. My understanding (and I completely stand to be corrected) is that it works more like this. Clubs were assessed for the wages for the 2012/3 season. All clubs will be allowed to spend only £4m more on wages this season (plus any extra revenue) than last season, with the proviso that if they spent less than £48m, that would count as their spend and would be the basis for future wage caps.

Just as examples, I think it would work like this. If Norwich spent £35m in 2012/3, West Ham spent £48m and Man City spent £200m.

Wage Cap for 2013/4
Norwich £52m
West Ham £52m
Man City £204m

Wage Cap for 2014/5
Norwich £56m
West Ham £56m
Man City £208m

Wage Cap for 2015/6
Norwich £60m
West Ham £60m
Man City £212m.

(Plus any new revenue streams so Man City's wage cap will be approximately £500m by 2015/6 thanks to a new sponsorship deal :lol:).

I really don't think G&S are playing anything clever now to allow for a huge increase in the future, our wages caps for the next 3 season have already been defined by what we spent in 2012/3 (apart from new revenue streams). I think they are simply trying to stay within the rules as they currently exist, I don't think they will affect the cap for future seasons under the current rules.
buffybegood
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 1:12 pm

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby SammyLeeWasOffside on Wed Sep 04, 2013 2:44 pm

QuintonNimoy wrote:It sets a future limit unless our profit increases to cover it. We're 100% limited to it and under FFP.

We are limited to 52 this year because that's what anyone can spend regardless of turnover. The allowance goes up by 4 million a year, and everyone subject to that 52 limit gets it regardless.

QN I may have this wrong but that isn't quite what it says
If in any of Contract Years 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16 a Club’s aggregated Player Services
Costs and Image Contract Payments:
E.18.1. exceed £52m, £56m, or £60m respectively; and
E.18.2. have increased by more than £4m when compared with the previous Contract Year or
by more than £4m, £8m or £12m respectively when compared with Season 2012/13;
then the Club must satisfy the Board that such excess increase as is referred to in E.18.2 arises
as a result of contractual commitments entered into on or before 31 January 2013, and/or that
it has been funded only by Club Own Revenue Uplift and/or profit from player trading as
disclosed in the Club’s Annual Accounts for that Contract Yea

2013/14 is the baseline so no one can be judged until next season (dec 14 is the first date any punishments can be handed out). So we could in effect have pushed the wage bill to 60m this summer and as long as it isn't more than 63.9M next season we are still fine because it has to be AND not either or.
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby Absentee Hammer on Wed Sep 04, 2013 3:12 pm

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote:
2013/14 is the baseline so no one can be judged until next season (dec 14 is the first date any punishments can be handed out). So we could in effect have pushed the wage bill to 60m this summer and as long as it isn't more than 63.9M next season we are still fine because it has to be AND not either or.


If in any of Contract Years 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16 a Club’s aggregated Player Services Costs and Image Contract Payments:
E.18.1. exceed £52m, £56m, or £60m respectively; and
E.18.2. have increased by more than £4m when compared with the previous Contract Year or
by more than £4m, £8m or £12m respectively when compared with Season 2012/13;
then the Club must satisfy the Board that such excess increase as is referred to in E.18.2 arises
as a result of contractual commitments entered into on or before 31 January 2013, and/or that
it has been funded only by Club Own Revenue Uplift and/or profit from player trading as
disclosed in the Club’s Annual Accounts for that Contract Yea


Close but no cigar...it says in the extract you quoted, that all Player Services Costs and Image Contract Payments are compared to the 2012/2013 season, thus, this is the baseline. Clubs have different Official accounts release dates, and it is from these accounts the majority of the investigation will take place, hence the confusion of when the "fines/points deductions" can take place, the FA will know what we are paying each player with signing on fee's, bonuses etc, but they need the financial accounts to see if any uplift in revenue will take care of any overspend.

We and all other PL clubs are being monitored now, from the appearance, the likes of Soton etc have spent alot more in salaries than they released off their books, maybe they didn't spend the 48M last year so have leeway to spend more before they reach the minimum cap of 52M? Maybe they plan to release players on loan this half of the season, or sale in January?

A club can spend heavily in the first half of the season and be over budget, but correct this in the 2nd half of the season by reducing the Player Services Costs and Image Contract Payments so the net effect is they do not spend over 52M or whatever their budget constraint cost is for the season. This could be risky as like Vaz Te, they might not be able to shift the player out and fall foul.

Finally, the fines & points deductions penalties have not been decided yet I understand, so I am sure there are plenty of legal experts out there who could argue the fact that the punishments were not defined from the outset, hence not legally binding, or it is an unfair hindrance on the clubs growth potential by not signing these players. In Europe, there have already been mutterings from top sports lawyers about unfairness.
User avatar
Absentee Hammer
 
Posts: 2791
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:08 pm
Location: Been away for a while now......

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby SammyLeeWasOffside on Wed Sep 04, 2013 4:45 pm

Absentee Hammer wrote:Close but no cigar...it says in the extract you quoted

So it does. Conclusive proof that virtually no one reads the crap I post....not even me :wink:
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby 1860OnceMoore on Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:13 pm

if Carlton is going not to be match fit for 2 months - aren't there other options we should be looking at?
User avatar
1860OnceMoore
 
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:46 am

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby backhouse21 on Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:24 pm

Petric in my opinion is an option
backhouse21
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Mon Jun 02, 2008 3:56 pm
Location: Barnet, North London

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby smarthammer on Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:35 pm

I’m sure FFP (however we’re interpreting it) has played a big part in our transfer activity this summer and failing to shift a couple before the window closed may/probably stopped us getting some of the other rumoured targets.

The Dave’s had choices however as to how to explain our transfer strategy.

The could have said – “Sam’s spent his budget for this window so he’ll need to sell to buy more” rather than all this FFP nonsense.

Having said that, Carlton returning without departures implies we still had greater wage headroom.
User avatar
smarthammer
 
Posts: 786
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 11:52 pm
Location: Top Six with an eye for higher

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby WCpete on Wed Sep 04, 2013 6:56 pm

Saw this elsewhere. Not sure how accurate it is. Nonetheless, the "still available Bosmans" starting eleven.

Image
WCpete
 
Posts: 12664
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 1:11 am
Location: San Francisco, CA

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby 1860OnceMoore on Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:01 pm

Well if CC is going to be 2 months getting fit we had just as well persist with Maiga / Lee / McCallum until AC is back - as another Bosman will surely have the same fitness issues?
User avatar
1860OnceMoore
 
Posts: 1134
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:46 am

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby last.caress on Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:01 pm

WCpete wrote:the "still available Bosmans" starting eleven.


Carlton couldn't get in that team either, eh?
User avatar
last.caress
Extreme w*nker
 
Posts: 11934
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 12:38 am
Location: Se incontri L'ultima.carezza, prega per la tua morte.

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby neil_d on Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:36 pm

This year's Premier League squad lists:

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news ... 01314.html

23 out 25 squad spaces used up
User avatar
neil_d
 
Posts: 864
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 11:34 pm

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby Dyl on Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:43 pm

last.caress wrote:
Carlton couldn't get in that team either, eh?


:lol:
User avatar
Dyl
 
Posts: 11479
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 4:29 pm
Location: Dyl's Helmets

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby Joey O'Irons on Wed Sep 04, 2013 7:44 pm

WCpete wrote:Saw this elsewhere. Not sure how accurate it is. Nonetheless, the "still available Bosmans" starting eleven.


No Carlton Cole. Therefore not best starting 11.
User avatar
Joey O'Irons
 
Posts: 774
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2013 7:11 pm

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby Absentee Hammer on Wed Sep 04, 2013 8:27 pm

neil_d wrote:This year's Premier League squad lists:

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/news ... 01314.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

23 out 25 squad spaces used up


I wonder why we included Diarra too if he is out all season? We can change the players after the Jan window, so should he make progress, then he could be included in Jan. We could have had 3 places if we took on any freebies who accepted 10 quid a week to play :wink:
User avatar
Absentee Hammer
 
Posts: 2791
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:08 pm
Location: Been away for a while now......

Re: Summer Transfer thread - 2013/2014

Postby Sir_Trevor on Wed Sep 04, 2013 8:33 pm

Absentee Hammer wrote:I wonder why we included Diarra too if he is out all season? We can change the players after the Jan window, so should he make progress, then he could be included in Jan. We could have had 3 places if we took on any freebies who accepted 10 quid a week to play :wink:


I've got a feeling that you have to include any senior players on your books if you haven't got to the 25 even if they are injured. But I might be talking bo##ocks as usual.
User avatar
Sir_Trevor
 
Posts: 2672
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 12:09 pm

PreviousNext

Return to KUMB Hall of Fame

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests