Summer Transfer Window 2018

[wizzo_66]

The only reason is contract length..

Better players get longer contracts, generally speaking.

Running down contracts happens so infrequently with players who are actually sought after.

[Bury Me @ The Boleyn]

Grady Diangana has signed a new 2-year deal with the club. 20-year old attacking mid/winger. #10 type. Clever and creative player on the ball. Have seen him play maybe a handful of times and come away impressed every time by his technique and willingness to take players on.

https://www.whufc.com/news/articles/201 ... r-contract" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Cellar-door]

Transfer fees aren't the be all end all of spending is one thing to note.
:Last summer they went cheap for sure, but they did still spend a significant amount (poorly). Chicharito's fee was reasonable, but his wage was enormous, Zabaleta and Hart were "Free" but both had high wages, and Zabaleta probably had significant signing on and agent fees.
Edit- by fees we spent a net 13M on transfers, but with salaries, signing on fees, etc. I'd guess it was closer to 25M or more increase in outlay,

This summer the budget is allegedly 75M (plus what we make in sales) that doesn't necessarily mean 75M (plus sales) in transfer fees. They'll likely take the fees for signing up Fredericks out of that for example.

[Tackler]

Man City have spent most NET in recent years.

Yet some say net spend does not matter!

[rare as rockinghorse shat]

Net spend, for the purpose of this thread is split into 2 categories:

1 - Ambition
2 - Squad reshuffling


1 - In terms of judging a club's ambition, then net spend can be a fairly high indicator. But if you base everything on it, then it's foolish.

2 - You shouldn't deduce anything from 'net spend' when it comes to discussing the ins and outs of the club and trying to create some fantasy transfers in and out balance sheet, as it's miles off.

[ageing hammer]

what does 'next level' even mean anyway?

It means doubling season tickets while spending half what you did previously

[Faithless]

So what level are we on now? And what's the next level up from that?

It doesn't actually have any clear definition does it? It's just a buzzword.

That was my point. It's meaningless. However like practically everything else it's down to GSB for the spin and over promising. You always under promise and over deliver never over promise and under deliver. That's what confuses me about GSB as they seem to operate in a completely counter intuitive way in everything they say and do.

If I was to define it the "next level" would a level all of our own (Possibly inc Everton but they flirted with relegation) where we are free of relegation worries all season long and sitting in 7th place (+or- a place or 2) as the level above that isn't something I see GSB having the nouse to achieve.

[ageing hammer]

gunna be linked with that Russian defender by the end of this game

Putin?

[Tackler]

Did they actually say 75 million? Do you have a link to the quote?

"West Ham transfer budget at least £75m as Manuel Pellegrini plots summer spree"

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/footba ... 48286.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Edit no quote, but the figure was in the media on many places

https://www.90min.com/posts/6068484-wes ... er-rebuild" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://westhamworld.co.uk/pellegrini-g ... er-budget/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.si.com/soccer/2018/05/23/we ... er-rebuild" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[EllisWHU22]

Putin?

As long as he putin the net then no complaints :lol:

I hate myself.

[rare as rockinghorse shat]

Did they actually say 75 million? Do you have a link to the quote?

"West Ham transfer budget at least £75m as Manuel Pellegrini plots summer spree"

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/footba ... 48286.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

'No', then.

[Tackler]

'No', then.

No direct quote but the 75 figure was in the media on many places. Maybe they made that up but they could have heard it from one of the owners. Who knows, but why would they make it up ?

[Burnley Hammer]

The only quote I can find in that is:

"There is no final figure but the budget will be flexible,” said a club source.

[Tackler]

The only quote I can find in that is:

"There is no final figure but the budget will be flexible,” said a club source.

Yeah I edited the post. No direct quote but the 75 million figure was spread in the media on quite a few places.

[MileEnder]

In that Standard article
https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/footba ... 48286.html the actual mention of 75m is quoting the newspaper no West Ham spokesperson.

There have been suggestions that the new Hammers boss will have around £75million to spend on what he has estimated as “four or five” new recruits but it is understood that player sales will contribute to the overall pot.

Furthermore that quote could be read either way as a net spend of 75m or as 75m plus income from sales.

David Gold is quoted quite heavily later in the article but not concerning the money but rather the quality of the existing squad.

Can anyone show us where 75m was mentioned by club people as a sum available, unattributed newspaper headlines don't count.

[Burnley Hammer]

So basically it's a figure that was spread around the media but nobody actually knows where it originated or who said it?

If it didn't come from Gold, Sullivan, or Brady then we should all completely disregard that figure right now.

[Bury Me @ The Boleyn]

re: ownership investment

I have a mate who has a few connections at the club. If you'll recall, a couple years ago when Tore was about to sign on loan I mentioned that my mate confirmed he was at SR having a medical before the papers got to it. I'm not claiming he's a great source for information but he told me some explosive things last night about what GSB's plan is for the future. Take all of this with a MASSIVE grain of salt, but I trust the lad, so there's that:

First, he's said that the reason the club had a negative net spend in January was because doing so brought the club's value up over the 500m mark. That figure creates a good benchmark for GSB to begin seeking out bids to sell the club. My mate says the asking price is starting at 800m.

Second, he said that the plan the entire time has been for the club to purchase the London Stadium. The deal was so one-sided by design as a way to upset taxpayers and eventually force the town council to sell the stadium to us in order to appease the taxpayers.

Third, he said that once that sales happens (and he's 100% confident it will happen, he says), the plan is for GSB to immediately turn around and sell the club, leaving all renovation expenses up to the new ownership. He says the goal is to have a club worth over 500m in assets and a stadium we own. Once those two things are accomplished GSB will sell.

Again, please take all of this with a grain of salt. I'm not claiming my mate is 100% reliable, but he has some connections to the club and I trust him not to be leading me along for no reason.

[Tackler]

So basically it's a figure that was spread around the media but nobody actually knows where it originated or who said it?

If it didn't come from Gold, Sullivan, or Brady then we should all completely disregard that figure right now.

Yeah but here is a direct quote from Gold.

"West Ham Chairman David Gold told Talksport listeners that West Ham were ready to spend more this summer than ever before."

http://www.claretandhugh.info/well-prob ... than-ever/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Burnley Hammer]

"West Ham Chairman David Gold told Talksport listeners that West Ham were ready to spend more this summer than ever before."

http://www.claretandhugh.info/well-prob ... than-ever/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Firstly... in his actual quote, there was 1 additional word - 'probably'

And... what is the most we've ever spent before?

[S-H]

Explosive stuff BM@TB