|
Post by Caerwrangonpotter on Feb 1, 2014 8:18:09 GMT
If PC is to stay at the Club, and Stoke retain their Premiership status come May, then one of the first things to look at would not be the playing staff but Luigi & Mario the Pizza Brothers.
Almost a case for bringing the club into disrepute!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 8:21:41 GMT
Apparently we had 7 players on 50k+ per week. We now have 6 of them. I think everyone can agree that this probably far too much for a club like Stoke City who recently posted a 30m loss for the last trading year. We had the chance to spend big money and we blew it. Take Southampton as an example. They paid 15m for Osvaldo, realised he was crap and promptly sold him for almost what they paid for him. We, on the other hand, signed a host of players on big money and even though it was clear that they were crap, we persisted with them, didn't cash in on them when we had the chance and now we are stuck with them. Step forward the likes of Palacios, Jerome, Crouch and Adam. It is fairly clear that we've had a "one in one out" policy since the Summer but sadly no-one seems to want some of the crap that we have got in our ranks. Who can blame them? Criticism of Coates support of the club, on this occasion, is way wide of the mark. This isn't 1997 now. Coates has invested a small fortune. It isn't just transfer fees. That is the easy bit. Sustaining the wages that this players come in on is the big drain. People won't have that though will they Dave? Pulis only spent 20 million a season to keep us up, thats good value. You are so right it's not about the fees it's the bloody wages we have to pay to the overpaid prima donns that is killing us. Have we had value for money? Have we fuck? The Pulis apologists need to wake up, he's fuckin hamstrung the club, you can guarantee that if we get dicked today, P and G will be rife with comments like" the grass is not always greener" and that sort of shit. The rot set in after the cup final and the waste of money that was Crouch, Palacios and Jerome.
|
|
|
Post by neddy on Feb 1, 2014 8:46:40 GMT
4 4 2!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by trigger on Feb 1, 2014 9:03:10 GMT
Coates has had his use out of scfc bet 365 had profits of 5 million in 2006 following association with scfc and prem league was 180 million last year they have moved on got other agendas not interested in scfc I'm at a loss to what your point is in this statement? Last year Bet365 lost £31million due to Stoke City. Thats over 15% of their profits essentially down the drain. If you think that's a good deal then feel free to donate 15% of your wages to a good cause Offsetting you'll find is what you're alluding to, don't be fooled. And since Peter Coates doesn't having a controlling interest then he can only ASK for some more money. Bet365 are well within their rights to say fuck off. They are building a new HQ and making 600 new jobs in Stoke in the next few years which wont come cheap. Would you like them to compromise that investment just so we can buy a few more players for huge prices on huge wages? Wake up and read the shit your writing before you comment. Thank you
|
|
|
Post by Fred Astaire on Feb 1, 2014 9:15:13 GMT
I honestly think that whoever is holding the purse strings has said that there is no money to spend unless players are sold(and maybe not even anything then)
The Ince deal was totally fabricated crap to make it look like we were trying to spend money. EVERYBODY knew that Ince was never going to sign for anybody other than a BIG club on anything other than a loan deal and if you can't see that your head is surely buried far too deep in the sand. Scholes knew that the deal was always going nowhere. As for the Clattermole deal. May be legit, may not. I believe that the Clattermole deal was never going to happen unless we sold somebody to finance it and the plug was always going to be there to be pulled!
Is Coates to blame - Don't know
Is somebody to blame - Fuck yeah!!!
|
|
|
Post by philb on Feb 1, 2014 9:27:21 GMT
The harsh reality of it is that we've spent a sum total of £5million over these two transfer windows and you can't 'push on' to the next level (us being a regular top ten side) by spending that amount of money.
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Feb 1, 2014 9:29:29 GMT
Just to be clear, we have signed 9 players this season Pieters, Muniesa, Ireland, Assaidi, Arnautovic, Aguledo, Odemwingie, Giudetti and Pennant. On additional wages that is probably way over £10 million alone and with signing on fees and transfer fees, more like £20 million. So the idea we are not spending is not right. The reality is that it is hard to find and attract players that improve the quality. How many strikers have moved to clubs at our level for realistic prices that would definitely improve us? No point wasing money just to prove we can spend, it has to be the right player and right deal and there have not been many
|
|
|
Post by Fred Astaire on Feb 1, 2014 9:40:54 GMT
Just to be clear, we have signed 9 players this season Pieters, Muniesa, Ireland, Assaidi, Arnautovic, Aguledo, Odemwingie, Giudetti and Pennant. On additional wages that is probably way over £10 million alone and with signing on fees and transfer fees, more like £20 million. So the idea we are not spending is not right. The reality is that it is hard to find and attract players that improve the quality. How many strikers have moved to clubs at our level for realistic prices that would definitely improve us? No point wasing money just to prove we can spend, it has to be the right player and right deal and there have not been many Where's Pennant? Where's Agudelo? Guidetti is on loan Assaidi is on loan Muniesa was a free and would have cost the square route of fuck all in fees We've just taken over the contracts of Ireland and nobody seems to know how long he is here for Likewise Odemwingie - but a good deal on this one possibly
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Feb 1, 2014 9:45:56 GMT
I find it hard to believe that clubs like Fulham, West Ham and Sunderland have lower wage bills than us but it never seems to stop them ploughing on regardless! As for the £30 million ...hmmm , accountants get paid large salaries for a good reason.
|
|
|
Post by shipshape on Feb 1, 2014 9:51:29 GMT
Big difference between Fulham, West Ham, Sunderland and ourselves is that those sides sell players and generate some income. We have spent years buying players with no resale value because they're either old or shit. This strategy is now inevitably coming back to bite us on the arse.
|
|
|
Post by mozzer on Feb 1, 2014 9:51:48 GMT
Apparently we had 7 players on 50k+ per week. We now have 6 of them. I think everyone can agree that this probably far too much for a club like Stoke City who recently posted a 30m loss for the last trading year. We had the chance to spend big money and we blew it. Take Southampton as an example. They paid 15m for Osvaldo, realised he was crap and promptly sold him for almost what they paid for him. We, on the other hand, signed a host of players on big money and even though it was clear that they were crap, we persisted with them, didn't cash in on them when we had the chance and now we are stuck with them. Step forward the likes of Palacios, Jerome, Crouch and Adam. It is fairly clear that we've had a "one in one out" policy since the Summer but sadly no-one seems to want some of the crap that we have got in our ranks. Who can blame them? Criticism of Coates support of the club, on this occasion, is way wide of the mark. This isn't 1997 now. Coates has invested a small fortune. It isn't just transfer fees. That is the easy bit. Sustaining the wages that this players come in on is the big drain. People won't have that though will they Dave? Pulis only spent 20 million a season to keep us up, thats good value. You are so right it's not about the fees it's the bloody wages we have to pay to the overpaid prima donns that is killing us. Have we had value for money? Have we fuck? The Pulis apologists need to wake up, he's fuckin hamstrung the club, you can guarantee that if we get dicked today, P and G will be rife with comments like" the grass is not always greener" and that sort of shit. The rot set in after the cup final and the waste of money that was Crouch, Palacios and Jerome. I agree with most you have written but Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I cant remember many people saying that when we signed the afore mentioned players or showing complete disgust at the gates of Clayton wood as them players drove away on deadline day, I cant remember the raised voices the year they arrived and we retained our prmiership status with Croaches wonder goal or Jeromes late substitute appearance goals, we know it is an expensive league to be in and we know the rewards for being in this league are great but lets not put all the blame on an ex manager who brought all these players in, of course he is by no means blameless in all this but lets look at the bigger picture, yes he may well have said he wanted them but his role is to identify the players/targets that he wants and other people are employed to make it happen, lets start to look at people behind the scenes who sanctioned all these signings and who dealt with the contracts for all these signings, the news coming out of Palace if it to be believed was NO TONE!!you are not signing Etherington as he has no saleable value and is way to old so look else where, not sure if he looked else where for an Etherington player but he then goes and signs a player he tried to sign at Stoke in Ledley, I am not saying Ledley is any better of a player than we have on our books mind but he is only 27 and if it goes tits up at the end of the season for palace they have a player who can play lower level for a few years or an asset they can sell on.........so whos to blame.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 9:54:14 GMT
These spending rules are a load of bollocks. When one club can spend 37 mil on one player, and I don,t particularly care who they are, it is completely wrong. I could go on for ever as to the reasons, but I,ll keep it short for now, other than to say, the same old clubs have the choice off the market, and have done for years. Until this changes, the same s---- will stay on top!
|
|
|
Post by doitforfrank on Feb 1, 2014 9:54:47 GMT
Apparently we had 7 players on 50k+ per week. We now have 6 of them. I think everyone can agree that this probably far too much for a club like Stoke City who recently posted a 30m loss for the last trading year. We had the chance to spend big money and we blew it. Take Southampton as an example. They paid 15m for Osvaldo, realised he was crap and promptly sold him for almost what they paid for him. We, on the other hand, signed a host of players on big money and even though it was clear that they were crap, we persisted with them, didn't cash in on them when we had the chance and now we are stuck with them. Step forward the likes of Palacios, Jerome, Crouch and Adam. It is fairly clear that we've had a "one in one out" policy since the Summer but sadly no-one seems to want some of the crap that we have got in our ranks. Who can blame them? Criticism of Coates support of the club, on this occasion, is way wide of the mark. This isn't 1997 now. Coates has invested a small fortune. It isn't just transfer fees. That is the easy bit. Sustaining the wages that this players come in on is the big drain. So what you're saying is, that Stoke aren't a Premiership Club, on a business level. Unfortunately, for one reason or another we can't get players to sign for the club. It may well be Scholes and Cartwright, it may well be the players being greedy twats, but the bottom line will be, that other clubs are prepared to pay higher wages to get these players to play for them, leaving us with cast offs. The conundrum facing Stoke is should we pay the silly wages and compete in the Premier League, or should we decline back to the Championship, where we will be competing on a more level playing field with clubs of equal size and stature.
|
|
|
Post by wuzza on Feb 1, 2014 9:56:25 GMT
That robo is where American sport beats us hands down. They make sure its a level playing field, in the UK and Europe they go out of their way to make sure the rich get richer.
|
|
|
Post by huddersstokie on Feb 1, 2014 9:58:53 GMT
Right, let's get this straight.
Spending has definitely been restricted whether it is because we need one in one out or not.
The facts remain that even if we were willing to spend £5 mil, that is very little compared with what we needed to spend on a top striker (i.e. £10m+ mil to score the goals we have been lacking for 2 years).
Also, just because we are willing to spend a little on transfer fees, it looks certain that we are being cheapskates in regards to the wages which looks to have put brakes on several deals over the last few windows.
I know it is not my money but I am a business man and I would rather have spent £10m fee +£5m wages rather than get relegated and lose £40m. I just don't get it! This is one hell of a risk!
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Feb 1, 2014 10:00:02 GMT
Facts speak for themselves I can't believe that Coates is expecting his new man to completely alter the way we play without making funds available to him. What I can believe ... is that Peter Coates, this evening, is absolutely fuckin livid because ONCE AGAIN his transfer team have let down the chairman, the manager and the fans. In a few months time, we could very well be looking back on this day and thinking, it was that night that sealed our fate. I hope that, this morning, PC is thinking: I won't do anything rash just now - I'll wait until 5.00pm and then make the phone call! The CW Muppets should be summarily dismissed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 10:04:24 GMT
People won't have that though will they Dave? Pulis only spent 20 million a season to keep us up, thats good value. You are so right it's not about the fees it's the bloody wages we have to pay to the overpaid prima donns that is killing us. Have we had value for money? Have we fuck? The Pulis apologists need to wake up, he's fuckin hamstrung the club, you can guarantee that if we get dicked today, P and G will be rife with comments like" the grass is not always greener" and that sort of shit. The rot set in after the cup final and the waste of money that was Crouch, Palacios and Jerome. I agree with most you have written but Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I cant remember many people saying that when we signed the afore mentioned players or showing complete disgust at the gates of Clayton wood as them players drove away on deadline day, I cant remember the raised voices the year they arrived and we retained our prmiership status with Croaches wonder goal or Jeromes late substitute appearance goals, we know it is an expensive league to be in and we know the rewards for being in this league are great but lets not put all the blame on an ex manager who brought all these players in, of course he is by no means blameless in all this but lets look at the bigger picture, yes he may well have said he wanted them but his role is to identify the players/targets that he wants and other people are employed to make it happen, lets start to look at people behind the scenes who sanctioned all these signings and who dealt with the contracts for all these signings, the news coming out of Palace if it to be believed was NO TONE!!you are not signing Etherington as he has no saleable value and is way to old so look else where, not sure if he looked else where for an Etherington player but he then goes and signs a player he tried to sign at Stoke in Ledley, I am not saying Ledley is any better of a player than we have on our books mind but he is only 27 and if it goes tits up at the end of the season for palace they have a player who can play lower level for a few years or an asset they can sell on.........so whos to blame. You've answered your own question. The Palace chairman said no to Matty, Coates while being uneasy about the Crouch deal let it go through.PC let his relationship with Tone get in the way of good business sense. We have too many players on big fat contracts that no-one else wants.
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on Feb 1, 2014 10:15:49 GMT
Apparently we had 7 players on 50k+ per week. We now have 6 of them. I think everyone can agree that this probably far too much for a club like Stoke City who recently posted a 30m loss for the last trading year. We had the chance to spend big money and we blew it. Take Southampton as an example. They paid 15m for Osvaldo, realised he was crap and promptly sold him for almost what they paid for him. We, on the other hand, signed a host of players on big money and even though it was clear that they were crap, we persisted with them, didn't cash in on them when we had the chance and now we are stuck with them. Step forward the likes of Palacios, Jerome, Crouch and Adam. It is fairly clear that we've had a "one in one out" policy since the Summer but sadly no-one seems to want some of the crap that we have got in our ranks. Who can blame them? Criticism of Coates support of the club, on this occasion, is way wide of the mark. This isn't 1997 now. Coates has invested a small fortune. It isn't just transfer fees. That is the easy bit. Sustaining the wages that this players come in on is the big drain. So what you're saying is, that Stoke aren't a Premiership Club, on a business level. Unfortunately, for one reason or another we can't get players to sign for the club. It may well be Scholes and Cartwright, it may well be the players being greedy twats, but the bottom line will be, that other clubs are prepared to pay higher wages to get these players to play for them, leaving us with cast offs. The conundrum facing Stoke is should we pay the silly wages and compete in the Premier League, or should we decline back to the Championship, where we will be competing on a more level playing field with clubs of equal size and stature. No I'm not saying that at all. I am saying that a club with our revenue streams can't keep posting 30m per year trading losses. It is fairly obvious that we have little room for maneovre when it comes to our wage bill. Add that to the fact that Scholes is a fantastic accountant but a lousy football administrator who should have been sacked after the Owen fiasco and it is fairly obvious where our transfer failings are.
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Feb 1, 2014 10:19:33 GMT
... Add that to the fact that Scholes is a fantastic accountant but a lousy football administrator who should have been sacked after the Owen fiasco and it is fairly obvious where our transfer failings are. But Scholes be not be a fantastic accountant when we lose £35m income stream, probably for having overseen the latest transfer window debacle?
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Feb 1, 2014 10:26:14 GMT
Just to be clear, we have signed 9 players this season Pieters, Muniesa, Ireland, Assaidi, Arnautovic, Aguledo, Odemwingie, Giudetti and Pennant. On additional wages that is probably way over £10 million alone and with signing on fees and transfer fees, more like £20 million. So the idea we are not spending is not right. The reality is that it is hard to find and attract players that improve the quality. How many strikers have moved to clubs at our level for realistic prices that would definitely improve us? No point wasing money just to prove we can spend, it has to be the right player and right deal and there have not been many Where's Pennant? GONE BUT WAS PAID Where's Agudelo? NO DOUBT PAYING SOME OF HIS WAGES Guidetti is on loan PAYING WAGES Assaidi is on loan PAYING WAGES AND MAYBE LOAN FEE Muniesa was a free and would have cost the square route of fuck all in fees WAGES We've just taken over the contracts of Ireland and nobody seems to know how long he is here for WAGES AND SIGNING Likewise Odemwingie - but a good deal on this one possibly Better if you had read my post carefully, the point was about wages, everyone goes on about transfer fees but typically the wages plus add ons over a contract are more than the fee. Nonsense to say we are not spending, the fact the players signed are not playing is an issue for the manager not the Chairman
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Feb 1, 2014 10:31:44 GMT
Right, let's get this straight. Spending has definitely been restricted whether it is because we need one in one out or not. The facts remain that even if we were willing to spend £5 mil, that is very little compared with what we needed to spend on a top striker (i.e. £10m+ mil to score the goals we have been lacking for 2 years). Also, just because we are willing to spend a little on transfer fees, it looks certain that we are being cheapskates in regards to the wages which looks to have put brakes on several deals over the last few windows. I know it is not my money but I am a business man and I would rather have spent £10m fee +£5m wages rather than get relegated and lose £40m. I just don't get it! This is one hell of a risk! Who would we get for £10 million that would be able to get the goals and would want to come to Stoke? The problem is there are very few players of that calibre and they have many options across Europe with better teams. £6 million for Long who has no better a goal scoring rate than our players, Fulham have taken a huge punt on the Greek guy, Cardiff have taken Jones. Riviere we have no idea about, Diouf didn't do it last time. £10 million probably gets you a Crouch in today's market
|
|
|
Post by huddersstokie on Feb 1, 2014 10:46:57 GMT
To be fair I think most of use would have been happy with either Riviere or Diouf but we would either not folk out on the transfer fee or the wages they wanted. Are they proven in this country? No, but they have pace and would have given us hope and possibilities.
|
|
|
Post by mozzer on Feb 1, 2014 10:49:22 GMT
I agree with most you have written but Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I cant remember many people saying that when we signed the afore mentioned players or showing complete disgust at the gates of Clayton wood as them players drove away on deadline day, I cant remember the raised voices the year they arrived and we retained our prmiership status with Croaches wonder goal or Jeromes late substitute appearance goals, we know it is an expensive league to be in and we know the rewards for being in this league are great but lets not put all the blame on an ex manager who brought all these players in, of course he is by no means blameless in all this but lets look at the bigger picture, yes he may well have said he wanted them but his role is to identify the players/targets that he wants and other people are employed to make it happen, lets start to look at people behind the scenes who sanctioned all these signings and who dealt with the contracts for all these signings, the news coming out of Palace if it to be believed was NO TONE!!you are not signing Etherington as he has no saleable value and is way to old so look else where, not sure if he looked else where for an Etherington player but he then goes and signs a player he tried to sign at Stoke in Ledley, I am not saying Ledley is any better of a player than we have on our books mind but he is only 27 and if it goes tits up at the end of the season for palace they have a player who can play lower level for a few years or an asset they can sell on.........so whos to blame. You've answered your own question. The Palace chairman said no to Matty, Coates while being uneasy about the Crouch deal let it go through.PC let his relationship with Tone get in the way of good business sense. We have too many players on big fat contracts that no-one else wants. I didnt ask a question that need answering, I replied to your post and basically said exactly the same as what you have just said ref Matty and Crouch I ended the post with a sarcastic so whos to blame after I had explained my reasoning.....I am only 50% sure who is to blame for the shit we find our selves in but I am 100% sure it is all not down to Pulis as some are making out.
|
|
|
Post by wingy11 on Feb 1, 2014 11:00:59 GMT
The fact of the matter is Hughes needed players, Coates employs Cartwright and Scholes to get players in!! money was available so it seems and the outcome of it all was no players in, so if we go down there should be two members of staff sacked. Coates should take some blame also as he employs the idiots. Notice tony pulis final got his men with no trouble.
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Feb 1, 2014 11:02:02 GMT
I've seen you posting a lot of critical messages about Coates on here. Without being condescending, I'm just wondering how old you are, and how long you've been watching Stoke? The reason I ask is because I am questioning whether you've experienced what it's actually like to support a club that is poorly backed. Maybe you've been going for 40 years and just have a short memory, I don't know, but I fail to see how anyone who was around towards the end of the first Coates & Humpo era would have the gall to start pissing their knickers over what we've seen spent this season. Sure you can ask....I'm 32, and supported stoke as long as I can remember....When we were in the lower league Stoke was always my team, but me and our friends picked a club from the in the top league back in the early 90's and I picked Newcastle, cause newcastle under lyme is my hometown...So I remember the good the bad and the ugly, and I wont be condersending to the Guy, although his first time in the club he bled us dry... I dont think its unfair to ask questions when things are going wrong, badly wrong.....Will never doubt he is a Stoke fan, and has done an amazing job up untill a few years ago and ever sense stopped...And starting to think that after two years of not investing in the squad, in the top league is reasonable grounds to ask what is going on and why are failing...And dont think its acceptable hiding behind wage excuse...This season it doesnt cut it especially considering in 5-6 months most of the dead wood contracts would of been gone.. Personally I dont think he is in charge anymore, I think the kids have taken over and dont have the same passion or drive for the club as Peter does, and if that is the case its the boards responsibility to say that there journey with Stoke has ended and find a new owner to take over who wants to have a proper go at it....Yes I know not an easy thing to do, but I would much rather that than experiance this slow death because they are doing everything on the cheap... P.S I dont consider myself a retard or shit-for-brains either. Fair enough- apologies for being a bit confrontational last night, but I was exceptionally pissed off (as we all were/still are.) I think you're way off the mark with what you're saying though, and it's a disgraceful opinion to hold. I do agree with what Pugsley and Rob have written above: Coates should at least make an honest statement about what went on and acknowledge what a fuck up it was.We deserve that much at least.
|
|
|
Post by elsidibe on Feb 1, 2014 11:05:34 GMT
Apparently we had 7 players on 50k+ per week. We now have 6 of them. I think everyone can agree that this probably far too much for a club like Stoke City who recently posted a 30m loss for the last trading year. We had the chance to spend big money and we blew it. Take Southampton as an example. They paid 15m for Osvaldo, realised he was crap and promptly sold him for almost what they paid for him. We, on the other hand, signed a host of players on big money and even though it was clear that they were crap, we persisted with them, didn't cash in on them when we had the chance and now we are stuck with them. Step forward the likes of Palacios, Jerome, Crouch and Adam. It is fairly clear that we've had a "one in one out" policy since the Summer but sadly no-one seems to want some of the crap that we have got in our ranks. Who can blame them? Criticism of Coates support of the club, on this occasion, is way wide of the mark. This isn't 1997 now. Coates has invested a small fortune. It isn't just transfer fees. That is the easy bit. Sustaining the wages that this players come in on is the big drain. People won't have that though will they Dave? Pulis only spent 20 million a season to keep us up, thats good value. You are so right it's not about the fees it's the bloody wages we have to pay to the overpaid prima donns that is killing us. Have we had value for money? Have we fuck? The Pulis apologists need to wake up, he's fuckin hamstrung the club, you can guarantee that if we get dicked today, P and G will be rife with comments like" the grass is not always greener" and that sort of shit. The rot set in after the cup final and the waste of money that was Crouch, Palacios and Jerome.Bullseye. Let's have a look at what you've won.
|
|
|
Post by digger on Feb 1, 2014 12:48:25 GMT
Apparently we had 7 players on 50k+ per week. We now have 6 of them. I think everyone can agree that this probably far too much for a club like Stoke City who recently posted a 30m loss for the last trading year. We had the chance to spend big money and we blew it. Take Southampton as an example. They paid 15m for Osvaldo, realised he was crap and promptly sold him for almost what they paid for him. We, on the other hand, signed a host of players on big money and even though it was clear that they were crap, we persisted with them, didn't cash in on them when we had the chance and now we are stuck with them. Step forward the likes of Palacios, Jerome, Crouch and Adam. It is fairly clear that we've had a "one in one out" policy since the Summer but sadly no-one seems to want some of the crap that we have got in our ranks. Who can blame them? Criticism of Coates support of the club, on this occasion, is way wide of the mark. This isn't 1997 now. Coates has invested a small fortune. It isn't just transfer fees. That is the easy bit. Sustaining the wages that this players come in on is the big drain.
|
|
|
Post by wingy11 on Feb 1, 2014 13:13:07 GMT
It's all about the money money
|
|
|
Post by Fred Astaire on Feb 1, 2014 13:57:35 GMT
Where's Pennant? GONE BUT WAS PAID Where's Agudelo? NO DOUBT PAYING SOME OF HIS WAGES Guidetti is on loan PAYING WAGES Assaidi is on loan PAYING WAGES AND MAYBE LOAN FEE Muniesa was a free and would have cost the square route of fuck all in fees WAGES We've just taken over the contracts of Ireland and nobody seems to know how long he is here for WAGES AND SIGNING Likewise Odemwingie - but a good deal on this one possibly Better if you had read my post carefully, the point was about wages, everyone goes on about transfer fees but typically the wages plus add ons over a contract are more than the fee. Nonsense to say we are not spending, the fact the players signed are not playing is an issue for the manager not the Chairman Ah yes wages. Jerome, Edu, Shotton, Kightly, Ness, Shea, Agudello and Butland have all spent some degree of the season out on loan having some degree of their wages paid by the clubs they are loaned to (probably only Jerome to any significant level) which as a whole would surely cancel out Assaidi's & Ireland's wages The club had a release clause in Pennant's contract which they used in January which probably meant they did not have to pay his full wages, probably just a percentage of them. Jones has gone to Cardiff to more than cancel out Odemwingie's wages Fuller, Upson, Owen, Whitehead, Delap, Sidibe, Nash, Cuvelier, all off the wage bill from last season. They together will cancel out any wages that we've added to the wage bill. Total - We're spending the square total of fuck all!!! Apart from the cost of the wool that they've firmly secured over your eyes
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2014 17:13:52 GMT
What a difference a day can make. Great post Trousers. We do have seem to have more than our fair share of bed wetters...
|
|