by Donkey Toon » Sat Sep 02, 2017 12:58 pm
Mifune wrote:@ OT and DT
I know there are other bills and such that cost money. Likewise there are other income streams other than transfer fees such as TV money, parachute payments, sponsorship, tickets money, etc. We will also be getting over £100m for being in the PL this season. I know we lost out on that £100m last season and the parachute payment will probably only cover about £40m of that and I know transfer fee we receive come in installments. We are though speculating a lot because we do not know for sure the financial situation or things that have been promised to Rafa.
That all said, why are all these problems Newcastle specific? We cannot be in a worse financial position than the likes of Brighton who spent almost £60m this summer. Why do we insist on paying transfers in one lump but accept transfer for our players in installments? Maybe so in three seasons everyone will have forgotten about the Sissoko money. Why if we are desperate for a certain player that could help us finish higher in the table (and make more money) can we not stake that out of the minimum £100m we know we will be receiving at the end of this season or the money we know we are getting for Sissoko?
End of the day we have had positions that have needed strengthening for a while now so either:
a) We have failed to identify players for these positions in which case Rafa and our scouting department are to blame.
b) We've had targets but failed to land them due to not wanting to spend the money needed to get them or being too slow. In this case Ashley and Charnley are to blame.
c) We have no money available to spend due to self-inflicted financial confines. In which case Ashley is responsible but only to blame if you disagree with his approach to running the club.
d) We've had the money but spent it in the wrong areas. In which case Rafa and Charnley are to blame/b]
I think if Rafa had been backed to a reasonable level we would've had a GK, LB, number 10 and a better strike force by now. I don't think that is unrealistic. I do acknowledge that the lack of outgoing has been an issue in freeing up squad space, but again that's not Rafa's job.
There is a lot there but I will try and give my take on the bits in bold.
1. Yeah we are all speculating to some point because we know little about what is actually going on. Although I have been using the 2015/16 accounts for the basis of our financial starting position. Which states zero bank balance (approx.), cash flow transfer deficit and the need for Ashley to put extra income into the club to cover day to day expenses. Agree that we don't know what Rafa has been promised except that Ashley has said he can have all available money generated by the club and Rafa has not disputed this.
2a. These issues are not Newcastle specific but each club will have its own issues. Brighton and Huddersfield will have some advantages in that their players will be on championship wages (or maybe even league 1 in some cases), and thus find it much easier to move the deadwood on. In addition they will be entering the season with lower wage bills, also lower as a percentage of income, and so the new PL income will leave them with much more room to increase their wage bills and to budget for player purchases.
2b. As for paying up front that was something Ashley introduced when he found out that the club had previously been financing player purchases by borrowing against future income (specifically gate receipts). I agree in principal, although don't have a problem with borrowing against the guaranteed minimum tv income. In light of our spending to date this window though I suspect we may have already financed acquisitions by borrowing against this. As will Brighton and Huddersfield.
3. Re "End of the day we have had positions that have needed strengthening for a while now so either:"
a) Agreed. Rafa has had 3 windows. The squad is now undeniably his, as are any shortcomings with it.
b) Disagree. There are other reasons why we may have missed out on targets; such as the club not wanting to sell or the player not wanting to move to us.
c) Agree that self-inflicted confines may be to blame for not having necessary cash. But it is also possible that we just plain have at times not had cash full stop. By which I mean club generated. My views on Ashley being under no obligation to put in more of his own money have been made numerous times. Would also had that technically the FIFA Fair Play rules do not allow it. Although with PSG it beggars the question whether the rules are being implemented or even worth the paper they are written on.
d) If the money has been spent in the wrong areas that is down to Rafa and not Charnley. Rafa apparently has final say on any transfers. The buck stops with him.
4. "I think if Rafa had been backed to a reasonable level we would've had a GK, LB, number 10 and a better strike force by now. I don't think that is unrealistic. I do acknowledge that the lack of outgoing has been an issue in freeing up squad space, but again that's not Rafa's job"
Not necessarily. He got two wingers, a CM, RB, CD, and Striker. Had he got the LB and GK but not the CM and CD would you now be saying he hadn't been backed because we didn't get a CM and defender? Clubs don't always get all the players they want, that is how it works. Real life is not like a computer game.
As for clearing deadwood that is primarily Charnley's job, but Rafa takes some responsibility for signing crap players for high wages that make that job extremely difficult in some instances. But ultimately squad management falls to Rafa. If he wants players out he has a part to play in helping that come about so he cannot be completely absolved.[quote="Mifune"]@ OT and DT
I know there are other bills and such that cost money. Likewise there are other income streams other than transfer fees such as TV money, parachute payments, sponsorship, tickets money, etc. We will also be getting over £100m for being in the PL this season. I know we lost out on that £100m last season and the parachute payment will probably only cover about £40m of that and I know transfer fee we receive come in installments. [b]We are though speculating a lot because we do not know for sure the financial situation or things that have been promised to Rafa.
[/b]
[b]That all said, why are all these problems Newcastle specific? We cannot be in a worse financial position than the likes of Brighton who spent almost £60m this summer. Why do we insist on paying transfers in one lump but accept transfer for our players in installments?[/b] Maybe so in three seasons everyone will have forgotten about the Sissoko money. [b]Why if we are desperate for a certain player that could help us finish higher in the table (and make more money) can we not stake that out of the minimum £100m we know we will be receiving at the end of this season or the money we know we are getting for Sissoko?
[/b]
[b]End of the day we have had positions that have needed strengthening for a while now so either:
a) We have failed to identify players for these positions in which case Rafa and our scouting department are to blame.
b) We've had targets but failed to land them due to not wanting to spend the money needed to get them or being too slow. In this case Ashley and Charnley are to blame.
c) We have no money available to spend due to self-inflicted financial confines. In which case Ashley is responsible but only to blame if you disagree with his approach to running the club.
d) We've had the money but spent it in the wrong areas. In which case Rafa and Charnley are to blame/b]
[b]I think if Rafa had been backed to a reasonable level we would've had a GK, LB, number 10 and a better strike force by now. I don't think that is unrealistic. I do acknowledge that the lack of outgoing has been an issue in freeing up squad space, but again that's not Rafa's job.[/b][/quote]
There is a lot there but I will try and give my take on the bits in bold.
1. Yeah we are all speculating to some point because we know little about what is actually going on. Although I have been using the 2015/16 accounts for the basis of our financial starting position. Which states zero bank balance (approx.), cash flow transfer deficit and the need for Ashley to put extra income into the club to cover day to day expenses. Agree that we don't know what Rafa has been promised except that Ashley has said he can have all available money generated by the club and Rafa has not disputed this.
2a. These issues are not Newcastle specific but each club will have its own issues. Brighton and Huddersfield will have some advantages in that their players will be on championship wages (or maybe even league 1 in some cases), and thus find it much easier to move the deadwood on. In addition they will be entering the season with lower wage bills, also lower as a percentage of income, and so the new PL income will leave them with much more room to increase their wage bills and to budget for player purchases.
2b. As for paying up front that was something Ashley introduced when he found out that the club had previously been financing player purchases by borrowing against future income (specifically gate receipts). I agree in principal, although don't have a problem with borrowing against the guaranteed minimum tv income. In light of our spending to date this window though I suspect we may have already financed acquisitions by borrowing against this. As will Brighton and Huddersfield.
3. Re "End of the day we have had positions that have needed strengthening for a while now so either:"
a) Agreed. Rafa has had 3 windows. The squad is now undeniably his, as are any shortcomings with it.
b) Disagree. There are other reasons why we may have missed out on targets; such as the club not wanting to sell or the player not wanting to move to us.
c) Agree that self-inflicted confines may be to blame for not having necessary cash. But it is also possible that we just plain have at times not had cash full stop. By which I mean club generated. My views on Ashley being under no obligation to put in more of his own money have been made numerous times. Would also had that technically the FIFA Fair Play rules do not allow it. Although with PSG it beggars the question whether the rules are being implemented or even worth the paper they are written on.
d) If the money has been spent in the wrong areas that is down to Rafa and not Charnley. Rafa apparently has final say on any transfers. The buck stops with him.
4. "I think if Rafa had been backed to a reasonable level we would've had a GK, LB, number 10 and a better strike force by now. I don't think that is unrealistic. I do acknowledge that the lack of outgoing has been an issue in freeing up squad space, but again that's not Rafa's job"
Not necessarily. He got two wingers, a CM, RB, CD, and Striker. Had he got the LB and GK but not the CM and CD would you now be saying he hadn't been backed because we didn't get a CM and defender? Clubs don't always get all the players they want, that is how it works. Real life is not like a computer game.
As for clearing deadwood that is primarily Charnley's job, but Rafa takes some responsibility for signing crap players for high wages that make that job extremely difficult in some instances. But ultimately squad management falls to Rafa. If he wants players out he has a part to play in helping that come about so he cannot be completely absolved.
