lewisnadasurf1 6:14 Mon Feb 3
Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
|
Sorry if this has been said before.
But where are we spent £240m on players on the last 4 years coming from? Are they including wages in that figure?
I've done some fag packet research and the net spend is about £80m at BEST. Infact 3 years ago we made a profit!
???????
|
|
|
Replies - Newest Posts First ( Show In Chronological Order)
Jonah Lomas
10:53 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
stewie griffin 7:16 Mon Feb 3
The strategy of signing players at their peak value, on peak wages etc wouldn't be too bad if those players were actually any good, or actually what we needed, or were to specifically replace an outgoing transfer.
I think the biggest problem is that there is a complete and utter inability to identify and fill the gaps in the squad, of which there are loads.
And, of course, a complete and utter inability (or desire) to get deals for players who WOULD fill those gaps over the line.
I know people joke about them using the FM games to scout players, but that would actually be better than what our current player identification process appears to be.
|
Johnson
10:46 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
https://twitter.com/rich_energy/status/1224395581466054660?s=21
Sullivan has a stake in this company, the utter utter cunt.
|
Too Much Too Young
10:25 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Why don't these cunts just sell up and fuck off.
FFS
|
penners28
9:47 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
The issue is the normal board lapdog mongs actually believe these figures...
|
rumford
8:05 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
The problem is which ever way you look at it the most recent accounts show the the total annual spend/cost were 28 m more than the annual income/ revenue. hence the loss.
Would Deliotte Touche, who undertake the annual review of the premiership finances, not identify any clear anomalies that exist.
|
geoffpikey
8:03 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Swiss. Yep, your figure roughly tallies.
This is how clubs like Palace, Bournemouth survive I guess. Premier League payments are HUGE! Dildos have somehow managed to piss half of it all. Useless wankers.
|
geoffpikey
8:00 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Premier League income, TV share and position prize, was for the last four years:
122,528,66
116,094,523
116,626,014
85,765,168
Which is over 441,000,000 in last four years. So that's a £200m positive balance anyway?! What has it been spent on? More cheese?
Can't be arsed to dig any deeper.
|
Alex V
7:58 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
It doesn't include wages afaik. A lot of money has been spent for sure.
|
Swiss.
7:58 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
We would have received 480m in Sky money alone over 4 years so hardly something to brag about
|
Lee Trundle
7:53 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
The old tarmacer has laid the boot in.
He has a go at:
The owners
The fans
The players
Bizzarely brings up Brady's sexuality.
And praises Allardyce and MOYES.
https://richardajkeys.com/index.php/blog/231-west-ham-a-car-crash
|
Sven Roeder
7:44 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Agree that when you see a team like that on Saturday run around (& get the run around) any inflated figures on ‘spend’ just make things worse.
All it shows is that (apart from being liars) the clowns have proved over and over again in 25 years of football club ownership that they don’t have a FUCKING SCOOBY of how to produce anything meaningful on a football pitch even in the short term let alone over a sustained period that builds something.
Spectacular incompetence from the worst owners in the league.
|
Side of Ham
7:28 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Can't you just give out the spend of other clubs and add up theirs to find how average this is or have they really spent a fortune in comparison to their rivals in this league?
|
Lily Hammer
7:18 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Any journos peeping in here, we are not investigative journalists, so I hope you have some professional pride and that your editors and owners aren’t going to stand for these mugs trying to gag you. Don’t be their gimps and get digging.
There’s possibly enough dirt to fertilize the Sahara.
|
stewie griffin
7:16 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
When you hear the three stooges state figures such as £250 million as they do, they include player signing on fees, agent fees etc
I enjoy it when they do tbh. It just highlights their absolute incompetence. There is no plan, no strategy, no direction coming from the top. They sign players at their peak value, on peak wages, with no scope to improve, and are then flummoxed when they can't offload them. If you are a half decent signing, simply have 4 (FOUR) good premier league games and you can be assured of a bumper new contract that will take you to retirement in order that you can join the group above of unsaleable, unwanted and unmotivated players.
The fact that they even try to offer it as a defence just shows how fucking inept they are.
|
Johnson
7:04 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
They will be factoring absolutely every last thing; wages, bonuses, image rights, agent fees, flight expenses, shirt printing the fucking lot to make that number look as good as possible completely oblivious to the fact everyone knows Sullivan sets the transfer agenda at the club.
So, more and more failures lumped on that horrible midget gobshite.
|
North Bank
6:58 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Lily those figures are per window so two windows a season equates to £38 million per calendar season.
When you hear the three stooges state figures such as £250 million as they do, they include player signing on fees, agent fees etc
|
rumford
6:56 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Lily
The 40 m loan is still outstanding and they have loaned other money from Michael Tabors company to address cash flow problems.
|
rumford
6:47 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
www.transferleague.co.uk has a similar figure for 5 years 155.7m
|
Lily Hammer
6:46 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
Interesting, North Bank. So, less than £19 million a season. Can anyone, then, say how much TV and ticket money has come in over the same period?
Even when you take off the wages, there should have been a lot left over to have either spent on more or better quality players, or have spent on getting those (profitable) loans down.
|
North Bank
6:28 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
If you work on transfermarkt as their figures are reliable, then we have spent £150 million net over the last four seasons, which works out on average at £18.75 million per window
You can make your own minds up how that ranks for the 18th richest club in the World
|
Jaan Kenbrovin
6:26 Mon Feb 3
Re: Net Spend £240m last 4 years
|
I like the fact the owners try to use the net spend as a positive in their favour. Like they've lived up to their side of the job.
We have never been a richer club, and yet we are equally the same miserable failure we have been for most of my entire lifetime so far.
Cheers you fucking moronic cunts.
|
| 
