Jump to content

Gary Hooper


Ivan Katalinic's 'tache

Recommended Posts

Most these posts just make me glad a fan isn't running the club, we'd be back in administration in 5 minutes.

 

Why? Don't say we should pay top whack for any player but consider:

 

* We're top of the league, crying out for a striker and won't have a better opportunity to get to the Prem and all its riches

* The lad is only 23/24 and has considerable resale value

* He's shown he can cut the mustard in the NPC - third top scorer in 2009/10 for a team that was hardly setting the pace and he's got goals in Europe and, whatever you say about the SPL, has dealt with the pressure of playing for Celtic, attracting Capello's interest

* Crazy though it sounds, perhaps his valuation is on the low side, reflecting the discount associated with playing in a noddy league. One good season in England and I wouldn't be surprised to see his value shoot up.

 

Not saying £6m is peanuts and doesn't raise a few eyebrows but its not totally unhinged and represents better value than the kind of money that's been spunked out on many English-based players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to be run exactly the same way as when Lowe was Chairman
You really think so? Under Lowe we signed loads of players that never improved us and in the end made us weaker. Here we're talking of only signing players that buy into the ethos of what NC and NA are trying to achieve and will genuinely improve us.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, this number just keeps on getting more and mre ridiculous. As said previously, to a newly promoted club going into the Premier League and finishing in the bottom 6, it is worth around £35m.

 

with player salaries being cranked up by about a third of that over 2 or 3 years.Do we see Blackpool throwing money about or Birmingham? West Ham sold,let go and reduced their salarial mass at first and now that they're in with a chance they're cranking it up a bit again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that include things like parachute payments?
Np, that is with staying up. One of the biggest things is for instance you receive £40m for TV rights after being promoted, but on average due to clauses in contracts, wage costs increase by £10m. Then you have the money for where you finish in the League, and also increase in matchday revenue. Then there is potential sponsorship deals (ie the money Man city are receiving for the Etihad naming etc. Essentially, that £100m is the BEST CASE scenario for any team. As said by both the Burnley and Blackpool chairman when it was mooted around £60m, they said it was realistically nowhere near that figure.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

with player salaries being cranked up by about a third of that over 2 or 3 years.Do we see Blackpool throwing money about or Birmingham? West Ham sold,let go and reduced their salarial mass at first and now that they're in with a chance they're cranking it up a bit again

 

Exactly. The money is not massive and the more I see it mentioned the more frustrated I get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does that include things like parachute payments?

 

It's supposed to be something like 35m for the first, 40m for the next (goes up if you stay up) and your parachute payments are only based on how long you were in the prem for, so no as we haven't been there yet it doesn't include it. If we went back down though it'd be 5-7m but only for another season or spread over two.

 

6m for an overlooked english striker who appears to have a decent couple of seasons under his belt (and one injury) could be a good move though (just to try and get back on topic) I assume he was with Adkins at s****horpe too which is a plus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Np, that is with staying up. One of the biggest things is for instance you receive £40m for TV rights after being promoted, but on average due to clauses in contracts, wage costs increase by £10m. Then you have the money for where you finish in the League, and also increase in matchday revenue. Then there is potential sponsorship deals (ie the money Man city are receiving for the Etihad naming etc. Essentially, that £100m is the BEST CASE scenario for any team. As said by both the Burnley and Blackpool chairman when it was mooted around £60m, they said it was realistically nowhere near that figure.

 

So really promotion can be worth 100 million, it's just that clubs choose to spend more money. Additionally, the parachiue payments mean you will receive at least 100 million doesnt it? Why should the parachute payments not count?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, this number just keeps on getting more and mre ridiculous. As said previously, to a newly promoted club going into the Premier League and finishing in the bottom 6, it is worth around £35m.
I'ts nowhere near £100 million but quite significantly more than £35 million, when you take in to account the tv revenue, the prize money and the guaranteed 4 season parachute payments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

with player salaries being cranked up by about a third of that over 2 or 3 years.Do we see Blackpool throwing money about or Birmingham? West Ham sold,let go and reduced their salarial mass at first and now that they're in with a chance they're cranking it up a bit again

 

In fairness, West Ham are walking the tightrope financially and are banking on an immediate return to the Premier League. I'd cringe if we had players on the same salaries as the likes ot Taylor, Carew and Nolan (who was on £50,000 a week at Newcastle) in our ranks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So really promotion can be worth 100 million, it's just that clubs choose to spend more money. Additionally, the parachiue payments mean you will receive at least 100 million doesnt it? Why should the parachute payments not count?

 

No, the only reason it has gone from 60-100m is due to the naming rights on Man City's stadium and the £40m a year they receive from that.

 

What I am saying is that £100m includes the best sponsorship, the best ticket revenue, the best merchandising etc in the Premier League. For instance, if Man United were in the Championship and got promoted again, then it is likely that their promotion would be worth a lot more than a smaller teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

with player salaries being cranked up by about a third of that over 2 or 3 years.Do we see Blackpool throwing money about or Birmingham? West Ham sold,let go and reduced their salarial mass at first and now that they're in with a chance they're cranking it up a bit again

 

LOL at 'their salarial mass' that's awesome!

 

Have you just made that up or is this another bu--sh-t bingo, buzz-phrase that hasn't reached me yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the only reason it has gone from 60-100m is due to the naming rights on Man City's stadium and the £40m a year they receive from that.

 

What I am saying is that £100m includes the best sponsorship, the best ticket revenue, the best merchandising etc in the Premier League. For instance, if Man United were in the Championship and got promoted again, then it is likely that their promotion would be worth a lot more than a smaller teams.

 

Pretty sure that I saw the figure of 90 million mentioned a few years ago during the playoff final.

 

Edit: there you go see above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Np, that is with staying up. One of the biggest things is for instance you receive £40m for TV rights after being promoted, but on average due to clauses in contracts, wage costs increase by £10m. Then you have the money for where you finish in the League, and also increase in matchday revenue. Then there is potential sponsorship deals (ie the money Man city are receiving for the Etihad naming etc. Essentially, that £100m is the BEST CASE scenario for any team. As said by both the Burnley and Blackpool chairman when it was mooted around £60m, they said it was realistically nowhere near that figure.

 

Both excellent examples. Neither is sat on a pot of gold, like some people seem to think. Both will be receiving parachute payments, but this isn't to say this immediately gives them £50m in their back pocket, allowing them to spend beyond their means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure that I saw the figure of 90 million mentioned a few years ago during the playoff final.

 

Edit: there you go see above.

 

"The Football League Championship play-off final on Monday will again be worth about £90m to the winner, accountancy group Deloitte has calculated.

 

That is how much money either Reading or Swansea City will pocket if they are promoted to the Premier League - the biggest prize in domestic football.

 

The £90m includes more than £40m of higher broadcast income, gate receipts and commercial income next season.

 

The club would also get payments of up to £48m if immediately relegated."

 

So if we stay up it is worth around £40m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The Football League Championship play-off final on Monday will again be worth about £90m to the winner, accountancy group Deloitte has calculated.

 

That is how much money either Reading or Swansea City will pocket if they are promoted to the Premier League - the biggest prize in domestic football.

 

The £90m includes more than £40m of higher broadcast income, gate receipts and commercial income next season.

 

The club would also get payments of up to £48m if immediately relegated."

 

So if we stay up it is worth around £40m.

 

ARGH! It's obvious to everyone but you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL at 'their salarial mass' that's awesome!

 

Have you just made that up or is this another bu--sh-t bingo, buzz-phrase that hasn't reached me yet?

 

It's quite a common phrase actually although some call it the total payroll or "wage bill". I've heard it used in EEC meetings in Brussels, the brits seemed to understand what it meant with no raising of the eyebrows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£6 million in the Championship. Wow.

 

On the plus side, I'm sure Hooper is a better player than Rory Delap, who unfortunately holds the record.

 

If Hooper puts together a 14 year Premier League career like Delap has, he should be very proud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We would get around 40m when we go up, and then another 50m or so when we go back down ? And if we stay in the prem we get more than that? Is that correct ?

 

The £90m often used by the press is the figure if you were to stay in the Premier League for one year and then get 4 years of parachute payments. So the £90m is over 5 years.

 

If you weren't relegated, those same 5 years could see the club earn £200m+ in TV money.

 

None of this takes into account the extra money you could earn through increased sponsorship, advertising, ticket sales, merchandising etc etc whilst in the top flight.

Edited by Matthew Le God
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the premiership is worth so much how comes Pompey are/were in so much debt?

 

Because they've been in debt for yonks,have a shît ground and not many fans. Their PPs would have totalled about 20 million,ie not much more than ours when we were relegated. The Saints were in the top flight for many years and yet we ended up in admin as well. The whole point being that any pretention of PL survival means that you have to increase your total salary mass enormously and project said amount over 2 or 3 years because the players you take on won't accept contracts of 1 year or 18 months.That's what happened to us,as many have said we spent 7 million but we'd sold players for more than that after relegation,Baird,Bale,Theo,Jones etc etc brought in far more than we spent. But as we weren't a hip team any more any we had an absolute knob of a manager in Burley we wasted our money on iffy,overaged,burnt out players who were just there for the money.Pompey were exactly the same, big wage bill with nothing to show for it on the field.Throw in a couple of iffy owners and bob's yer uncle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that is a CHOICE of the individual club to put in clauses that increase wages. Why are you finding this difficult?

 

Most clubs do this. There's no way a potential transfer target would sign for a promotion chasing club without asking for a high wage, or a clause for a substantial pay rise on promotion.

 

Most of our first team have signed new, long term deals, and all will receive substantial pay rises if we get promoted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So anyway...back to Gary Hooper.... no developments then.... just lots of arguements about hypothetical parachute payments that we may or may not be entitled to should we maybe get promoted and then possibly relegated or not as the case may be...

 

New talented striker anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it's you being a pedantic f ucking no brained pr ick as you usually are. Seriously, what the f uck is wrong with you? I would say you're a WUM, but I don't think you are, I think you're just a monumental c unt.

 

Classy. Seriously there is nothing at all pedantic about it. EITHER you go up and go straight back down, in which case you get parachute payments. Otherwise you get at least 30 million tv revenue and if you stay up then you get that AGAIN the season after. Therefore promotion has meant you have got a lot more than the 35 million you claim. There we go I was able to make my point without abuse, not sure you will be able to achieve the same feat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The £90m often branded about in the press is the figure if you were to stay in the Premier League for one year and then get 4 years of parachute payments. So the £90m is over 5 years.

 

If you weren't relegated, those same 5 years could see the club earn £200m+ in TV money.

 

None of this takes into account the extra money you could earn through increased sponsorship, advertising, ticket sales, merchandising etc etc whilst in the top flight.

 

Can't believe I am agreeing with MLG over this. It's seems quite obvious to me!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We would get around 40m when we go up, and then another 50m or so when we go back down ? And if we stay in the prem we get more than that? Is that correct ?

 

In a nutshell. That is the answer. What we choose to do with that (be it put the standard wage increase clause in our player contracts or whatever) is entirely our choice but in terms of revenue, that breaks it down nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely it doesn't need explaining but Pompey are mainly up sh1t creek because they splurged millions they didn't have on player wages and transfer fees based on attendances of no more than 21,000. They even needed the Prem parachute money up front before relegation to pay football creditors such as Udinese, who they hadn't paid for Muntari, or they'd have been kicked out of the league. They spent LOTS more than they could possibly earn with their poxy fanbase - that doesn't mean the amount they could make wasn't significant, they just spent a hell of a lot more than that. It's utterly irrelevant to a debate about how much being in the Prem is worth anyway.

 

Also contrary to some implications on this thread, the parachute payments have nothing to do with how long you've been in the Prem - they are a set amount, and the only fluctuations come when relegated teams get re-promoted whilst still receiving parachute money, thus removing the requirement to pay them the parachute payment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Classy. Seriously there is nothing at all pedantic about it. EITHER you go up and go straight back down, in which case you get parachute payments. Otherwise you get at least 30 million tv revenue and if you stay up then you get that AGAIN the season after. Therefore promotion has meant you have got a lot more than the 35 million you claim. There we go I was able to make my point without abuse, not sure you will be able to achieve the same feat.

 

But you are treating that as profit. It's not, it's revenue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...