The January Transfer Window 2019!

[SuperSAINT]

Is Fraser Forster actually training?

 

Yes.

[Forester]

well, they do

Carrillo, Boufal, Clasie and now Hoedt all loaned out.

2 of those were our most expensive signings at the time along with our costliest ever defender

 

throw in Forster on £90k a week to....just train

Long with a new deal etc..

 

so yes, they do player recruitment better than us at present

These are the key facts relevant to looking at that net spend table. While fans often like to see a big net spend, reality is that you really want to be successful but be recouping good transfer fees when you do ship players out. So it’s not the lack of net spend that is a concern per se, more the fact that it is WHY we have negative net spend that is incompetent.

 

On the subject of January, I for one are quite happy not to spend this month and let Ralph continue to improve and assess the squad. If there is a great deal to be done then fine, but often it’s panic buying in January.

[Chez]

Why would you want him here with his wages?

 

because he was mustard before the injury, hence my question, is he back to where he was before the injury. If the answer is no then obviously I wouldn't want him here. I avoid watching Villa wherever possible, hence I don't know if he has got his mojo back. If not Bolasie, then someone offering his combination of pace, power and tricks please.

[Heisenberg]

I think the point is that every other club appears to actually invest money, not just spend what they get in fees.

 

Unfortunately not all clubs pay c80-100k a week to the no.3 GK.

 

Or have record signings out on cheap loans.

 

We have a large Les Reed F-up Era to clean up before we can start again.

[Guan 2.0]

I don't blame Ralph or even RK or Gao that much, to be honest. Gao and RK explained to Ralph the transfer situation when he was approached to be our new manager, and while he doesn't seem over the moon with the situation, he does accept it. Gabbiadini out and Davis/hoedt loans free up enough cash that we shouldn't have to dip into summers transfer funds to cover Ings, which is all for the good. I can't speak for other fans, but I'd rather Ralph has a full range of options in the summer, rather than dip into the advance now and gamble on an overpriced replacement.

 

If we can get the players in on Loan, fine. Otherwise, I'm a lot more excited by a team training intensively under Ralph for 10 days without interruption than I am transfer countdowns.

[Vancouver Saint]

Last 5 years 'Net Spend' table...

 

https://www.transferleague.co.uk/premier-league-last-five-seasons/transfer-league-tables/premier-league-table-last-five-seasons

 

 

 

Says it all. Unfortunately our Academy piggy bank is empty - our days as a milking cow for the owners are over. Fundamental rethink required by Gao if he thought he was buying a cash cow.

[SuperSAINT]

I don't blame Ralph or even RK or Gao that much, to be honest. Gao and RK explained to Ralph the transfer situation when he was approached to be our new manager, and while he doesn't seem over the moon with the situation, he does accept it. Gabbiadini out and Davis/hoedt loans free up enough cash that we shouldn't have to dip into summers transfer funds to cover Ings, which is all for the good. I can't speak for other fans, but I'd rather Ralph has a full range of options in the summer, rather than dip into the advance now and gamble on an overpriced replacement.

 

If we can get the players in on Loan, fine. Otherwise, I'm a lot more excited by a team training intensively under Ralph for 10 days without interruption than I am transfer countdowns.

 

This was one of my worries, Guan. I understand the cash situation, but I worried that the perception of the situation might make Ralph somehow re-think our 'ambition' if anyone comes calling in the summer.

 

Hopefully we've got a good plan in place for the summer that gets him excited.

[Crab Lungs]

I genuinely don’t understand there cash situation - other clubs seem to be able to spend money, yet we seem to have to sell before we can buy a lot of the time.

 

I know we’re haemorraging some cash on a couple of ridiculous contracts but that net spend table says it all.

[RedWillie]

Where do Bournemouth get their money from? Small ground and no sales revenue to speak of.

 

Still spending what we put in their begging buckets at st Marys a few years ago...or it could be the Russian bloke who has bankrolled them up the divisions

[Victor]

Still spending what we put in their begging buckets at st Marys a few years ago...or it could be the Russian bloke who has bankrolled them up the divisions

 

For goodness sake - why don't you write and ask for your money back (if you actually put anything in the bucket)? And when you get it back just shut up.

[Ultimatt]

I genuinely don’t understand there cash situation - other clubs seem to be able to spend money, yet we seem to have to sell before we can buy a lot of the time.

 

I know we’re haemorraging some cash on a couple of ridiculous contracts but that net spend table says it all.

 

The club changed strategy in 2016 with a new KPI of "Average contract length". That meant long new contracts to the entire playing group with pay rises attached. Our wage budget went up almost 30% in one year. Now we can't offload them and wish some of them were on short contracts. Our board have been awful since that strategy change with the contracts/signings.

[LGTL]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

[SuperSAINT]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

 

Plus pay offs to Puel / Pellegrino / Hughes.

[LGTL]

Plus pay offs to Puel / Pellegrino / Hughes.

 

Absolute worst case scenario that's £10 million each, and I doubt it's that high. We are still in a positive net transfer spend even if you include those!

 

Oh well, it's only money. And I'd rather a competent manager then splashing loads at rubbish like Hoedt and Carrillo again.

Edited 22 January, 2019 by LGTL

[saint77]

I genuinely don’t understand there cash situation - other clubs seem to be able to spend money, yet we seem to have to sell before we can buy a lot of the time.

 

I know we’re haemorraging some cash on a couple of ridiculous contracts but that net spend table says it all.

 

Same boat as many prem teams at the moment I.e Arsenal ,Everton etc

[Toadhall Saint]

Plus pay offs to Puel / Pellegrino / Hughes.

 

Plus business don’t run themselves - how many people do saints employ other than playing staff? It all adds up.

[SuperSAINT]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

 

What do the accounts say? I normally assume most people that ask "where's the money, FFS" always under-estimate just how much all the wages cost.

[SW5 SAINT]

Plus pay offs to Puel / Pellegrino / Hughes.

 

Gao needs to pay down the loan he took out to buy us in the first place. That is where I think a lot of the money is going.....

[SuperSAINT]

Gao needs to pay down the loan he took out to buy us in the first place. That is where I think a lot of the money is going.....

 

I assume this will be shown in the next set of financial accounts?

[Dusic]

Gao needs to pay down the loan he took out to buy us in the first place. That is where I think a lot of the money is going.....

Not according to the club. He hasnt requested to take any money out.

 

Have to remember, in the case of Hoedt for example that we will probably be paying Lazio for him for another 2 years, regardless of whether he is at the club or not. Likewise Carillo. Likewise Boufal.

 

We have a series of expensive signings that we continue to pay for even though they aren't at the club, a wage bill that is in the top 10 in the PL and three Manager payoffs.

 

It all adds up.

[SuperSAINT]

Gao needs to pay down the loan he took out to buy us in the first place. That is where I think a lot of the money is going.....

 

I assume this will be shown in the next set of financial accounts?

[John D]

I assume this will be shown in the next set of financial accounts?

 

Will certainly confirm or dispel a few myths anyway

[philelec]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

 

That's the "in" tray, now do the "out" tray - the cost of running the club.

[The Fat Controller]

The wage bill must be huge

25 man squad averaging £40k p/w

Then all the other management /staff etc

[Saints foreva]

Same boat as many prem teams at the moment I.e Arsenal ,Everton etc

 

Yes but sell before we can buy has been this clubs mentality since 2014.

[meatball]

Call me old fashioned but I prefer it when businesses are profitable and financially secure.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[saintwbu]

For the first time ever, I want us to sell more than i want us to buy anyway. We built a squad with strength in depth when we got to Europe, but the problem was that it wasn’t that strong. Now we have multiple senior pro’s not getting in the squad every weekend, or out on loan. For a club of our size that isn’t sustainable at all. We desperately needed to trim the squad, fill the gaps with youngsters and eventually replace some of the first team with genuine quality. We probably won’t ever have a squad of two quality players in each position, but i’d rather we had a great first team instead like we used to.

[doddisalegend]

I genuinely don’t understand there cash situation - other clubs seem to be able to spend money, yet we seem to have to sell before we can buy a lot of the time.

 

I know we’re haemorraging some cash on a couple of ridiculous contracts but that net spend table says it all.

Silva was saying that Everton can't buy unless the sell only a few days ago...

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Saint Garrett]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

 

Absolutely sums my thoughts up. Something doesn’t add up here.

[Heisenberg]

Call me old fashioned but I prefer it when businesses are profitable and financially secure.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

We wouldnt be if we were relegated.

[Colinjb]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

 

Over the five years, based on a squad of 35 players this is an individual wage of £57,000 a week.

 

This excludes any other costs/wages/taxes.

 

Doesn't seem that unfeasible.

[Roo1976]

there is so much bluster and hot air in this thread .............whats happend to the transfer speculations ?

[ericb]

Over the five years, based on a squad of 35 players this is an individual wage of £57,000 a week.

 

This excludes any other costs/wages/taxes.

 

Doesn't seem that unfeasible.

 

Over the last 10 years we've made a net profit of £71m in transfers, but until about 3 years ago were running with an operational debt. Make of that what you will.

[egg]

Absolute worst case scenario that's £10 million each, and I doubt it's that high. We are still in a positive net transfer spend even if you include those!

 

Oh well, it's only money. And I'd rather a competent manager then splashing loads at rubbish like Hoedt and Carrillo again.

 

Wages and manager pay offs aren't the only expenses!! That said, they eat up the majority of our expenditure. Then there's agents, other staff, other running costs, we spent £40m on staplewood, tax on any operating profit, repayment of loans etc etc.

[LGTL]

Wages and manager pay offs aren't the only expenses!! That said, they eat up the majority of our expenditure. Then there's agents, other staff, other running costs, we spent £40m on staplewood, tax on any operating profit, repayment of loans etc etc.

 

Quite. But then again I didn't include matchday income, ticket/ST sales, sponsorship money etc.

[SuperSAINT]

there is so much bluster and hot air in this thread .............whats happend to the transfer speculations ?

 

Here are one for you - Update on Jack Clarke

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/8255719/man-united-interested-leeds-jack-clarke/

[doddisalegend]

there is so much bluster and hot air in this thread .............whats happend to the transfer speculations ?

There isn't any transfer news that's why these threads end up like this.

 

It would probably better if we had two threads one to discuss stuff ( on the understanding it will most likely be full of crap) and a another thread which is only press links/ rumours and actual club press statements with no discussions. So people could discuss why we need a striker, haven't spent any money, Puel etc on the discussion thread. People who just want to look at transfer news could have all the links in one thread to just look at. More work for the mods mind to keep the links only thread clean.

 

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[Dan Johnson]

Since the 2013/14 season, we have received the following central payments from the Premier League, that include TV money and merit payments;

 

13/14 - £77 million

14/15 - £82 million

15/16 - £85 million

16/17 - £122 million

17/18 - £107 million

 

A total of £473 million.

 

We have received a further £46 million in net transfer fees, bringing our total up to £519 million. Over half a billion!

 

We must have some bloody high wages, because how the hell are we now in a situation where we have to sell to buy? I just don't get the current money situation.

 

hypothetically, with a 22 man squad who are each on 45k a week, thats £990k a week total wage bill for the 22 man squad ALONE!!

 

over the 5 years, just with that 22 man squad that's half the £519 million gone already (£275.5 million)

 

Now consider the first team coaches who will be on decent money, the directors and board, the ground staff etc etc etc we probably employee easily another 400 people? Even if all those 400 people were on 25k A YEAR (imagine mark hughes being on just 25k a year lol) then thats another 50 million over 5 years and we are already at £325 million even when massively under valuing non playing staff wages!

 

Take into account managerial pay offs, transfers, normal business running costs (insurance, accounting, stationary, equipment etc etc etc) it's not hard to see how we need to sell to buy

[CB Fry]

There isn't any transfer news that's why these threads end up like this.

 

It would probably better if we had two threads one to discuss stuff ( on the understanding it will most likely be full of crap) and a another thread which is only press links/ rumours and actual club press statements with no discussions. So people could discuss why we need a striker, haven't spent any money, Puel etc on the discussion thread. People who just want to look at transfer news could have all the links in one thread to just look at. More work for the mods mind to keep the links only thread clean.

 

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

In fairness if you just want transfer rumours from other media, it's all there on Newsnow or individual newspaper/broadcaster websites or Twitter. Can't really see the point of a links only thread. Especially as nothing is actually happening anyway so would be a dead thread.

 

If people aren't prepared to wade through the guff on here for the real info then tough. Put the work in, snowflakes!

[doddisalegend]

In fairness if you just want transfer rumours from other media, it's all there on Newsnow or individual newspaper/broadcaster websites or Twitter. Can't really see the point of a links only thread. Especially as nothing is actually happening anyway so would be a dead thread.

 

If people aren't prepared to wade through the guff on here for the real info then tough. Put the work in, snowflakes!

I'm not overly bothered I just take saintsweb threads for what they are if they stay on track for more than 10 posts they are doing well.

 

Just seems to me judging by the endless complaints about the thread derailing some people just want a rumours links only thread with little or no discussion. Either way it's not up to me.

 

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[supersonic]

The only manager we are currently paying off is Hughes.

 

As others have said, we'll still be paying for players like Hoedt/Boufal/Carillo for a while as the payments aren't usually done in one go. If you think we may be covering some of their wages whilst on loan, as well as paying most (if not all) of Ings' wages and we have people like Forster on a huge wage you can see why we have no money.

 

Football contracts are a dangerous game, you don't want to give a player a too long contract and then have to be stuck with them for the duration if this doesn't work out, or you don't want to give a player a short-term deal and they turn in to a star and you have to sell under-priced or possibly lose them for nothing.

 

I think we've been too reactive with players and offering them new deals too quickly and a serious summer clearout is needed. Let's hope Hoedt players ok for Celta and they buy him.

[Turkish]

hypothetically, with a 22 man squad who are each on 45k a week, thats £990k a week total wage bill for the 22 man squad ALONE!!

 

over the 5 years, just with that 22 man squad that's half the £519 million gone already (£275.5 million)

 

Now consider the first team coaches who will be on decent money, the directors and board, the ground staff etc etc etc we probably employee easily another 400 people? Even if all those 400 people were on 25k A YEAR (imagine mark hughes being on just 25k a year lol) then thats another 50 million over 5 years and we are already at £325 million even when massively under valuing non playing staff wages!

 

Take into account managerial pay offs, transfers, normal business running costs (insurance, accounting, stationary, equipment etc etc etc) it's not hard to see how we need to sell to buy

 

And every other club has all these expenses as well, plus agents fees, bonuses etc which is the usual line trotted out to defend our spending. Yet out of all the other clubs we are the only one who has reported a profit from transfers over the last 5 years. The profit from transfers alone would cover the cost of Staplewood, (which should have been £20m less but that's another story)

 

Mike Ashley gets absolutely destroyed by Newcastle fans for not spending but over the last 5 years they have a £71m spend against out £46m profit from transfer. They also have a season in the championship to take into account in that period.

[Chewy]

In fairness, we do have a really good club twitter feed, plus some lovely signs saying 'We March On' all over the place. I'm much happier that we spend money on pretending to be a big deal than investing on the first team. Bournemouth have got it so wrong.

[tajjuk]

Same is true of Arsenal and Everton, and Arsenal are supposedly quite cash rich and Everton are now bankrolled by Moshiri.

 

Whilst we are not cash rich or bankrolled, I suspect we are in the same situation as those two clubs, its wages more than transfer fees that are the problem. Clubs have wages budgets worked out and FFP also has restrictions on the wage bill rising, so you can't just go out and add 150k a week (say one elite level player or two very good level players for us) if you are already at the max.

 

I fully suspect, based on the lower wages and finances most continental clubs have, that the likes of Hoedt, Boufal, Clasie, Carrillo and possibly Davis that we are in part paying some of their wages up to a PL level.

 

It's the kind of the curse that comes with the blessing of having PL money, players coming into the club and their agents are attracted by the wages and money on offer in the PL that allows most PL clubs to attract players at a higher level than they would otherwise.

 

That means lots of players on £50-70k a week, because these players were probably only earning more like £30-40k at their Italian, Spanish, Dutch, French clubs etc. So probably we are still picking up 50% of their wages when they are on loan.

 

Then we have the likes of Austin, Cedric, Forster, Long, etc. who are probably on £65k a week plus but are not currently nailed on first teamers.

 

The squad is just too bloated with high earners, mainly left over from the planning for a European campaign and the mass load of long contracts we gave out to try to hold onto our players.

 

 

But there is one week of the transfer window left and 14 PL clubs so far have signed no one.

 

Only Bournemouth, Cardiff, and Chelsea have signed anyone for a substantial fee.

 

Bournemouth and Cardiff likely have much lower wage bills, with many of their squad players likely to be on Championship level wages.

[SimplyRed&White]

Same is true of Arsenal and Everton, and Arsenal are supposedly quite cash rich and Everton are now bankrolled by Moshiri.

 

Whilst we are not cash rich or bankrolled, I suspect we are in the same situation as those two clubs, its wages more than transfer fees that are the problem. Clubs have wages budgets worked out and FFP also has restrictions on the wage bill rising, so you can't just go out and add 150k a week (say one elite level player or two very good level players for us) if you are already at the max.

 

I fully suspect, based on the lower wages and finances most continental clubs have, that the likes of Hoedt, Boufal, Clasie, Carrillo and possibly Davis that we are in part paying some of their wages up to a PL level.

 

It's the kind of the curse that comes with the blessing of having PL money, players coming into the club and their agents are attracted by the wages and money on offer in the PL that allows most PL clubs to attract players at a higher level than they would otherwise.

 

That means lots of players on £50-70k a week, because these players were probably only earning more like £30-40k at their Italian, Spanish, Dutch, French clubs etc. So probably we are still picking up 50% of their wages when they are on loan.

 

Then we have the likes of Austin, Cedric, Forster, Long, etc. who are probably on £65k a week plus but are not currently nailed on first teamers.

 

The squad is just too bloated with high earners, mainly left over from the planning for a European campaign and the mass load of long contracts we gave out to try to hold onto our players.

 

 

But there is one week of the transfer window left and 14 PL clubs so far have signed no one.

 

Only Bournemouth, Cardiff, and Chelsea have signed anyone for a substantial fee.

 

Bournemouth and Cardiff likely have much lower wage bills, with many of their squad players likely to be on Championship level wages.

 

First sensible post in a long time on this forum!

[Saint IQ]

Our annual wage bill in the 2016-17 season was 112.5m probably higher now even with Gabbiadini and Davis leaving

 

https://www.planetfootball.com/quick-reads/a-club-by-club-breakdown-of-wages-in-the-premier-league-championship/

 

Still we could go down if Redmond gets injured so surely getting someone in now would make financial sense.

[Soggy Bottom]

Not a full member so I can't create a new thread, but just found this in my Internet Explorer favs: http://foreversaints.1talk.net/f1-forever-saints

It does put things back in perspective about moaning that we are not spending £30 million plus on a player etc

[Dan Johnson]

And every other club has all these expenses as well, plus agents fees, bonuses etc which is the usual line trotted out to defend our spending. Yet out of all the other clubs we are the only one who has reported a profit from transfers over the last 5 years. The profit from transfers alone would cover the cost of Staplewood, (which should have been £20m less but that's another story)

 

Mike Ashley gets absolutely destroyed by Newcastle fans for not spending but over the last 5 years they have a £71m spend against out £46m profit from transfer. They also have a season in the championship to take into account in that period.

 

Well the reason that it's trotted out is because it's the truth, there is no conspiracy, the club is publicly traded and the accounts are available for all to see.

 

Making a profit from transfers while being good business sense means little else to our spending power as transfer profit doesn't take into account the clubs other expenditure. We may have made £46m in transfer profit over the last 5 years but we could have made a loss of £47m in other areas so our overall profit and available cash is -£1m.

[capitalsaint]

It isn't publicly traded...

[SuperSAINT]

And every other club has all these expenses as well, plus agents fees, bonuses etc which is the usual line trotted out to defend our spending. Yet out of all the other clubs we are the only one who has reported a profit from transfers over the last 5 years. The profit from transfers alone would cover the cost of Staplewood, (which should have been £20m less but that's another story)

 

Mike Ashley gets absolutely destroyed by Newcastle fans for not spending but over the last 5 years they have a £71m spend against out £46m profit from transfer. They also have a season in the championship to take into account in that period.

 

Newcastle work the same way though, I believe.

 

I think money they spend is generated by the club.