Have I missed something?

[Big_Bald_Si]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/sai...for_saints.php

 

According to this article, Saga has joined AAB on loan - when did this happen?

[Master Bates]

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/sai...for_saints.php

 

According to this article, Saga has joined AAB on loan - when did this happen?

 

No article fella, it happened though.

[Marsdinho]

Last week i think

[Nexstar]

August 7th

[Big_Bald_Si]

Why did they not mention anything on the OS? Very strange indeed.

 

Not understanding why we're loaning these players out, as they'll only come back and we'll have to pay their wages again. Why not sell them, or if we're that desperate, let them go elsewhere for free?

[Scudamore]

So in conclusion...yes you have missed something...Saga leaving for some team i've never heard of on loan...

[stevegrant]

Why did they not mention anything on the OS? Very strange indeed.

They did: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10414

 

Not understanding why we're loaning these players out, as they'll only come back and we'll have to pay their wages again. Why not sell them, or if we're that desperate, let them go elsewhere for free?

It seems as if nobody is willing to take the likes of Saganowski and Rasiak off our hands on a permanent basis right now, presumably because of their high salaries. They can probably afford to take them on loan, paying the salaries for a short period of time and with no obligation at the end of the loan period to sign them permanently.

 

In terms of the benefit to us, it gives us a short-term cash flow relief but we also still own the registration of two players who have demonstrated an ability to score goals at this level at times in the last 2 years. If we can get ourselves back to a situation where the finances aren't so tight, perhaps we might still see the pair of them play for us again, or (again, if we get to a non-desperate financial state) sell them for more than a pittance.

[Bossman]

Why did they not mention anything on the OS? Very strange indeed.

 

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10414

[Big_Bald_Si]

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10414

 

I stand very much corrected!

[Scummer]

If we can get ourselves back to a situation where the finances aren't so tight, perhaps we might still see the pair of them play for us again, or (again, if we get to a non-desperate financial state) sell them for more than a pittance.

 

Do we know how long Saga and Rasiak have got left on their contracts? Not much I'd have thought by next summer.

[Scudamore]

I stand very much corrected!

 

...said the man in the orthopaedic shoes

[buctootim]

Do we know how long Saga and Rasiak have got left on their contracts? Not much I'd have thought by next summer.

 

Dunno. But you're right, thats the key. I think our current plan is to just survive until we can get them, Skacel, BWP and Euell off the wage bill. The c£3m pa that would save would enable us to stabilise and improve the team.

[Whitey Grandad]

Do we know how long Saga and Rasiak have got left on their contracts? Not much I'd have thought by next summer.

 

Saga and Rasiak each have two years left. Their value on the balance sheet will be written down over that period so as each season goes past the club's assets are reduced by that depreciation, and this will figure in the losses for the year.

[um pahars]

or (again, if we get to a non-desperate financial state) sell them for more than a pittance.

 

When do their contracts run out???

 

I assumed we would get no money for Rasiak as thought his deal wouldprobably be three years, which would expire at the end of the Watford loan.

 

Saga, I presume he still has one or two years left???

[stevegrant]

When do their contracts run out???

 

I assumed we would get no money for Rasiak as thought his deal wouldprobably be three years, which would expire at the end of the Watford loan.

 

Saga, I presume he still has one or two years left???

Rasiak signed a 4-year deal when his loan from Spurs was made permanent. Saganowski's is a 3-year deal, so I think they both expire at the same time, i.e. in 2010.

[Whitey Grandad]

There's a bit about hime here:

 

http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/localsport/3597206.Rasiak_signs_on_loan/

 

It says that there is an option to sign him in January for an 'agreed fee'. We paid £2m for him for 4 years so his write-down would be £500k pa.

[Chez]

They did: http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/?page_id=10414

 

 

It seems as if nobody is willing to take the likes of Saganowski and Rasiak off our hands on a permanent basis right now, presumably because of their high salaries. They can probably afford to take them on loan, paying the salaries for a short period of time and with no obligation at the end of the loan period to sign them permanently.

 

In terms of the benefit to us, it gives us a short-term cash flow relief but we also still own the registration of two players who have demonstrated an ability to score goals at this level at times in the last 2 years. If we can get ourselves back to a situation where the finances aren't so tight, perhaps we might still see the pair of them play for us again, or (again, if we get to a non-desperate financial state) sell them for more than a pittance.

 

By not offloading them properly we end up paying their wages during the summer when they nothing to earn it.

[stevegrant]

By not offloading them properly we end up paying their wages during the summer when they nothing to earn it.

That's true, but if the only takers are willing to take them on a loan basis, I don't see that we've got an awful lot of choice in the matter.

[um pahars]

Rasiak signed a 4-year deal when his loan from Spurs was made permanent. Saganowski's is a 3-year deal, so I think they both expire at the same time, i.e. in 2010.

 

Didn't realise Rasiak got a four year deal!!!!!!!!!!!

[stevegrant]

Didn't realise Rasiak got a four year deal!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/search/?page_id=6853

[um pahars]

http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/search/?page_id=6853

 

That was some commitment back then by Lowe. I remember him saying he had blown the wage cap to land him, but didn't realise it was such a lomg term commitment.

[Thedelldays]

That was some commitment back then by Lowe. I remember him saying he had blown the wage cap to land him, but didn't realise it was such a lomg term commitment.

what, penny pincher lowe..?

 

[um pahars]

what, penny pincher lowe..?

 

 

Exactly!!!!!!!!

 

He spent 2million on Rasiak and then committed the Club to a four year deal.

 

And that was about the same time as he was telling everyone that their was a war chest that Burley could spend.

[angelman]

Lowe is not a penny pincher. Can't you remember him splashing £3.2m on Tino and I presume that he gave to go ahead for our club record £4m on Delap, or actually if you take Tino and his bum chum cousin to keep him company at (I think) £1.1m then that is probably really the club record.

[Thedelldays]

Exactly!!!!!!!!

 

He spent 2million on Rasiak and then committed the Club to a four year deal.

 

And that was about the same time as he was telling everyone that their was a war chest that Burley could spend.

and there i was being told he was deliberately trying to run this club down....

[um pahars]

and there i was being told he was deliberately trying to run this club down....

 

And of course when the statement comes out that the Club has been mismanaged (by his new sidekick) since the same summer, the part about giving Rasiak a 4 year deal on mega wonga is brushed over (along with the warchest quote!!!).

 

The double standards at play are shocking.

[stevegrant]

The double standards at play are shocking.

From more angles than I think you're suggesting.

 

After all, many people on here claimed (and still claim, despite mountains of irrefutable evidence to the contrary) that Lowe refused to spend any money when he was chairman the first time around.

[Thedelldays]

From more angles than I think you're suggesting.

 

After all, many people on here claimed (and still claim, despite mountains of irrefutable evidence to the contrary) that Lowe refused to spend any money when he was chairman the first time around.

im sure, even lowe's most harsh critics on saintsforever even produced a balance sheet for our time at sms to relegation and it showed that we spent every penny we had on players...well almost, we made something like £2m profit in over 4 years..

 

i may be wrong but im sure i read somthing like that....

 

we did spend plenty, but maybe not too wisely as we should have....

[Whitey Grandad]

im sure, even lowe's most harsh critics on saintsforever even produced a balance sheet for our time at sms to relegation and it showed that we spent every penny we had on players...well almost, we made something like £2m profit in over 4 years..

 

I may be wrong but im sure i read somthing like that....

 

we did spend plenty, but maybe not too wisely as we should have....

 

Yes I remember that too, in terms of strict cash purchases and sales of players we were very nearly even. Of course there were probably all sorts of agents' fees and expenses on top. IMO the problems were caused by the rapid turnover of managers. Every new one would buy in his own favourites without moving on the players he didn't like and we would end up with a squad of nearly 40. Fabrice was a clear example.