Jump to content

Peter Griffin

Established Member
  • Posts

    5,400
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Everything posted by Peter Griffin

  1. It would save us a fortune in wages too. Poch 15m, Sarina <1m
  2. We could make a statement signing as manager and go for Sarina Wiegman
  3. That may be due to Howe v Gerrard as opposed to our respective transfer windows
  4. Bonuses are insulated by money received for the sporting success that warrants the bonus payments but bonus payments are the smaller portion of the player's wage. Bonus payments at Man City, when they have a successful season are circa 10m/15 for the full squad. That is only about 3 weeks wages for many of them. That is not too much insulation.
  5. Targett 15m v Digne 26m Guimares 38m v Kamara Free Chris Wood 27m v Ings or Ollie (in situ) Botman 33m v Carlos 26m Pope 10m v Emi 1 (in situ) Burn 13m v Chambers Free Trippier 12m v Cash (in situ) How do u see their transfers have overtaken us?
  6. If he is looking for a sporting project we are well positioned. Send Gerrard and Purslow to his house with the PowerPoint and he is all but signed up
  7. I was assuming that he was an alternative to Isak, I hadn't consider them buying both but now u say it that could be the case
  8. Guilbert, Nakamba and Sansan are surplus to requirements imo. 3rd/4th placed backup should be from youth imo or players covering multiple positions e.g. Ash
  9. Abramovic bought Chelsea for 140m and sold it for 4.25Billion, that is quite a healthy. Yes he wrote of debt but there were external factors related to the sale. The fact that he was receiving none of the sale proceeds and was not allowed to received the 1.5Bbn back would have helped to write off the debt. Man Utd is the same, it is worth multiples of what was paid for it, again massive profit for the businesses. A lot of investors at that level do not want an annuity, they just want the value of the capital asset to increase, I expect this is what NSWE are doing. But, if they did want an annuity they can still realise one as demonstrated at Man Utd. Football is a very difficult business and the risks are high but if the club is well managed then the rewards are equally high.
  10. PaddyPower are very good at their marketing
  11. There is more to go before we start making any holes in the squad imo
  12. Yes, I want to see him play in the first team. Ideally, I would like to see us sell Ings and replace him with a younger striker that is higher profile to Ollie so he would come in as the senior striker. But I am talking about the selling him comments, it isn't happening.
  13. U can say that about any of our players, there is NOTHING to suggest we are selling Archer and SG has actually stated he is going to be part of our 1st team this season. Just drop the narrative, its daft.
  14. I like the type of player but I would not like to see us buy a player that is not due back from a serious injury till after the WC break. Too much risk imo and not enough short term ROI for the investment. It would be difficult to have any real positive contribution this season. I would much prefer to see the money go on a player that goes straight into the 1st team
  15. As in: we will give u ElGhazi for free and pay 50% of his wages if u give us Sangare for 30m Seriously though, with Rangers result last night PSV have a much more difficult financial year ahead and may need to cash in. The same logic will suggest they won't want to pay a fee for ElGhazi
  16. I get that, and yes every player has a price and I have no problem with the club selling any of our players for crazy money. But I can still see that Gerrard's quote is a joke and it is not saying he would sell him this summer
  17. And do you actually believe that Gerrard is saying Archer is for sale at the right price based on that? Seriously, Gerrard and Lowe are mates, PNE don't have naughts to spend on players. It is clearly a joke and telling the guy that he is not for sale and Villa rate him very highly. Turning that into Gerrard said Archer is for sale at the right place is ragtop clickbait nonsense
  18. That looks like an opinion to me and not a quote., The article in the Athletic is behind a Paywall so I can't see it
  19. When/where did he say that, I can only find links to Greg Evans' opinion about Archer where he thinks Archer would be sold for the right price. Do u have a link?
  20. I believe from an FFP perspective the rental income is based upon the a market rate rental yield. So the stadium was worth 56m and if the market rate is 5% yield the rent will be 2.3m a year
  21. They pay 2.5m a year which is very low.. But they can't use the stadium for other purposes and they do not own the naming rights to it. Theoretically, the new Chelsea owner could buy the naming rights and call it the Chelsea FC Supporters stadium
  22. Why? If we could own the stadium we wouldn't have the rental costs on our accounts
  23. Yes, if u rent the stadium the rental cost is subject to FFP. However, with a long term rental agreement it is not that unusual for the tenant to pay for upgrades to the premises and not impact rental agreement amount for the term of the contract. It would be nice if the club could use the redevelopment to buy the stadium back or get equity in the stadium. NSWE only paid AVFC 56m for the stadium and the redevelopment costs will be double that
  24. https://s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/gc-media-assets.gc.avfcservices.co.uk/6450db80-f650-11ec-928d-3b29163abbc6.pdf I think your observations of the CGI were correct
  25. Only 99.99%? I think I would go a bit higher than that. Any time I asked for a link to it the conversation appeared to change
×
×
  • Create New...

exclamation-mark-man-user-icon-with-png-and-vector-format-227727.png

Ad Blocker Detected

This site is paid for by ad revenue, please disable your ad blocking software for the site.

Â