Adebayor gone (& we aren't paying his wages)

[SWP's back]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Are you on the wum or something? It is a saving on him. A player that wasn't playing for us,

If we replace him with someone that may play for us then no, we will not make a net saving overall, but we didn't want to. What we wanted was to receive a professional footballer that may help our title aspirations for the money we were laying out.

Can someone tell me if I speaking Swahili on this one? As I feel I may get better sense talking to my cushions.

Tell you what though, if just saving money is your preferred method for the club, then why don't we sell all of our players, irrespective of whether they play for us and only play trainees. We could save £180m per year doing that. Fucking awesome.

Its keeping me entertained SWP, I actually PMSL at that , says a lot for the education system in this country

Public school boy i take it ?... the ability to lick arse and be patronising at the same time...

But once more for the hard of hearing....And what i think is the truth or not put aside.... Point you can reference ( im sure such highly educated individuals who mock others education can graps the simple fact of factual reference)

They say the deal is for £5m......

so wages aside, taken they are a given for the new guys comming in, making any individual saving saving irrelevant.

Its like selling a house, you save £1000 a month, but you need to pay it on another.

But if you sold that house for £20k.... then bought a new one for £100k you can ive lost out by £80k. I havent actually saved anything at all.....

The fee is a poor one, that's the whole point... and when you look at the bigger picture we lose out big time... Forget FFP accounting figures. All we come out with is £5m.. now personaly i dont care less, im happy he has gone.. But dont bring figure's that in the real world have no realtive impact.

Now in common sense terms you try to maximise any investent... but to cut and run at the benefit of a club who would happily bend us over the Barrell on a player like Bale... thats a good deal ? Get of you're high horse.

Your analogy works better if used properly.

You own a house and are paying £1000 per month for it. But the problem is that you can't live in the house as it has masisve subsidence so you are staying at your mums. Now the house was worth £300k orginally and you have £200k still owing on it (for which you pay the £1000 per month). Now the house is a drain on your finances and you get no benefit from. Luckily, some fucker wants to build a tescos on it so doesn't care about the fact it is now unsafe to live as they are going to knock it down.

They pay the money you owe on the house and you save £1000 per month, though you obviously upset that you didn't make a profit on it or get back what you originally paid, however, you may now use that money to buy a new house that is actually habitable.

Look fella, the rest of the forum seem to understand this. Does that analogy now make sense?

 

[Rammy Blue]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Can you just run me through the maths again on the Ade sale, not sure I understand where the savings come in?

Cheers in advance.

Yeah we signed him on a new 6 year deal this morning and are paying Spuds £300k per week.

It's nice seeing you two getting along.

It's all good mate, no reason to visit "the cellar" when the loons are in here!

 

[SWP's back]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Can you just run me through the maths again on the Ade sale, not sure I understand where the savings come in?

Cheers in advance.

Yeah we signed him on a new 6 year deal this morning and are paying Spuds £300k per week.

It's nice seeing you two getting along.

We always do. Tall good looking people should stick together! ;-)

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

The point about replacing Adebayor (plus Bridge, RSC and one or two others)is that we presumably aren't replacing them. These are players who were completely surplus to requirements and their sale or loan will trim the wage bill not make space for others. Any replacements will come in place of players like Johnson, Kolo Toure or de Jong, who are part of the squad and will need to be replaced.

I'd expect us to get rid of about a net £25m off the £174m we paid in wages in 2010/11.

 

[SWP's back]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

The point about replacing Adebayor (plus Bridge, RSC and one or two others)is that we presumably aren't replacing them. These are players who were completely surplus to requirements and their sale or loan will trim the wage bill not make space for others. Any replacements will come in place of players like Johnson, Kolo Toure or de Jong, who are part of the squad and will need to be replaced.

I'd expect us to get rid of about a net £25m off the £174m we paid in wages in 2010/11.

Then sniff will be very happy as if we don't replace him then we are £23m better off in the next 24 months.

I think you may find however that he was a barrier to bringing in more players mate.

 

[sniff]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Its keeping me entertained SWP, I actually PMSL at that , says a lot for the education system in this country

Public school boy i take it ?... the ability to lick arse and be patronising at the same time...

But once more for the hard of hearing....And what i think is the truth or not put aside.... Point you can reference ( im sure such highly educated individuals who mock others education can graps the simple fact of factual reference)

They say the deal is for £5m......

so wages aside, taken they are a given for the new guys comming in, making any individual saving saving irrelevant.

Its like selling a house, you save £1000 a month, but you need to pay it on another.

But if you sold that house for £20k.... then bought a new one for £100k you can ive lost out by £80k. I havent actually saved anything at all.....

The fee is a poor one, that's the whole point... and when you look at the bigger picture we lose out big time... Forget FFP accounting figures. All we come out with is £5m.. now personaly i dont care less, im happy he has gone.. But dont bring figure's that in the real world have no realtive impact.

Now in common sense terms you try to maximise any investent... but to cut and run at the benefit of a club who would happily bend us over the Barrell on a player like Bale... thats a good deal ? Get of you're high horse.

Your analogy works better if used properly.

You own a house and are paying £1000 per month for it. But the problem is that you can't live in the house as it has masisve subsidence so you are staying at your mums. Now the house was worth £300k orginally and you have £200k still owing on it (for which you pay the £1000 per month). Now the house is a drain on your finances and you get no benefit from. Luckily, some fucker wants to build a tescos on it so doesn't care about the fact it is now unsafe to live as they are going to knock it down.

They pay the money you owe on the house and you save £1000 per month, though you obviously upset that you didn't make a profit on it or get back what you originally paid, however, you may now use that money to buy a new house that is actually habitable.

Look fella, the rest of the forum seem to understand this. Does that analogy now make sense?

I never failed to understand that at all, I got that in the first post and explained as such.

My point was, and always is that £5m is a poor fee from a buissness sense. No ammount of dressing up will change that, yes you will save in the short term on his contract. That would be all fine and great if the scenario was as you describe, i have no arguments about that. We get out of his contract with only a slight loss if you take the BBC, and a break even if you use you're source ( im not interested in debate on that either)

The issue is you are now left with nothing to fund the replacement (or new house in the analogy) If we could carry on without bringing in new players that would be a win, win situation. But the fact remains we have given him away for free from our side, so we can pay through the nose for someone else..

Like i explained many times the bigger picture shows this isnt a good deal for us by any stretch.

Other people have also questioned the explanation you gave them, you just havent aknowleged them.

My point always was unless we dont sign anyone else we save nothing. Now you agree with PB on the same point i made all along...Only time will tell if the others leave.

 

[Wretched Vengeance]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

On a lighter note, it look's as if Levy has managed to persuade Hughes to part with 9 million for Dawson.....so Sky said anyway.

 

[SWP's back]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Public school boy i take it ?... the ability to lick arse and be patronising at the same time...

But once more for the hard of hearing....And what i think is the truth or not put aside.... Point you can reference ( im sure such highly educated individuals who mock others education can graps the simple fact of factual reference)

They say the deal is for £5m......

so wages aside, taken they are a given for the new guys comming in, making any individual saving saving irrelevant.

Its like selling a house, you save £1000 a month, but you need to pay it on another.

But if you sold that house for £20k.... then bought a new one for £100k you can ive lost out by £80k. I havent actually saved anything at all.....

The fee is a poor one, that's the whole point... and when you look at the bigger picture we lose out big time... Forget FFP accounting figures. All we come out with is £5m.. now personaly i dont care less, im happy he has gone.. But dont bring figure's that in the real world have no realtive impact.

Now in common sense terms you try to maximise any investent... but to cut and run at the benefit of a club who would happily bend us over the Barrell on a player like Bale... thats a good deal ? Get of you're high horse.

Your analogy works better if used properly.

You own a house and are paying £1000 per month for it. But the problem is that you can't live in the house as it has masisve subsidence so you are staying at your mums. Now the house was worth £300k orginally and you have £200k still owing on it (for which you pay the £1000 per month). Now the house is a drain on your finances and you get no benefit from. Luckily, some fucker wants to build a tescos on it so doesn't care about the fact it is now unsafe to live as they are going to knock it down.

They pay the money you owe on the house and you save £1000 per month, though you obviously upset that you didn't make a profit on it or get back what you originally paid, however, you may now use that money to buy a new house that is actually habitable.

Look fella, the rest of the forum seem to understand this. Does that analogy now make sense?

I never failed to understand that at all, I got that in the first post and explained as such.

My point was, and always is that £5m is a poor fee from a buissness sense. No ammount of dressing up will change that, yes you will save in the short term on his contract. That would be all fine and great if the scenario was as you describe, i have no arguments about that. We get out of his contract with only a slight loss if you take the BBC, and a break even if you use you're source ( im not interested in debate on that either)

The issue is you are now left with nothing to fund the replacement (or new house in the analogy) If we could carry on without bringing in new players that would be a win, win situation. But the fact remains we have given him away for free from our side, so we can pay through the nose for someone else..

Like i explained many times the bigger picture shows this isnt a good deal for us by any stretch.

But we have untold wealth to bring new players in and we have cooked the books beautifully on the Ade sale so it was no net loss. A new £20m player over 5 years shows an amortisation of £4m per year. So long as we only pay him £230,000 or less per week then we have made zero impact on the figures for FFP (which is all that matters when our owner is richer than god)

 

[sniff]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Your analogy works better if used properly.

You own a house and are paying £1000 per month for it. But the problem is that you can't live in the house as it has masisve subsidence so you are staying at your mums. Now the house was worth £300k orginally and you have £200k still owing on it (for which you pay the £1000 per month). Now the house is a drain on your finances and you get no benefit from. Luckily, some fucker wants to build a tescos on it so doesn't care about the fact it is now unsafe to live as they are going to knock it down.

They pay the money you owe on the house and you save £1000 per month, though you obviously upset that you didn't make a profit on it or get back what you originally paid, however, you may now use that money to buy a new house that is actually habitable.

Look fella, the rest of the forum seem to understand this. Does that analogy now make sense?

I never failed to understand that at all, I got that in the first post and explained as such.

My point was, and always is that £5m is a poor fee from a buissness sense. No ammount of dressing up will change that, yes you will save in the short term on his contract. That would be all fine and great if the scenario was as you describe, i have no arguments about that. We get out of his contract with only a slight loss if you take the BBC, and a break even if you use you're source ( im not interested in debate on that either)

The issue is you are now left with nothing to fund the replacement (or new house in the analogy) If we could carry on without bringing in new players that would be a win, win situation. But the fact remains we have given him away for free from our side, so we can pay through the nose for someone else..

Like i explained many times the bigger picture shows this isnt a good deal for us by any stretch.

But we have untold wealth to bring new players in and we have cooked the books beautifully on the Ade sale so it was no net loss. A new £20m player over 5 years shows an amortisation of £4m per year. So long as we only pay him £230,000 or less per week then we have made zero impact on the figures for FFP (which is all that matters when our owner is richer than god)

I 100% understand that, and its a insightfull bit of accounting. I have no doubt that in terms of FFP this makes perfect sense. But to the rest of the world, clearly many on here who comment without attempting to understand.. Tottenham have a fucking steal..

I would have rather been able to actualy stump up the saving in the incomming transfer so it takes more preassure off FFP.. I still dont think we have a good deal at all.. ust moved on a player who will be great for another team.

 

[alera]

Re: Adebayor gone (Official)

Wow thats a surprise Hughes signing an old, shit, injury prone player for 3 times what he is worth.