Danny Rose

[mouse]

Tagging me again. I dont know.
Anyway, you seem to regard us as a relitavely poor club. A small club of little resources. I don't belittle us like that. I see us as a massive club, with a massive fanbase, and a club that should be trying to compete with the best..
Difference between us is I respect your opinions, even though I think they're negative, misguided bollocks

Nope, the difference is that i can back my opinion with facts and figures and you cant.
You're still yet to respond to the figures i posted in the transfer thread?

Financially, we're still clearly in the top 1 or 2% of all football clubs world wide. I'm well aware of that, its just the step up to the 5 or 6 clubs above us currently is still vast.

 

[John Thomas]

Nope, the difference is that i can back my opinion with facts and figures and you cant.
You're still yet to respond to the figures i posted in the transfer thread?

Financially, we're still clearly in the top 1 or 2% of all football clubs world wide. I'm well aware of that, its just the step up to the 5 or 6 clubs above us currently is still vast.

#Net Spend last 5 YearsPurchased GrossSoldNettPer Season 1Manchester City£723,850,000£217,750,000£506,100,000£101,220,0002Manchester United£611,800,000£174,550,000£437,250,000£87,450,0004Arsenal£298,740,000£116,850,000£181,890,000£36,378,0003Liverpool£396,300,000£277,080,000£119,220,000£23,844,0005Chelsea£602,459,000£410,450,000£192,009,000£38,401,8006Leicester£181,000,000£97,750,000£83,250,000£16,650,0007Crystal Palace£192,035,000£56,700,000£135,335,000£27,067,0008West Ham£188,450,000£81,870,000£106,580,000£21,316,0009Watford£144,200,000£51,650,000£92,550,000£18,510,00014Everton£332,600,000£200,100,000£132,500,000£26,500,00010Brighton & Hove Albion£75,805,000£12,000,000£63,805,000£12,761,00011AFC Bournemouth£88,450,000£24,830,000£63,620,000£12,724,00015West Bromwich Albion£139,850,000£40,209,000£99,641,000£19,928,20012Newcastle United£206,300,000£155,600,000£50,700,000£10,140,00015Stoke City£101,700,000£53,250,000£48,450,000£9,690,00016Huddersfield Town£44,615,000£14,400,000£30,215,000£6,043,00017Burnley£85,150,000£61,450,000£23,700,000£4,740,00018Southampton£237,800,000£210,550,000£27,250,000£5,450,00019Swansea£145,575,000£195,060,000-£49,485,000-£9,897,00020Tottenham£341,450,000£339,400,000£2,050,000£410,00
Theres some facts and figures for you.
20th out of 20 in the transfer net spend table.
So, as the 9th richest club in Europe, why is it so unreasonable to expect a little more investment in our playing squad from our super rich owners

 

[mouse]

#Net Spend last 5 YearsPurchased GrossSoldNettPer Season 1Manchester City£723,850,000£217,750,000£506,100,000£101,220,0002Manchester United£611,800,000£174,550,000£437,250,000£87,450,0004Arsenal£298,740,000£116,850,000£181,890,000£36,378,0003Liverpool£396,300,000£277,080,000£119,220,000£23,844,0005Chelsea£602,459,000£410,450,000£192,009,000£38,401,8006Leicester£181,000,000£97,750,000£83,250,000£16,650,0007Crystal Palace£192,035,000£56,700,000£135,335,000£27,067,0008West Ham£188,450,000£81,870,000£106,580,000£21,316,0009Watford£144,200,000£51,650,000£92,550,000£18,510,00014Everton£332,600,000£200,100,000£132,500,000£26,500,00010Brighton & Hove Albion£75,805,000£12,000,000£63,805,000£12,761,00011AFC Bournemouth£88,450,000£24,830,000£63,620,000£12,724,00015West Bromwich Albion£139,850,000£40,209,000£99,641,000£19,928,20012Newcastle United£206,300,000£155,600,000£50,700,000£10,140,00015Stoke City£101,700,000£53,250,000£48,450,000£9,690,00016Huddersfield Town£44,615,000£14,400,000£30,215,000£6,043,00017Burnley£85,150,000£61,450,000£23,700,000£4,740,00018Southampton£237,800,000£210,550,000£27,250,000£5,450,00019Swansea£145,575,000£195,060,000-£49,485,000-£9,897,00020Tottenham£341,450,000£339,400,000£2,050,000£410,00
Theres some facts and figures for you.
20th out of 20 in the transfer net spend table.
So, as the 9th richest club in Europe, why is so unreasonable to expect a little more investment in our playing squad from our super rich owners

Well that changes everything, what a comprehensive and well presented argument.

 

[John Thomas]

Well that changes everything, what a comprehensive and well presented argument.

So, with that in mind, I'll ask one more time. As the 9th richest club in Europe, but with the lowest net transfer spend in the whole of the Premier League, why is it so unreasonable to expect more investment in our playing squad. You asked for facts and figures. I provided them

 

[mouse]

So, with that in mind, I'll ask one more time. As the 9th richest club in Europe, but with the lowest net transfer spend in the whole of the Premier League, why is it so unreasonable to expect more investment in our playing squad. You asked for facts and figures. I provided them

No - from what i can make out you've literally just (badly) posted a net transfer spend table.

But transfers aren't just the only outlay the club makes, - I've asked you to show me where this extra investment is to come from whilst still staying within FFP and paying off the other huge investments that the club has made over the last 5 years.

 

[mouse]

In fact, contrary to it being detrimental, our low net spend is the reason we have been able to compete more effectively over the last few years.

It is well documented that our buisness model is based on selling players for profit and that has helped to bridge the gap between us and other clubs that bring in much more money than us commercially. if you knew or were prepared to learn anything about the way we operate financially you would understand that.

The Swiss Ramble: Tottenham Hotspur - Moving On Up

Levy explained the strategy thus, “Our pragmatic player trading has been important in the way we have run the business of the club and in getting us to the position where we have now been able to start work on a new stadium.” Indeed, without those player sales, Tottenham would have reported losses of £141 million.

 

[mouse]

Oh here he is.....

Impaired communication skills?
Problems establishing relationships?
Repetitive behavioural traits?

Autism spectrum - Wikipedia

if you want me to write you another Haiku just ask?

 

[Airfixx]

In fact, contrary to it being detrimental, our low net spend is the reason we have been able to compete more effectively over the last few years.

It is well documented that our buisness model is based on selling players for profit and that has helped to bridge the gap between us and other clubs that bring in much more money than us commercially. if you knew or were prepared to learn anything about the way we operate financially you would understand that.

The Swiss Ramble: Tottenham Hotspur - Moving On Up

Levy explained the strategy thus, “Our pragmatic player trading has been important in the way we have run the business of the club and in getting us to the position where we have now been able to start work on a new stadium.” Indeed, without those player sales, Tottenham would have reported losses of £141 million.

You're wasting your time mate... John-Boy doesnt do facts, learning and things of that nature.... He just wants a pony and will "sqweem and sqweem and sqweem until [he makes everyone else] sick.

 

[John Thomas]

You're wasting your time mate... John-Boy doesnt do facts, learning and things of that nature.... He just wants a pony and will "sqweem and sqweem and sqweem until [he makes everyone else] sick.

John-Boy always backs his points up with facts and figures.
As above. My argument is we could and should invest more in the transfer market, instead of expecting our manager to work miracles with his hands tied . Are you disputing the fact that we are the lowest net spenders? Lets see some figures from you to prove otherwise. Put up, or shut up, as they say.

 

[John Thomas]

No - from what i can make out you've literally just (badly) posted a net transfer spend table.

But transfers aren't just the only outlay the club makes, - I've asked you to show me where this extra investment is to come from whilst still staying within FFP and paying off the other huge investments that the club has made over the last 5 years.

But you keep avoiding the point.

On the one hand you acknowledge we have the lowest 5 year net spend in the WHOLE of the premier league. Including the likes of Burnley, Huddersfield and 17 others.

On the other hand you acknowledge our status as one of the richest clubs in Europe.

So, Im not asking for extra investment that would break FFP.

I'm asking for investment befitting of our financial status.

If all 19 other clubs are investing more, why is it unreasonable to think we are being short changed, especially while the trophy cabinet remains bare

 

[mouse]

But you keep avoiding the point.

On the one hand you acknowledge we have the lowest 5 year net spend in the WHOLE of the premier league. Including the likes of Burnley, Huddersfield and 17 others.

On the other hand you acknowledge our status as one of the richest clubs in Europe.

So, Im not asking for extra investment that would break FFP.

I'm asking for investment befitting of our financial status.

If all 19 other clubs are investing more, why is it unreasonable to think we are being short changed, especially while the trophy cabinet remains bare

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or whether this is just over your head. I think a little from column A and a little from column B.

I haven't avoided the point. I've tried to explain it to you and I've provided evidence.

Once more as its half time in the Liverpool game.

Comparing clubs net transfer spend alone as a marker of financial viability and success is useless as each club has their own financial models and constraints in play. Some have more investment from owners, some have more collateral, some have borrowed more, some make more money commercially.

For a number of years we have used our profit in the transfer market to re-invest in other areas of the club, be that wages, or investing in capital expenditure and assets like the training centre or the new billion pound stadium.

To keep it simple stupid - we use our profit from transfers to pay for other things.

 

[John Thomas]

I'm not sure if you're being deliberately obtuse or whether this is just over your head. I think a little from column A and a little from column B.

I haven't avoided the point. I've tried to explain it to you and I've provided evidence.

Once more as its half time in the Liverpool game.

Comparing clubs net transfer spend alone as a marker of financial viability and success is useless as each club has their own financial models and constraints in play. Some have more investment from owners, some have more collateral, some have borrowed more, some make more money commercially.

For a number of years we have used our profit in the transfer market to re-invest in other areas of the club, be that wages, or investing in capital expenditure and assets like the training centre or the new billion pound stadium.

To keep it simple stupid - we use our profit from transfers to pay for other things.

So you're happy that we sit bottom of the transfer net spend table while we regularly miss our transfer targets and Poch openly voices his frustration at our transfer policy. So long as we, to use your words, make a profit in the transfer market to invest in other areas of the club.
Yes. You're making it very clear now.

 

[mouse]

So you're happy that we sit bottom of the transfer net spend table while we regularly miss our transfer targets and Poch openly voices his frustration at our transfer policy. So long as we, to use your words, make a profit in the transfer market to invest in other areas of the club.
Yes. You're making it very clear now.

How else would you like us to have funded the training centre and continue to fund the new stadium?

 

[Maccer]

How else would you like us to have funded the training centre and continue to fund the new stadium?

What trophies do they give out for new stadiums and training facilities ?

Who were the previous holders, when can you do a lap of honour and where do you it ?

So many questions in these footballing parallel universes.

 

[Bagelboy]

So you're happy that we sit bottom of the transfer net spend table while we regularly miss our transfer targets and Poch openly voices his frustration at our transfer policy. So long as we, to use your words, make a profit in the transfer market to invest in other areas of the club.
Yes. You're making it very clear now.

Apparently it was Pochettino who didn't want Barkley this window.
Also the only teams who’ll be spending is then teams trying to stay up, using one of either parachute or PL money, and clubs like Man U, City and maybe & Chelsea.
Liverpool suddenly spend nearly 3 times the usual net spend over how many seasons, 8?
Tells me they can only afford £75m for VVD becuase they will be selling.
If they don’t I’ll be surprised. I don’t think they are seeing that much profit from theirnextension yet.
They spent less than we did last season and the same the season before.
We are never going to be able to spend like City and Man U or pay their wages.
We are like most clubs. Even Chelsea who before Conte we spending £10m and selling to buy.
If you count Costa sale the spent £75m last two seasons. Sold £231m bought £306m

We could improve our match day income with the new place, but it’s all about sponsorship/commercial and TV revenue with the others.
We are about £60m down on both on Woolwich & Liverpool
City got £53m matchday income compare to our £41m 15/16, yet they got £178 in sponsorship And £160m in TV revenue.
We got £59m and £110m
That £170m extra makes a difference. 3 players on 150k is £23m a season.
You can only spend and pay what you earn.
When we we become a consistent CL side and raise our matchdaynrevenue we can compete with Woolwich, Liverpool and raise our wage bill. But we are never going to compete with the two mancs, unless we get bought by Qatar.

 

[Mockers]

The new stadium and training facilities are steps towards us competing long term at the top of the league.

It’s frustrating being patient but that’s the path we have to take unless you’d rather a quick gratification that’d put our future in jeopardy.

 

[mouse]

What trophies do they give out for new stadiums and training facilities ?

Who were the previous holders, when can you do a lap of honour and where do you it ?

So many questions in these footballing parallel universes.

They should give out trophies for the most short sighted fans.

If you can't see how improving our facilities and our stadium will increase and cement our chances of success for the foreseeable future then this is a pointless argument.

Its take it you've not got a mortgage or a pension? Don't believe in investing in the future?

 

[Essexyido94]

Isn’t this meant to be a Danny rose thread?

 

[Bazali]

Funny that people are eager to slag off players like Bale, whilst fawning over Rose and calling for the head of players who actually are loyal like Davies.

Davies is loyal, genuine etc but simply not good enough along with Tripps

 

[Bazali]

Funny that people are eager to slag off players like Bale, whilst fawning over Rose and calling for the head of players who actually are loyal like Davies.

Advised, you’re being very kind to him. At what point does common sense kick in. You don’t need to be very clever to realise the extent to which you’re publicly slagging off your employer, used to love him and the whole it’s a job stick yes yes yes. Fact is he accepted an improved contract, while the rest of his colleagues were chasing Chelsea he was in recovery, adding comments like ‘his worth’ doesn’t signify any team ethic and ‘players you need to google’ is just nasty never mind unnecessary.
He wears our colours so I’ll support but that’s all as far as I’m concerned he’s impeding my club’s progress

He’s not very clever

But best we’ve got in that position by a country mile