Research On The 44 Players..Have To SAY We Spent Hardly Nothing

[Rsonist]

Rsonist. Read what I have written. According to the club offish the ENTIRE deal for Faurlin cost £3.5m. A fairly large outlay. No matter whether that money was on a transfer fee, wages, signing on fee or to fly in two dozen red roses before every game it is a cost the club has to pay, therefore showing that the club HAS spent a lot of money. Therefore showing that the point of view expressed by the thread starter is erronious.

1/ "according to the club offish". what credence does this have any more based on what we've seen, heard and read from the club during briatore and ali russell's tenure? it seems disingenuous to be this naive taking club statements at face value and then suddenly be sherlock holmes himself when it comes to attacking pete.

2/ it is extremely irregular practice to combine projected fees into the reporting of a transfer fee, and explicitly distorts the facts to appear as if more has been spent than first appears. in that case why not combine the future wages saved by selling blackstock and routledge into their sale fees - hey presto, they've gone for £8m and briatore is a transfer genius.

[W12_Ranger]

w12 ranger,

Blackstock was replaced by a loan player till end of this season

called

JAY SIMPSON

We sold Blackstock and got in a loan. How much did Flavio give for a new striker, you seem to have your finger on the pulse.

Please tell me?

Rubbish Pete before Blackstock left we needed a striker, when he left we needed 2. Pellicori was brought into replace Blackstock, if Jay Simpson was Blackstocks replacement why did it take us so long to acquire his services.

Keeping Spinning it Baby!

[toboboly]

1/ "according to the club offish". what credence does this have any more based on what we've seen, heard and read from the club during briatore and ali russell's tenure? it seems disingenuous to be this naive taking club statements at face value and then suddenly be sherlock holmes himself when it comes to attacking pete.

2/ it is extremely irregular practice to combine projected fees into the reporting of a transfer fee, and explicitly distorts the facts to appear as if more has been spent than first appears. in that case why not combine the future wages saved by selling blackstock and routledge into their sale fees - hey presto, they've gone for £8m and briatore is a transfer genius.

Rsonist. Do you really think Briatore mucks around with the official website? However at least I have found something with printable figures. I have asked Pete to show his links or whatever necessary to show that he hasn't just plucked figures out of the air. So far he has failed to do so.

In regards to your second point you are correct, it is unusual. However a pettern has emerged where you don't seem to have actually understood the thrust of the point I am making. I will try and show it below;

Pete says that Briatore hasn't spent much at the club.

Faurlin alone has cost the club £3.5m. There are then all the other wages, signing on fees, stadium upgrades, agents fees, loan fees and contracts paid off by mutual consent to add on.

Therefore the club has indeed spent a significant amount, especially when the average attendance is taken into account.


Do you now see that the point Pete raised is invalid UNLESS he can provide his workings out?

[Rsonist]

Rsonist. Do you really think Briatore mucks around with the official website? However at least I have found something with printable figures. I have asked Pete to show his links or whatever necessary to show that he hasn't just plucked figures out of the air. So far he has failed to do so.

In regards to your second point you are correct, it is unusual. However a pettern has emerged where you don't seem to have actually understood the thrust of the point I am making. I will try and show it below;

Pete says that Briatore hasn't spent much at the club.

Faurlin alone has cost the club £3.5m. There are then all the other wages, signing on fees, stadium upgrades, agents fees, loan fees and contracts paid off by mutual consent to add on.

Therefore the club has indeed spent a significant amount, especially when the average attendance is taken into account.

Do you now see that the point Pete raised is invalid UNLESS he can provide his workings out?

i think ali russell - mindful of increasing hype, expectation, season ticket sales, and attracting sponsors under briatore - was and is well capable of "mucking around" with the website. that is what he's well paid to do after all.

the point you in turn seem to be having trouble with is that your own "proof" (the official statements) with regards moneys spent is next to worthless. even if i nor pete have the paperwork to equally disprove faurlin's fee, common sense at least dictates that it is highly unlikely.

finally i repeat - have you really taken into account the outgoing fees from the club? and if you have does it all still add up to a "significant amount" on the basis of the stated goals of promotion challenge and champions league within 5 years?

[Bluehoop]

Rsonist. Do you really think Briatore mucks around with the official website? However at least I have found something with printable figures. I have asked Pete to show his links or whatever necessary to show that he hasn't just plucked figures out of the air. So far he has failed to do so.

In regards to your second point you are correct, it is unusual. However a pettern has emerged where you don't seem to have actually understood the thrust of the point I am making. I will try and show it below;

Pete says that Briatore hasn't spent much at the club.

Faurlin alone has cost the club £3.5m. There are then all the other wages, signing on fees, stadium upgrades, agents fees, loan fees and contracts paid off by mutual consent to add on.

Therefore the club has indeed spent a significant amount, especially when the average attendance is taken into account.


Do you now see that the point Pete raised is invalid UNLESS he can provide his workings out?

Do you mark exam papers for a living?

[Stu Hoop]

Without wishing to speak on his behalf, I doubt that Pete will be able to post any references to his research because he cites a contact at the Football League as his source. Unfortunately, as the Football League have no authority to release such information, there is no publicly available evidence, and rather more worryingly, his '#### ######' might also be in a spot of bother.

[Chalet1882]

yawn this thread is borrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrring mooooooooooooveeeeeee on guys

move on seriously

[Chalet1882]

must be something better to squable about? ;)

[jonno]

Toboly

I disagree, in Flavio's tenureship, not much was spent at all, especially for a team he promosed would be challenging for promotion.

I'm guessing and not 100% sure

Newcastle, WBA, Cardiff, Forest and even Swansea have spent more??

We might not have spent as much as those Clubs on transfer fees, but we spent more than most of them on all the other associated players costs like
agents fees, wages etc. And it was the "Sporting Director" that spent, and wasted, that money, on low cost has-beens and discards from other Clubs or loan players that nobody else wanted. They all cost money. Add to that the fact that no proper scouting network has ever been put in place, which means we'll never sign a promising player from a lower league (in fact, our entire player purchase strategy is based on someone either playing well once against us, or on TV, or being available from a certain player agency) which means we'll never pick up a promising player relatively cheaply, and our youth setup is farcical which means that we'll be very unlikely to attract good youngsters to the Club that might progress to first team level and the erstwhile "Sporting Director" has a lot to answer for. Briatore clearly pulled the plug on the money available at the end of last year, unsurprisingly when you see how much has been wasted. And if Paladini was not able to sign the right quality players cheaply, he should have had the guts to tell Briatore that it was not possible to do that, instead of signing yet more and more discards on the cheap and wasting even more money.

[qblockpete]

Who spent the money?

[Chalet1882]

i wish i was a mod and i could lock this thread ure doing circles guys both of you have points and both correct in your own ways

thats fair to say

10 pages of this dribble is boring put effort into some better posts guys

liars lie and will all ways get fount out GP's day is coming if he has
if not he will ride of into the sunset with boyfriend flabio in hand cluthing his bumcheecks together "firmly" corked by a £20 note stuffed in by the flab him self

cant we all agree to dissagree?

[qblockpete]

Problem is this thread is not about GP?/

for some reason it keeps coming back to it.

This is about what we have spent on players.

You'll right, I'm going to lock it as this is not what the thread is about