Farhad Moshiri

7+ Years On... Your Verdict On Farhad Moshiri

  • Pleased

    Votes: 110 7.8%

  • Disappointed

    Votes: 1,298 92.2%
  • Total voters
    1,408

hibbo'sclass said:
32 mil not recognised yet and no account taken of Barnsley share of John Stones, so reduction of incomings of between 36.7 ad 39 mil depending on 10 or 15% sell on fee.

How was shopping?
Click to expand...

Martin Steklenberg £1m
Idrissa Gueye £7.1m
Ashley Williams £12m
Yanick Bolasie £25m
Dom Calvert-Lewin £1.5m
Ademola Lookman £11m
Morgan Schneiderlin £24m

Total spent £81.6m

Players sold:

Tim Howard £1m
John Stones £47.5m
Bryan Oviedo 4m
Darron Gibson 3m
Tom Cleverley 8m
Niasse 10m
Geri 12m
McGeady 2m

Total recouped £87.5m

Negative net spend of £5.9m

Shopping was rubbish, they had hardly anything left.
 
MorgsGoat said:
Martin Steklenberg £1m
Idrissa Gueye £7.1m
Ashley Williams £12m
Yanick Bolasie £25m
Dom Calvert-Lewin £1.5m
Ademola Lookman £11m
Morgan Schneiderlin £24m

Total spent £81.6m

Players sold:

Tim Howard £1m
John Stones £47.5m
Bryan Oviedo 4m
Darron Gibson 3m
Tom Cleverley 8m
Niasse 10m
Geri 12m
McGeady 2m

Total recouped £87.5m

Negative net spend of £5.9m

Shopping was rubbish, they had hardly anything left.
Click to expand...

Niasse, McGeady, Cleverley and Deulofeu registrations are still owned by the club. So that's £32m not recouped.
 
MorgsGoat said:
Martin Steklenberg £1m
Idrissa Gueye £7.1m
Ashley Williams £12m
Yanick Bolasie £25m
Dom Calvert-Lewin £1.5m
Ademola Lookman £11m
Morgan Schneiderlin £24m

Total spent £81.6m

Players sold:

Tim Howard £1m
John Stones £47.5m
Bryan Oviedo 4m
Darron Gibson 3m
Tom Cleverley 8m
Niasse 10m
Geri 12m
McGeady 2m

Total recouped £87.5m

Negative net spend of £5.9m

Shopping was rubbish, they had hardly anything left.
Click to expand...
Right thread for that then.

Seriously, you brought up not spending in accounting terms, but it's not true as accounts run to 31 May. Even if Geri does go so give you him and Cleverley for 20 mil still a net spend. Edit and those are in the next financial year.
Do you expect anyone to pay 10mil for Niasse, and although the reported asking price for McGeady is 2mil, unless he drops his pay, I could only see that happening if he went to one of the promoted sides.
Just an opinion.
 
Last edited:
DerbyshireAndHarper said:
My figures aren't skewed mate. Niasse was bought before Moshiri came. Ditto Funes Mori. You name a whole list of players who we MIGHT sell to raise money. MIGHT. We also MIGHT spend a load of money on new players (in all likelihood we will).

The actual facts show that, as things currently stand, under Moshiri, we have a positive net spend of £25.6m. This is £17.6m if you include the Cleverley sale, which technically hasn't happened yet. Still a very substantial amount, considering the likes of LFC have a £10m NEGATIVE net spend during the same time period, just as a comparison. It's a total myth that Moshiri hasn't spent money. In fact it's not just a myth, it's stupidity to think that.

Deals done since Moshiri came in February 2016 (so basically, the last two windows, summer 2016 & January 2017):

Players signed (Fees reported in hyperlinks):

Martin Steklenberg £1m
Idrissa Gueye £7.1m
Ashley Williams £12m
Yanick Bolasie £25m
Dom Calvert-Lewin £1.5m
Ademola Lookman £11m
Morgan Schneiderlin £24m

Total spent £81.6m

Players sold:

Tim Howard £1m
John Stones £47.5m
Bryan Oviedo & Darron Gibson £7.5m

Total recouped £56m

Positive net spend of £25.6m.

Now if you want, we can add the sale of Tom Cleverley to this for £8m (even though it hasn't happened yet and won't happen until July 1st).

That's still a net spend of £17.6m on players by Moshiri since February 2016.

Them's the actual facts mate.

Anything else you've written are 'mights' and 'could be's just to suit your negative agenda of what you think might happen under Moshiri.

The reality thus far has been very different.
Click to expand...

What about all the loans, their fees, and saved wages. Tens of millions there in savings. Clear negative spend. Certainly no 100m watchest. Sell to buy. And yes it's my opinion, but I expect to be extremely disappointed again this summer.
 

ToffeeTim said:
What about all the loans, their fees, and saved wages. Tens of millions there in savings. Clear negative spend. Certainly no 100m watchest. Sell to buy. And yes it's my opinion, but I expect to be extremely disappointed again this summer.
Click to expand...

Can you break the loan fees, and percentages of wages paid down please?
 

ToffeeTim said:
What about all the loans, their fees, and saved wages. Tens of millions there in savings. Clear negative spend. Certainly no 100m watchest. Sell to buy. And yes it's my opinion, but I expect to be extremely disappointed again this summer.
Click to expand...

Loans - not every loan has a fee attached.
Saved wages - most loans don't see the entire wage attached to the loanee club. Loanee club may pay a proportion but usually not the whole amount.

As shown to you, Moshiri currently has a £25.6m (or £17.6m if you include Cleverly) positive net spend.

Lets say Deulofeu is on £50000 a week (it's probably a lot less than that but this is just to prove a point). His loan is for 6 months. Let's pretend that AC Milan are paying ALL of his wages (extremely doubtful that's the case). That would be saving of £1.3m.

Ditto Tom Cleverley with Watford. Again, that would bring these supposed savings to £2.6m. That's hardly 'saving tens of millions'. That's not making that much of a dent in the substantial net spend. It's definitely not 'a clear negative spend'.

Sorry mate, you're entitled to your negative predictions, but as far as stating stuff as fact, you're talking nonsense. The figures, both those we actually know and those that we can logically guess, prove that.

And if we're going down the road of factoring wages into net spends, Baines, Coleman and Mirallas all signed improved lengthy contracts in the last 6 months alone.
 
Last edited:
DerbyshireAndHarper said:
Loans - not every loan has a fee attached.
Saved wages - most loans don't see the entire wage attached to the loanee club. Loanee club may pay a proportion but usually not the whole amount.

As shown to you, Moshiri currently has a £25.6m (or £17.6m if you include Cleverly) positive net spend.

Lets say Deulofeu is on £50000 a week (it's probably a lot less than that but this is just to prove a point). His loan is for 6 months. Let's pretend that AC Milan are paying ALL of his wages (extremely doubtful that's the case). That would be saving of £1.3m.

Ditto Tom Cleverley with Watford. Again, that would bring these supposed savings to £2.6m. That's hardly 'saving tens of millions'. That's not making that much of a dent in the substantial net spend. It's definitely not 'a clear negative spend'.

Sorry mate, you're entitled to your negative predictions, but as far as stating stuff as fact, you're talking nonsense. The figures, both those we actually know and those that we can logically guess, prove that.

And if we're going down the road of factoring wages into net spends, Baines, Coleman and Mirallas all signed improved lengthy contracts in the last 6 months alone.
Click to expand...
We've spent nothing net since he arrived imo. There's at least 30m in saved wages, loan fees etc and I don't have blind faith in someone who has failed to deliver 2 windows running. He must get his act together this summer or I feel it's safe to conclude he's not all he was made out to be.
 
DerbyshireAndHarper said:
Loans - not every loan has a fee attached.
Saved wages - most loans don't see the entire wage attached to the loanee club. Loanee club may pay a proportion but usually not the whole amount.

As shown to you, Moshiri currently has a £25.6m (or £17.6m if you include Cleverly) positive net spend.

Lets say Deulofeu is on £50000 a week (it's probably a lot less than that but this is just to prove a point). His loan is for 6 months. Let's pretend that AC Milan are paying ALL of his wages (extremely doubtful that's the case). That would be saving of £1.3m.

Ditto Tom Cleverley with Watford. Again, that would bring these supposed savings to £2.6m. That's hardly 'saving tens of millions'. That's not making that much of a dent in the substantial net spend. It's definitely not 'a clear negative spend'.

Sorry mate, you're entitled to your negative predictions, but as far as stating stuff as fact, you're talking nonsense. The figures, both those we actually know and those that we can logically guess, prove that.

And if we're going down the road of factoring wages into net spends, Baines, Coleman and Mirallas all signed improved lengthy contracts in the last 6 months alone.
Click to expand...
sorry buddy but i am an economist and you are lying.
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top