Nothing has changed.

[Efcjake]

I get where you are coming from, but we had BK borrowing money from future season ticket sales to fund loans and crap players.

Borrowing the money from future season ticket sales never really bothered me so long as the debt was affordable and manageable.

The TV money increases would have meant that we would have improved our financial position over time but not as quickly as Moshiri simply acquiring our debt and writing it off of the books.

He's given us more freedom to operate and invest that money elsewhere as a result but it is nowhere near close enough for what is required to drag this cup up the table. While not quite at the level of City prior to their takeovers we're not far off in terms of what is required to bring us to that level, an absolutely extravagant amount of FFP busting spending. Except, we're not allowed to do that because we aren't PSG and we don't know which hands at UEFA to slip the money into.

Moshiri himself said we had a window to close the gap on the teams ahead of us. We've had 3 windows and that gap looks just as big as it did under Kenwright doesn't it?

 

[davids]

Hey don't shoot the messenger, I was just trying to help a brother out.

For future reference though, constantly pretending people are basing their opinions on FIFA is a childish insult. It's funny when certain posters do it because it's such an obvious joke, when you're being serious it's just, well, tedious.

I'm sure other posters don't need you help in being insulting,for quite a few here it's second nature.And if you think a lot of the membership don't base their opinions of players on game console rating,jut have read back through the forum.One of your old posts was enlightening

"We wanted the lad from Nice (again, I don't have any evidence of this but we'll go with it) but why would they be more likely to sell in the summer than now? And if they did why would he be more likely to move, seeing as they look likely to be in the CL?"

 

[Lanolin]

I'm sure other posters don't need you help in being insulting,for quite a few here it's second nature.And if you think a lot of the membership don't base their opinions of players on game console rating,jut have read back through the forum.One of your old posts was enlightening

"We wanted the lad from Nice (again, I don't have any evidence of this but we'll go with it) but why would they be more likely to sell in the summer than now? And if they did why would he be more likely to move, seeing as they look likely to be in the CL?"

Enlightening in what sense? What relevance does that have to games consoles?

You've gone back to vault me about FIFA, found that you can't and have dragged up a conversation with @BlueToff in which he said we had tried to buy a player from Nice and I gave him the benefit of the doubt despite not being aware of it. It has absolutely no relevance to what we're talking about. This is really getting quite surreal.

 

[Joey66]

..I think we had a transfer pot and it simply ran out with a week to go. There was a dependency to top funds up with outgoings but the Barkley situation in particular scuppered this.

I suppose the criticism can be levelled at prioritisation, but a costly striker would probably have been at the expense of one of the other players we bought.

Saying that, I think things have changed. We still have a limitation on spend but that limitation is higher than previous and its not a hand to mouth existence. The other major difference is salary, in that we can attract key players with big wages.

Eggs no way would barkley's sale fetch in a top striker 35 million ?....

 

[Eggs]

Eggs no way would barkley's sale fetch in a top striker 35 million ?....

..it's can't be a coincidence that as soon as Barkley's £35m transfer was reported, we apparently bid £35m for Raul Jimenez of Benfica.

I'm saying we ran out of money and there was a dependency on selling Barkley (and to a lesser extent Niasse) to bring funds in. If that had happened within sufficient timescales I'm sure we would have used that income.

 

[Joey66]

..it's can't be a coincidence that as soon as Barkley's £35m transfer was reported, we apparently bid £35m for Raul Jimenez of Benfica.

I'm saying we ran out of money and there was a dependency on selling Barkley (and to a lesser extent Niasse) to bring funds in. If that had happened within sufficient timescales I'm sure we would have used that income.

So we are skint?lol

 

[Eggs]

So we are skint?lol

...I think it's fair to say we have a limited amount to spend on transfers. Most clubs will have a transfer pot, unless your Man City or PSG.

What is different is the size of our transfer envelope and our ability to bring in costly purchases on big income. Previously we had a hand to mouth existence, it now seems we have a spend envelope plus whatever we bring in on players sold. We can't buy whoever we want when we want but the situation is so much better than it was.

 

[davids]

Enlightening in what sense? What relevance does that have to games consoles?

You've gone back to vault me about FIFA, found that you can't and have dragged up a conversation with @BlueToff in which he said we had tried to buy a player from Nice and I gave him the benefit of the doubt despite not being aware of it. It has absolutely no relevance to what we're talking about. This is really getting quite surreal.

In the sense that you think it's easy enough to find a target and just sign him (you remember Lukaku's replacement) Get Walsh out there identify the player offer a fee and it's job done.Strange Chelsea the reigning Champs in the group stages of the CL can't get Barkley over the line.Still go ahead blaming the club,though oddly in your post you were saying it isn't that simple.

 

[Moomin]

I'll say again, there was nobody available that RK wanted, that wanted to come to us. If there was I'm sure we would have bought them.

So you admit we failed then.

 

[Baines' left foot]

Yep. I can see it now. There was definitely not a single striker in world football available that would have improved us. Righto.

 

[davids]

...I think it's fair to say we have a limited amount to spend on transfers. Most clubs will have a transfer pot, unless your Man City or PSG.

What is different is the size of our transfer envelope and our ability to bring in costly purchases on big income. Previously we had a hand to mouth existence, it now seems we have a spend envelope plus whatever we bring in on players sold. We can't buy whoever we want when we want but the situation is so much better than it was.

Far too sensible a post for the day after the the window has closed.

 

[Lanolin]

In the sense that you think it's easy enough to find a target and just sign him (you remember Lukaku's replacement) Get Walsh out there identify the player offer a fee and it's job done.Strange Chelsea the reigning Champs in the group stages of the CL can't get Barkley over the line.Still go ahead blaming the club,though oddly in your post you were saying it isn't that simple.

I don't even think you know what you're trying to say anymore so we'll leave it there.

 

[davids]

Yep. I can see it now. There was definitely not a single striker in world football available that would have improved us. Righto.

And you of going to name him?

 

[davids]

I don't even think you know what you're trying to say anymore so we'll leave it there.

I think you know exactly what I'm saying,but then ignorance is bliss.

 

[Efcjake]

So you admit we failed then.

Yep. I can see it now. There was definitely not a single striker in world football available that would have improved us. Righto.

The Excuse Makers coming out strong this morning.