+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Well of course, because of hindsight. No one who got relegated ever 'spent wisely'.
We obviously need something a bit different in the middle of the park but I would be disappointed if we start next season with less than 8-9 of our current 'best XI' playing (accounting for injuries).
Sorry to harp on about it but if Tan had converted the debts to equity as he had promised, then he would not be allowed to "pocket all the promotion money". As it is, the club owes him a huge amount of money and he can call in his debts at any time which makes a scenario of him pocketing the club's promotion money a possibility (although I think it's an unlikely possibility).
And what is that debt? £100m ish.
How much do you think it has cost him to keep the club afloat? £100m? No chance and let's also not forget that the club was also in receipt of Sky money for the last few seasons. A lot of that £100m was spent on an ego trip in 2012-14. Money that HE decided to spend, extra wages that HE incurred on the club, extra building work that HE decided was necessary etc etc. Now, we have a situation where at least one Cardiff fan (you) seems to be making allowances for Tan to recoup the money he has lost in numerous failed gambles if he so desires. He is a billionaire, he made a conscious decision to buy Cardiff City. I assume he did so knowing what the finances were like at the time. These are risks he happily accepted.
The club's debt has increased 5-6 times under his management/ownership - how much of that debt is down to mismanagement, overspending (Madine £6m, Tomlin £2m - just this season's examples of "keeping the club afloat")?
At no stage has Vincent Tan taken responsibility for the bad decisions he has made. He was quick to blame Mackay for the signing of Cornelius (which, you would assume, would have been signed off by the CEO), and he has wasted no opportunities in reminding the media about that signing.
What were the administration costs at Cardiff City in the Premier League? What were those fees for? Agent's fees? Or something else? How much money do the club owe Vincent Tan for Vincent Tan flying various dignatories to Cardiff from Malaysia for the odd game? Is it £0? Is it more? Do these count as "keeping the club afloat"?
What about the 1MCC project? How much do Cardiff City owe Vincent Tan for this? Is it £0? Is it more? If it is more, are these costs also attributable to "keeping the club afloat".
I agree with you in that I don't think Tan will "pocket the money". But, if he does, I sincerely hope that more is said than "Ah well, he did keep the club afloat for a few years" because it really doesn't seem to be as simple as that does it? Vincent Tan is responsible for the success or otherwise of the business whilst he is the owner. If it turns a profit, then he has every right to take a dividend. If it turns huge losses, then I think he needs to take responsibility too. I am not suggesting he won't take responsibility (although there are very few signs that he is doing that, just empty promises often underwritten with less than clear reasons for not being made) - but I am alarmed that one of the more sensible and more well researched fans on this board is willing to accept an owner "pocketing the money" given the less than clear backdrop of Cardiff City's finances.
Here's a question - if TG remained as the "owner" without investment from Vincent Tan, do you think Cardiff City would be as heavily in debt today?
Anything new?
My focus in 2013 was more off the field, but I feel that it wasn't so much the spending splurge that tripped us up when promoted but the types of players signed and the gaps of quality left in the side. For example, we had Taylor (no pace) or John (almost not prior game time) only as left-back and immediately opened us up down that side, asking too much of Cb's/GK, while there wasn't a real attacking threat so not enough going through other way either. Stoke this year made a mess, despite spending a lot of money last summer, and frankly they were hoping to survive til this summer from the first game of the season. They signed two full-backs quite cheaply in January (one on loan) and immediately had a much better chance.
Spending a lot of money on big names or spending a restricted amount of money can either improve key positions and form part of a plan to stay up or can leave gaps in the starting line-up/squad and give us a mountain to climb.
Think it's positions and qualities that we need to talk about rather than sums of money.
Some people have very short memories. To advocate spending most of the tv money we are going to get is crazy. We spent over £40m last time just on transfers and saddled ourselves with massive salaries and useless players that we couldn't get rid of. There was no team spirit or fight and that led to relegation, Slade, Trollope, etc etc.
You really have excelled yourself with this load of crap. Suffice to say it is Tans money and he can do with it what he likes. PS. TG didnt own the club as far as I am aware, he was a figurehead and the money was other peoples, mostly Vincent Tans. TG stepped aside when Tan became fully involved.
I must admit that the "experienced Premier League" criteria which it is said we are going to be using baffles me a little, because, unless we are talking about veterans looking at their last season or two, it's the worst market you can shop in surely? Far better surely to look at Football League like Burnley, the team who are supposedly the template for us to follow, do rather than looking for Andre Ayew types.
Talking of Burnley, their accounts for 16/17 showed total salary costs of £61 million
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk...bill_increase/
that's considerably more than than ours is, yet they were still able to post a profit for the year.
Whether you believe figures like the ones used in this website
http://www.spotrac.com/epl/burnley-f.c/payroll/
is up to you (I must admit a total salary of almost £28 million on the playing side in 2018/19 does not sit well alongside a total salary bill more than double that in the previous season, but I notice signing bonuses are not included, so I suppose it could be possible for the figures to be correct if they are just a basic salary without any bonuses). However, the important figure to me is the £35,000 per week - if we made that the most we would pay any player at the club, then we are talking an annual salary of just over £1.8 million. Let's say we spent £35 million in transfer fees to bring in six players who were all on that club max figure, you are talking in terms of slightly over £47 million.
This would be added to a total salary figure for the players still at the club who were being paid £20 million according to the 16/17 accounts (let's assume that figure increased by a quarter in 17/18, so it's £25 million now). If that doubles with our promotion, we are talking about a total spend of £97 million which is more or less what we are going to receive in television rights and then we have all of the other income streams available to the club and we will, surely, be raising income through player sales and loans with subsequent wage bill reductions.
Whilst I agree to an extent, i do believe we could strengthen the squad substantially with players who wouldn't demand the type of fees that a Grealish or Cairney would.
I'm thinking of players like Joe Bryan, Luke Freeman, Barry Bannan, Forestieri, Ollie Watkins etc who would make us a better team in my opinion.
I don't know the type of fee Bobby Reid would command but I know one thing, Most of the above players wouldn't demand the sort of wages someone who currently plays in the premier would ask for.
We'd also be in very good position to grab the very best players from league one.
I'd love to see us pick up a few gems from the continent, I just don't see us utilising that market too much during this window.
dml?