Well, I'm encouraged. (Being stuffed by Soton never gets me down - I can remember 1972.) My optimism is because we KEEP buying players (whenever we can evade that cock Roach), giving players trials, or at least being seriously linked with players. And a good proportion of them are young and for the future.

But I want to know where is the money coming from? Or it is that even our "good" buys, e,g, Lua Lua we hope, are comparatively cheap because they are young? Accounting has never been my strong point - but I thought we were skint after Cort?

-- Anonymous, September 20, 2000

Answers

I always thought that at the start of the pre-season we had about 10 million for transfers. In the process of selling players Bobby raised about 11 million, making a total to spend of around 21 million. We spent about 11.5 million on Cort, Bassedas and Cordone and when Lua- Lua signs this afternoon (?) thats another 2.25 mill gone. So by my reckoning we have about 7.75 million left if they choose to spend it on players.

Not sure in the current transfer climate whether we should be paying anything!!

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

I agree - unless it's for really young players who we would get compensation for if they went elsewhere, I think we should hold on to what Bobby calls his "war chest". We had the NTL money plus normal summer transfer money plus increased ST revenue so I think we are just playing it close to our chests so we don't get ripped off.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

Not forgetting the 200K per month that we save by not paying Big Dunc (not inlcuding his medical bills). That soon ads up!

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

What with Leeds' fresh 15 mill bid for Rio Ferdinand and our signing of Lua-Lua, do the clubs know something about the transfer system that we don't. It seems strange that clubs are still spending money when it could all be for nothing.

Leeds couldn't hope to get 15 mill back for Rio under this new compensation rule.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

Didn't Tony Blair or someone say they wouldn't be scrapped? ie that EC would have a fight on their hands.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

Didn't Tony Blair or someone say they wouldn't be scrapped? ie that EC would have a fight on their hands

Is that the same Tony Blair (or SST) that said last Tuesday "the situation will be back to normal and there will be petrol in the pumps in 24 hours" - if it is the same SST, then the football transfer situation is in deep doo doo.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

Thanks De Builder. So we do still have some money left. Does anyone have any idea what the weekly wage bill is?

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

I read somewhere that the #2.25 million for Lua Lua is the eventual total fee. However, it comprises an initial payment of something like #750k, and then incremental payments based on PL appearances. I suspect the hold up related to continuing negotiations on the up-front payment.

Since BR appeared on the scene (thank the sweet Lord!) we appear to be taking an entirely more innovative stance on transfers - eg. Cordone's transfer, and now this one.

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000

>>>where is the money coming from?

Well we haven't spent a great deal. #2m for Lua Lua is trivial by today's standards and is about what we pay Shearer annually.

At this stage of the season the club is very cash rich. The coffers are bloated with the receipts from the season ticket sales as almost all our gate money arrives this way. Any further gate receipts will rely on cup runs which cannot be guaranteed. Then there is TV and sponsorship money coming in constantly. This huge cash float has to be carefully watched of course, because we have to pay the players their huge salaries month after month so the accounting must be quite complex in terms of how much (if any) you allow for player purchases while preserving enough to pay the day to day running of the place until next summer when the ST's go on sale again.

I'm sure the club has sufficient cash to purchase a player in the event of an emergency, but as others point out, the transfer system is in question and it would now be very silly to pay out large sums of the kind of money we paid for Cort, Ferguson, Shearer etc.

The club should never reveal how much it has available for spending on players otherwise the prices get bid up.

What about this transfer system anyway? I'm warming slightly to the idea of getting rid of it. One possible advantage would be that a player who is too much of a primadonna could be sacked (Ravenelli, Collymore, Anelka, etc) or a player who doesn't make the grade (Perez, Hamilton, Serrant, Brady etc). However, I suspect that the primadonnas would be protected. The contracts will be drawn up with 12 months notice required by the club but the player can go whenever he wants I suspect.

George Eastham and Mr Bosman have a lot to answer for...

-- Anonymous, September 21, 2000