Fofana off?

That piece, for me suggested that WF realises it is not the right moment for him to go.
Which goes to the heart of the matter which is timing. Yes, there will always be players who are bigger than we can afford to keep.
As I think I was one of the first to on here to identify what seemed to be a strategy, it is really just a recognition of that reality and playing it so that it works to our advantage as Briz hints .
And it is why we appointed a coach to be our manager. And why we splurged on a state of the art training ground.
Despite all the inevitable angst when favourite players move on to greener pastures (or not) the fact is that we have steadily become stronger so that leavers do not torpedo our club.
This is because we now 'bring on' more top players/prospects than we lose in any given season.
There is, of course a danger in the policy which is ending up simply become a supply line to those with wealth but it seems we are wise to that and play it well.
Oddly, the policy we have been debating is far older that the present. A director told me many years ago that selling our best player is 'our way' of balancing the books in the days long before FFP.
Whether or not that qualifies as an ideology is up for debate but the next couple of weeks will tell us if the board is in control of it or not...
 
Pen4 said:
100,000,000
Click to expand...
I think this a bit disingenuous. This includes a period where there was a global pandemic and everyone's revenues were down. Nobody was making money.

Also the club has invested in a state-of -the-art training facility and drawn up plans to increase the capacity of the ground and the surrounding infrastructure.

All of these are going to be factors in the financial postings and Barcelona have showed that you take financial losses with a pinch of salt!

Whilst I am frustrated that we haven't made any signings my understanding is not a lack of transfer funds but ensuring that the club operates in a sustainable manner and budget and as some people have said they need to clear some off the wages before they can look at reinforcing.

If you gave me the option between a frustrating transfer window where we don't sign anyone or long term planning and sustainability i'd go with the long term option everyday!

I love Fofana i think he's a sensational player but you have to realise where you are, we may have asperations to break into the european mix but if we sell Fofana for £85 million + (bearing in mind that 20% of any profit goes to Saint Ettiene) then we can use that money to reinvest and whilst we may be weaker at centre half you'd hope the squad as a whole would be a lot better.

I'd also point out that the signing from last season appear to be showing signs of improvement and Praet has come back and looked good (which will all act essentially as new signings).

I'm not happy and want to see us improving the squad but I think we have to put it in perspective and realise that the issue isn't that we're a financial mess it's that the owners are guarding us against financial difficulties.

Lets see how it goes.

Rant over :)
 
TopFox said:
Call it what you will, that's fine by me.
Forced, chosen, reluctantly chosen, grudgingly recognised there's n alternative, etc – whatever, it's simply what LCFC do in the real world. As agreed to by the very people responsible for keeping the Club solvent. It's a model or plan or strategy borne of necessity, I'm sure. But who is free to simply choose an ideological business model that isn't grounded in necessities??
And what's the alternative when, as I say, we elect to spend over 100% of turnover on running the ship.
Rodgers says it again today at his PC – without specifically upsetting fans by saying "yes, so-and-so is for sale for £x price".
I think a lot of people would point the finger at the club for being naive and out of touch if they had a business model that relied on young footballers and their agents / families not behaving in the way that sought-after star players the world over behave.
Maybe I'm not enough of a fan, to be so disloyal to the lovely idea that we don't realise the need to sell to survive. I'll accept that.
Click to expand...
I've been thinking more about this, and really can't find any alternative growth model for us beyond opportunely selling an investment (usually) each summer, ie a player.
Any ideas?
 
I just want them to cough up and Fof to feck off now. All the juvenile fan baiting with his facebook gets on my tits. Potentially a great player, but a spoiled little brat with it.
 
TopFox said:
I've been thinking more about this, and really can't find any alternative growth model for us beyond opportunely selling an investment (usually) each summer, ie a player.
Any ideas?
Click to expand...
Whilst I agree that such sales are likely to remain a feature I would argue that it cannot really be a growth model as the risk of not realising the sale of an investment for a significant profit each or even most summers is too great & if that is the model then the impact of not selling potentially damaging to the overall health of the club. Developing your own players or buying cheaper prospects so you can sell for substantial profit is really an acquisition strategy rather than a selling one for the same reason, i.e. you can only control one side of that particular policy.

Growth can only really be achieved through increasing revenue (predominantly PL Payments/Broadcasting Rights, UEFA monies, Sponsorship & Advertising, Gate Receipts and Commercial activities - profits on transfers are income but not revenue) and that can only really be done through success on the field something that selling your best player(s) on a near annual basis is something not obviously conducive to helping you achieve. Even dodgy self sponsorship deals at inflated rates to try to increase revenue should in theory not be allowed these days as "associated party transactions" attract extra scrutiny to ensure that they are at fair market rates.

The above demonstrates the vicious circle clubs always seem to find themselves in: it will be on-field success that drives many of those increases but it always feels that it needs those increases in order to achieve that on-field success obviously.

What I would say though is that what the last 6 years have shown is that when there is a significant increase in revenue (i.e. Champions League football) or other income (i.e. a player sale) which gives an opportunity for accelerated growth then we really need to capitalise as the rest of the footballing world will not stand still but it is incredibly complex to drive that growth when you think of what it means in terms of picking the right personnel, budgeting &, well, everything coming together & then sustaining it. Getting that very wrong though could really set us back.

Part of the frustration at the moment is the nagging feeling of missed opportunities following 2015/16 & the subsequent near misses for top 4 (and despite the fabulous FA Cup win) though you could also come to the conclusion that it means we're ahead of where we imagined we might be (I am largely in the first camp though as people have probably noticed I feel comfortable sitting on fences so there's a bit of the second camp too, the positions are not mutually exclusive).

So, in answer to your question (and I appreciate a lot of this is semantics again as you rightly pointed out before)... no, I have no friggin' idea how you achieve it or at least not how you achieve it quickly.

From the club's perspective, let us hope though that one way to achieve it in the longer run is to build a training complex which, aside from being a substantial asset on the club's books, you hope can both be the difference in attracting the best cheap(er) talent - as well as providing a base to develop your own talent - with which to help build a successful team (though lets face it every club chased that particular dream of home grown talent until the top echelon started scooping up all available). That maybe you are able to increase gate receipts as well as advertising, sponsorships & commercial activity through developments such as gradual increases in ground capacity & facilities with wider aims to increase revenue streams through investment properties. And that each gradual increase leads to a steady consolidation on the field leading in time to more regular European Football and Champions League Football specifically which in turn increases the commercial opportunities.

As a minimum it seems that even if not successful (and let's face it history suggests that is probable, it is football so we know that even if money was no object you couldn't guarantee it and most of the footballing world is after the same thing) the club hope it will be a more sustainable path than taking a "shit or bust" approach (not that you were suggesting that). Given that there are considerable risks with regards to continuation of the same levels of broadcasting rights, threats of breakaways and not to mention the 'R' word if the team performs appallingly this seems prudent.
 
newboldfox said:
If we wait another year we may find there are lots of other bidders - maybe PSG or Barca or Juve. Clubs with even deeper pockets than CFC and WF is happy to play in an unfamiliar country.
Click to expand...

Barca are in a real financial mess and can’t register 3 players they’ve bought (inc. Chelsea’s Christensen) because of it.
 
astleyfox said:
I just want them to cough up and Fof to feck off now. All the juvenile fan baiting with his facebook gets on my tits. Potentially a great player, but a spoiled little brat with it.
Click to expand...
BA195B50-052E-490E-B527-B6C1B1947750.thumb.png.16df82f06777ced3e6f790e6c40fa071.png
 
buz_not_buzz said:
Whilst I agree that such sales are likely to remain a feature I would argue that it cannot really be a growth model as the risk of not realising the sale of an investment for a significant profit each or even most summers is too great & if that is the model then the impact of not selling potentially damaging to the overall health of the club. Developing your own players or buying cheaper prospects so you can sell for substantial profit is really an acquisition strategy rather than a selling one for the same reason, i.e. you can only control one side of that particular policy.

Growth can only really be achieved through increasing revenue (predominantly PL Payments/Broadcasting Rights, UEFA monies, Sponsorship & Advertising, Gate Receipts and Commercial activities - profits on transfers are income but not revenue) and that can only really be done through success on the field something that selling your best player(s) on a near annual basis is something not obviously conducive to helping you achieve. Even dodgy self sponsorship deals at inflated rates to try to increase revenue should in theory not be allowed these days as "associated party transactions" attract extra scrutiny to ensure that they are at fair market rates.

The above demonstrates the vicious circle clubs always seem to find themselves in: it will be on-field success that drives many of those increases but it always feels that it needs those increases in order to achieve that on-field success obviously.

What I would say though is that what the last 6 years have shown is that when there is a significant increase in revenue (i.e. Champions League football) or other income (i.e. a player sale) which gives an opportunity for accelerated growth then we really need to capitalise as the rest of the footballing world will not stand still but it is incredibly complex to drive that growth when you think of what it means in terms of picking the right personnel, budgeting &, well, everything coming together & then sustaining it. Getting that very wrong though could really set us back.

Part of the frustration at the moment is the nagging feeling of missed opportunities following 2015/16 & the subsequent near misses for top 4 (and despite the fabulous FA Cup win) though you could also come to the conclusion that it means we're ahead of where we imagined we might be (I am largely in the first camp though as people have probably noticed I feel comfortable sitting on fences so there's a bit of the second camp too, the positions are not mutually exclusive).

So, in answer to your question (and I appreciate a lot of this is semantics again as you rightly pointed out before)... no, I have no friggin' idea how you achieve it or at least not how you achieve it quickly.

From the club's perspective, let us hope though that one way to achieve it in the longer run is to build a training complex which, aside from being a substantial asset on the club's books, you hope can both be the difference in attracting the best cheap(er) talent - as well as providing a base to develop your own talent - with which to help build a successful team (though lets face it every club chased that particular dream of home grown talent until the top echelon started scooping up all available). That maybe you are able to increase gate receipts as well as advertising, sponsorships & commercial activity through developments such as gradual increases in ground capacity & facilities with wider aims to increase revenue streams through investment properties. And that each gradual increase leads to a steady consolidation on the field leading in time to more regular European Football and Champions League Football specifically which in turn increases the commercial opportunities.

As a minimum it seems that even if not successful (and let's face it history suggests that is probable, it is football so we know that even if money was no object you couldn't guarantee it and most of the footballing world is after the same thing) the club hope it will be a more sustainable path than taking a "shit or bust" approach (not that you were suggesting that). Given that there are considerable risks with regards to continuation of the same levels of broadcasting rights, threats of breakaways and not to mention the 'R' word if the team performs appallingly this seems prudent.
Click to expand...
Lots of good points.
But as I said before, I tend to think that, as per your first para, the lack of a sale last summer is significantly associated with this summer's situation.
 
Apparently Chelsea are ‘Preparing’ a third bid for Wes been doing so for 3 days now I wonder wtf this entails to take 3 days
 
Filbo24 said:
Apparently Chelsea are ‘Preparing’ a third bid for Wes been doing so for 3 days now I wonder wtf this entails to take 3 days
Click to expand...
I understand they have a lot of sofas at Stamford Bridge to look down the back of?


Edit: I also think the transfer of Marcos Alonso to Barcelona hasn't gone through yet. That might affect their kitty, too!
 
According to the Daily Mail (I know), he has agreed personal terms with Chelsea. As he is under contract with us, having recently agreed a 5-year extension, I assume he must have been given permission to talk to them. If that's the case, it can only mean one thing: the club is more anxious to cash in than to hold on to him. The only issue is whether Chelsea, who seemingly have bottomless pockets, will meet our asking price.
 
veuveclicquot said:
According to the Daily Mail (I know), he has agreed personal terms with Chelsea. As he is under contract with us, having recently agreed a 5-year extension, I assume he must have been given permission to talk to them. If that's the case, it can only mean one thing: the club is more anxious to cash in than to hold on to him. The only issue is whether Chelsea, who seemingly have bottomless pockets, will meet our asking price.
Click to expand...
Disappointing if it’s true that the club have let him talk to Chelsea after they haven’t made an offer anywhere near what we expect, mind you The Mail is in the same bracket as all the other red top rag newspapers, Fofana will be gone in this window and I hope we stick to our guns and get close to the £90million we want, when PSG or Real Madrid come knocking on Chelsea’s door in the next season or 2 I hope we get some more money with a hefty sell on fee…
 
I would reckon it is his agent doing the sums in order to advise WF accurately. Doing his job in other words.

Andy, players' or more accurately, their contracts, are bound to be commercial issues and much (all) of it is a matter of assessment.
I think it can be a sound way to grow a club as, unlike your view, both ends of the deal making is within your control.
Which is not to say it is easy. Somebody said a manager can be judged by his recruitment record.
Our record over the last few seasons has been good and despite some big headline sales our squad is the best we ever had.
Yes, it is potentially volatile, like property or share dealing, a risk recognised by the board in their investment in Seagrave which reduces the
risk element by controlling better the inward flow of talent..
 
Oadlad said:
I would reckon it is his agent doing the sums in order to advise WF accurately. Doing his job in other words.

Andy, players' or more accurately, their contracts, are bound to be commercial issues and much (all) of it is a matter of assessment.
I think it can be a sound way to grow a club as, unlike your view, both ends of the deal making is within your control.
Which is not to say it is easy. Somebody said a manager can be judged by his recruitment record.
Our record over the last few seasons has been good and despite some big headline sales our squad is the best we ever had.
Yes, it is potentially volatile, like property or share dealing, a risk recognised by the board in their investment in Seagrave which reduces the
risk element by controlling better the inward flow of talent..
Click to expand...
Sorry had not realised there was a reply to my post.

Sure whilst a player is registered with a club they can control if the player leaves (player power not withstanding) and for how much if there is the demand for them but it is that demand that is outside of the club's control and if the world for example is interested in midfielders just not your midfielders that is not volatility. If the demand for midfielders generally disappears or events cause market values to fluctuate wildly away from the club's market valuations (one way or another) that is volatility. But, sure, the club attempt to manage the risks whatever by, in their words, "managing the squad on a portfolio basis to maintain the value of the squad as a whole".

Growth essentially is achieved by increasing revenues which in the world of football is primarily achieved - directly and indirectly - through on-field success. I am not arguing that the approach of trying to develop home grown talent or of identifying relatively cheaper prospects who can develop is wrong (it is absolutely necessary for us) nor that Seagrave is a potential enabler of that (though "controlling better the inward flow of talent" is not a given) and nor am I arguing that we should not be selling players ever. I am merely saying that a deliberate strategy that relies on player sales for growth or even stability would be foolish.

Still, rightly or wrongly one club has been cited in the past of taking that very approach. Here's hoping they don't beat us tomorrow!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top