What was Hurst’s net spend with us? 11:35 - Oct 31 with 7217 views | Illinoisblue | Approx 9mill in from Waghorn and Webster.... I lost track of what he spent on bringing in his League 1.5 all stars. | |
| | |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:37 - Oct 31 with 5367 views | Bloots | ....£6m on the trash. So Evans still pocketed a good few quid. | |
| TWTD Leadership Group/Elite Level Supporter/Anti-Bullying Crusader |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 11:39 - Oct 31 with 5343 views | Reuser_is_God | Probably £10m in & £5/6m on all his sh1t. | |
| |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:40 - Oct 31 with 5341 views | Reuser_is_God |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:37 - Oct 31 by Bloots | ....£6m on the trash. So Evans still pocketed a good few quid. |
Lambert to have a mega £4m “war chest” in January. | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 11:40 - Oct 31 with 5339 views | chicoazul | Kieffer Moore FIFA the kid we lost to Man City Garner and the two you mentioned adds up to about 11.5 I think. He spent more or less 6m. | |
| |
Think he spunked about.... on 12:11 - Oct 31 with 5213 views | BlueBadger |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:37 - Oct 31 by Bloots | ....£6m on the trash. So Evans still pocketed a good few quid. |
Loan fees to factor in as well. | |
| |
We'll probably have to sell.... on 12:20 - Oct 31 with 5183 views | Bloots |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:40 - Oct 31 by Reuser_is_God | Lambert to have a mega £4m “war chest” in January. |
...Dozzell and Crowe to get any money in. And then we'll sell them for about £3m between them. And he'll give PL £750K to spend. It sounds ridiculous, but..... | |
| TWTD Leadership Group/Elite Level Supporter/Anti-Bullying Crusader |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:27 - Oct 31 with 5158 views | awayfan | Most figures below from transfermarkt.co.uk.... SPENT Nolan & Nsiala - not published but was rumoured to be approx £2m combined Jackson £1.6m Harrison £750k Edwards £700k Donacien - loan, but reported £750k transfer at end of season if work permit sorted out Total: about £5.8m RECEIVED Waghorn £5m Webster £3.6m Garner £1.3m Total: about £9.9m Not sure about potential add-ons re. the players sold (Webster deal is one that has substantial add-ons I think) [Post edited 31 Oct 2018 12:31]
| | | |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:28 - Oct 31 with 5162 views | itfcjoe | At a guess: Webster - £3.5m Waghorn - £5m Garner - £1.25m IN - £9.75m Harrison - £750k Jackson - £1.6m Nolan and Nsiala - £2m Edwards - £700k OUT -£5.05m So approx £5m profit on fees | |
| | Login to get fewer ads
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:50 - Oct 31 with 5045 views | Wickets | Our wage bill must be a fair bit reduced as well ? | | | |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:50 - Oct 31 with 5047 views | Ely_Blue |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:28 - Oct 31 by itfcjoe | At a guess: Webster - £3.5m Waghorn - £5m Garner - £1.25m IN - £9.75m Harrison - £750k Jackson - £1.6m Nolan and Nsiala - £2m Edwards - £700k OUT -£5.05m So approx £5m profit on fees |
Isn’t it funny how everyone is certain on what we spent but in terms of the incoming money it’s alway “I’d guess” | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:55 - Oct 31 with 4993 views | TractorCam |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:27 - Oct 31 by awayfan | Most figures below from transfermarkt.co.uk.... SPENT Nolan & Nsiala - not published but was rumoured to be approx £2m combined Jackson £1.6m Harrison £750k Edwards £700k Donacien - loan, but reported £750k transfer at end of season if work permit sorted out Total: about £5.8m RECEIVED Waghorn £5m Webster £3.6m Garner £1.3m Total: about £9.9m Not sure about potential add-ons re. the players sold (Webster deal is one that has substantial add-ons I think) [Post edited 31 Oct 2018 12:31]
|
Only £1.3m for Garner? That is outrageous! | |
| |
Think he spunked about.... on 12:58 - Oct 31 with 4974 views | Garv |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:37 - Oct 31 by Bloots | ....£6m on the trash. So Evans still pocketed a good few quid. |
Trash is harsh surely. No one can deny they haven't worked yet but they've had what, 15 games to prove their worth? | |
| |
Correct, "Trash" is the wrong word.... on 13:12 - Oct 31 with 4924 views | Bloots |
Think he spunked about.... on 12:58 - Oct 31 by Garv | Trash is harsh surely. No one can deny they haven't worked yet but they've had what, 15 games to prove their worth? |
....I should have said "Rubbish". But I was replying to Illy, so I can be excused. | |
| TWTD Leadership Group/Elite Level Supporter/Anti-Bullying Crusader |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:14 - Oct 31 with 4912 views | Reuser_is_God |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:50 - Oct 31 by Wickets | Our wage bill must be a fair bit reduced as well ? |
Yes you'd have thought so. | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:24 - Oct 31 with 4848 views | JimmyJazz |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:28 - Oct 31 by itfcjoe | At a guess: Webster - £3.5m Waghorn - £5m Garner - £1.25m IN - £9.75m Harrison - £750k Jackson - £1.6m Nolan and Nsiala - £2m Edwards - £700k OUT -£5.05m So approx £5m profit on fees |
You're not including Donacien? Once legal details sorted aren't we obliged to complete the transfer? | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:26 - Oct 31 with 4846 views | WeirdFishes |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 12:28 - Oct 31 by itfcjoe | At a guess: Webster - £3.5m Waghorn - £5m Garner - £1.25m IN - £9.75m Harrison - £750k Jackson - £1.6m Nolan and Nsiala - £2m Edwards - £700k OUT -£5.05m So approx £5m profit on fees |
I think in terms of the books and FFP Edwards and Harrison go down as £1.5m because of potential add ons. | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:40 - Oct 31 with 4794 views | ElephantintheRoom | You could also add in the £1million received as a lump sum for the schoolkid (Man City's hand bitten off, even though Chelski offered more in instalments). Tellingly Town are offering their academy players for sale again. | |
| |
Correct, "Trash" is the wrong word.... on 13:49 - Oct 31 with 4735 views | Illinoisblue |
Correct, "Trash" is the wrong word.... on 13:12 - Oct 31 by Bloots | ....I should have said "Rubbish". But I was replying to Illy, so I can be excused. |
like, totally excused, dude | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:50 - Oct 31 with 4730 views | Illinoisblue |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:40 - Oct 31 by ElephantintheRoom | You could also add in the £1million received as a lump sum for the schoolkid (Man City's hand bitten off, even though Chelski offered more in instalments). Tellingly Town are offering their academy players for sale again. |
offering their players? Or just accepting the fact everyone has a price? | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 14:02 - Oct 31 with 4712 views | Townly | Why is virtually everybody on this thread totally ignoring the cost of the loans. These never come on the cheap especially from the three PL clubs involved. The bad luck with Walters has cost a small fortune no doubt. Take these into account and the pot is not likely very big. | | | |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 14:54 - Oct 31 with 4595 views | agentp |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 14:02 - Oct 31 by Townly | Why is virtually everybody on this thread totally ignoring the cost of the loans. These never come on the cheap especially from the three PL clubs involved. The bad luck with Walters has cost a small fortune no doubt. Take these into account and the pot is not likely very big. |
6 loan fees have to be around the £3m mark I would have thought. They are ignoring the sell on fees to Rangers and Portsmouth as well. There is another £1m In £8.75m plus £1.3 academy [Two youngsters went] minus £1.1m in sell ons = £8.95m out 5.9 plus £3m [est] loans. = £8.9m Guessing ALL of the £8.95m was not received upfront, [Post edited 31 Oct 2018 15:10]
| |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 14:56 - Oct 31 with 4589 views | BluePG | Wages! Even the lowest paid squad players will be on £300,000 a year. | |
| |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 15:13 - Oct 31 with 4533 views | BrixtonBlue |
What was Hurst’s net spend with us? on 13:40 - Oct 31 by ElephantintheRoom | You could also add in the £1million received as a lump sum for the schoolkid (Man City's hand bitten off, even though Chelski offered more in instalments). Tellingly Town are offering their academy players for sale again. |
All you do is post bullsh!t on here, are you a Norwich supporter? | |
| |
Think he spunked about.... on 15:19 - Oct 31 with 4524 views | casanovacrow |
Think he spunked about.... on 11:37 - Oct 31 by Bloots | ....£6m on the trash. So Evans still pocketed a good few quid. |
I'm probably on my own here, I think Hurst spent well. I best explain... Hurst's players hardly look outshone by those still here from before. If anything the opposite has slightly been the case, the few goals we have had seem to be from Hurst's lot for a start. I just think the job wasn't finished due to time and money constraints and that is why everyone is looking poor. Everyone suffers when you have half your team suited to play one way and you bring in a handful of new guys to do the opposite, especially when those of the Mick era on the whole looked very resistant to change. Too much too soon maybe, but when the brief was to change the style of play and with so many players out the door even before he arrived I don't think he had a choice. It could also be argued maybe to little too soon, and he should've had that extra £10m and got to replace those who were here that will never fit progressive attacking football. I keep thinking back to what happens to all of Mick's old clubs after he leaves, they go down. Why? I'd hazard a guess at it's because they are full of limited players who are stuck in their ways. Managers don't have a chance in making their mark on things without the risks involved with a complete overhaul and that needs a shed load more than £6m to do properly anyway. Either way it's unwise to judge anyone on 15 games in a disjointed team. Yep, someone fighting Hurst's corner Let's hope Lambert can find a system that can get the best out of them and they come good in the end | | | |
Think he spunked about.... on 15:51 - Oct 31 with 4464 views | JimmyJazz |
Think he spunked about.... on 15:19 - Oct 31 by casanovacrow | I'm probably on my own here, I think Hurst spent well. I best explain... Hurst's players hardly look outshone by those still here from before. If anything the opposite has slightly been the case, the few goals we have had seem to be from Hurst's lot for a start. I just think the job wasn't finished due to time and money constraints and that is why everyone is looking poor. Everyone suffers when you have half your team suited to play one way and you bring in a handful of new guys to do the opposite, especially when those of the Mick era on the whole looked very resistant to change. Too much too soon maybe, but when the brief was to change the style of play and with so many players out the door even before he arrived I don't think he had a choice. It could also be argued maybe to little too soon, and he should've had that extra £10m and got to replace those who were here that will never fit progressive attacking football. I keep thinking back to what happens to all of Mick's old clubs after he leaves, they go down. Why? I'd hazard a guess at it's because they are full of limited players who are stuck in their ways. Managers don't have a chance in making their mark on things without the risks involved with a complete overhaul and that needs a shed load more than £6m to do properly anyway. Either way it's unwise to judge anyone on 15 games in a disjointed team. Yep, someone fighting Hurst's corner Let's hope Lambert can find a system that can get the best out of them and they come good in the end |
Ah, that old argument that MMs teams go down after he leaves That happens when 1. MM first gets the team promoted to the Prem 2. Team struggles at a higher level, MM leaves with the team in trouble Neither of which is applicable to us | |
| |
| |