The Reasonable Advocate
- Oct 17, 2006
You've raised some good questions, but I just don't buy there's any evidence that we won't buy when the football case outweighs the financial one.And I agree. But with all those players we bought. Lo Celso, Ndombele, Clarke, Sessegnon, Bergwijn, Fernandes. They're all young players with resale value. They're all great signings but my point is occasionally investing when the footballing case is greater than the financial one because winning should be the most important thing, it's why we're all here.
People can say this striker doesn't exist etc. etc. But I repeat that Jason Burt and I think many other journalists reported our attempt to try and sign Eran Zahavi from China in the dying minutes. There were also reports everywhere that we wanted Ighalo too.
So Jose clearly deemed those two as good enough for us. Now my point is people are saying there is nobody in world football as good as these two available had we stumped up a decent loan fee to get somebody in temporarily for 6 months? I just don't buy it. It's either incompetency or there's just not a great care for winning.
Good post young man.You're raised some good questions, but I just don't buy there's any evidence that we won't buy when the football case outweighs the financial one.
A few points.
1. Its not proven because those 6 signings happen to fit both the football and investment / sell on value criteria.
We made some good signings of a certain type. It doesn't prove that we wouldn't touch buys of a different type.
2. We bought Fernando Llorente whilst under far greater financial restrictions mid stadium build.
That's a £12m (+ £100k pw) cost on a write down on a 32 year old who wasn't intended to start.
We did that after Levy had already written down £13m Soldado and what turned out to be £10m on Jansen.
So we were prepared to do that mid summer when it wasn't evidently crucial to CL football and revenue, but wouldn't speculate when it obviously could be pivotal?
3. Finally, loan strikers. You've argued earlier that we could have a better loan striker by throwing a bigger loan fee around. Neither of us can prove a hypothetical either way.
But I'd argue a £6m per season write down on Llorente suggests it more likely we will invest when no young "investment option" is available to solve a football-ing need.
So lets take Ighalo as the quality bench mark of what loan strikers were available to PL clubs.
Functional, probably bench options to throw on. Do any of us, JM included, think Ighalo is such a difference maker that we should try and outbid United's deep pockets? Probably not.
So what does the permanent version of Ighalo look like financially, or even slightly better. We're back to Piatek, Jose, or similar levels across Europe who we may have enquired but never heard about.
Add on the "Spurs are desperate for a striker" tax. It's still going to be a £40-50m 4+ year commitment in Fee + Wages.
Does Mourinho want to spend his first summer window moving on the next Janssen. Definitely not, so my read is that in agreement with the board (as per his comments) he passed and took the football hit in order to have a better less risky summer window.
I get why there's suspicion over Levy, some of it is well earned, but I genuinely believe in this case it's just an unfortunate series of events stemming from changing manager and the value the pace on having multiple game ready no.9s.
The board couldn't have over rule Poch, who wasn't necessarily wrong to rely on Son /Parrott for his style of football.
If it happens in the summer though, we riot
I think there is still huge potential to grow the club further before he calls it a day.
Yeah there's still plenty of room for financial grow.I think there is still huge potential to grow the club further before he calls it a day.
The re-development of the local area and expanding the non-footballing side of the business will keep him busy for another 2 or 3 years.
He'll want to make us the biggest (richest) club in the world before he finishes.
Whilst this may sound laughable if you put Wembley level turnovers on top of our current earnings we will be.
Soccerex. Who also ranked us 4th overall in terms of “ powerful “ Which seems a bit unlikely but if you only use certain criteria is plausible. Although tangible assets is fact not based on some weird Formulae. As it would be considering we’ve just built most expensive stadium in Europe.Yeah, he's going to push the button any second now. Which study by the way? Ta.
The tangible asset value of the stadium development isn't directly related to its cost. You could spend £500,000 building a house in a neighbourhood where a house is worth £300,000 and it would still be worth only £300,000 when you sell it.Soccerex. Who also ranked us 4th overall in terms of “ powerful “ Which seems a bit unlikely but if you only use certain criteria is plausible. Although tangible assets is fact not based on some weird Formulae. As it would be considering we’ve just built most expensive stadium in Europe.