Are we making excuses why we won't buy in January already.

No not really. I think it was widely known that we were tight on FFP. I think if we need to strengthen in January it will be in the loan market.
 
We need a striker for starters. Not enough goals in Josh and he doesn't seem to want to start Lath. And I think Carrick knows that. Had we got a striker in Josh would have been out on loan.
 
In terms of FFP I think loans make the least sense - its akin to signing a player on a one year contract.

No resale value makes it poor business in monetary terms, unless it end in a promotion, which it rarely does.
 
asredastheycome said:
We need a striker for starters. Not enough goals in Josh and he doesn't seem to want to start Lath. And I think Carrick knows that. Had we got a striker in Josh would have been out on loan.
Click to expand...

He's not started Lath for a few games. Extrapolating from that, that Carrick doesn't want to start him at all is a stretch. I'm sure he'll be a very good player for us, as will Coburn.
 
The Card Cheat said:
He's not started Lath for a few games. Extrapolating from that, that Carrick doesn't want to start him at all is a stretch. I'm sure he'll be a very good player for us, as will Coburn.
Click to expand...
I hope so on both counts but I still think we need a tried and tested striker in January if we are to push on towards the playoffs. No saying a tried and tested striker will do any better than what we have though.
 
How can we be close to the limit all funds spent were earned through sales. Same as last season we sold tav and it funded the season.
 
Quicksilvera said:
@indeedido said we were nowhere near the ffp threshold and Gibson was putting nowhere near enough money into the club? 🤔
Click to expand...
The club is nowhere near the FFP limits. I've posted the numbers on a few occasions.
Gibson may have decided he will not fund to FFP limits - or anywhere near - but that is not the same as saying an owner couldn't invest/spend more.
Gibson spends on Championship football.
Another owner could choose to invest for Premier League football.

It's Gibson's choice and none of us can influence that, but it is not the only thing that could happen.
MFC now has a massive squad. Huge quantity.
I believe we need more quality.
Time will tell.
 
We bought the players we needed in the Summer..

We do have one place left in the squad..

I’d be surprised if we don’t sneak in a cheeky loan.. with an option to buy.

Michael Carrick said he was still after a striker..

Ben Johnson.. the right back from West Ham would be my best bet tho.
 
I think it's nonsense. We're nowhere near FFP. We've had significant sales in recent years and hardly any incoming for big money. We've also replaced expensive wages with players on cheaper wages. Players we signed for big money in the past have now dropped off the FFP calcs as well. We should be in the best FFP position we've been since relegation.
 
Boro4life said:
How can we be close to the limit all funds spent were earned through sales. Same as last season we sold tav and it funded the season.
Click to expand...
Player fees are paid and received in instalments split over several years - the ideal situation is you directly match like for like with instalments you pay for a player with those you receive.
 
I don't think the fans need softening up and I don't think the club would do it.

They'd just come out and say it if we weren't going to do it.

Regardless of whether or not we need new players (I think we do), fans will always complain if their club doesn't do business. Change is mistaken for improvement.
 
fmttmadmin said:
Player fees are paid and received in instalments split over several years - the ideal situation is you directly match like for like with instalments you pay for a player with those you receive.
Click to expand...
Just stop it Rob.
You are talking about cash flow, not FFP.

The sales of Tav and Spence HAVE to show as profits on sale of registrations in the Accounts in the year they are sold, regardless of the payment schedules.
Fees agreed for Players registrations (signings) are amortised over their contracts (inc renewals).
The next Accounts have to reveal this.
Same as the following ones must show the profit from Akpom as income that year, and that year's amortisation of our signings as expenses.

Gibson has the right not to spend/invest up to FFP, but aligning payments of transfer fees and receipt of transfer fees is a choice to help balance cash flow, not fit FFP rules.
I can't believe you don't know you are being misleading.

Whenever I post numbers I am closed down by your henchman and naughty stepped/have my posts frozen/thread removed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top