Foxes set to return with new Ulloa bid

Leo Ulloa is settled in Brighton and likes playing for the club

Leo Ulloa is settled in Brighton and likes playing for the club

First published in Sport by , Chief sports reporter

Albion are coming under increasing pressure from Leicester City to sell Leo Ulloa.

The Premier League newcomers are poised to step up their pursuit of the Seagulls’ Argentinian hitman, The Argus understands.

Leicester have already made four bids for Ulloa.

The latest of just over £6 million was turned down by Albion last week.

The Foxes are not prepared to meet the reported £10 million asking price.

But they are expected to further test Albion’s resolve with at least one more bid.

Ulloa is currently in Spain on Albion’s pre-season tour.

He sat out Saturday’s 4-0 win against Partick Thistle, the club attributing his absence to a minor ankle injury.

It is unclear whether Ulloa will be involved in tomorrow night’s match against Real Betis.

He is settled in Brighton with his family and enjoys playing for the club but he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion.

Comments (114)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:15am Wed 16 Jul 14

lighteninglee says...

Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo.... lighteninglee
  • Score: -8

5:24am Wed 16 Jul 14

pannell1 says...

Derby is said to be thinking of putting in a offer for lua lua a long with leicester they can both go away.
Derby is said to be thinking of putting in a offer for lua lua a long with leicester they can both go away. pannell1
  • Score: 13

5:28am Wed 16 Jul 14

Alan G Skinner says...

They dont want to pay £10m. Fine don't pay £10m, look elsewhere. Ulloa is Brighton's player!
They dont want to pay £10m. Fine don't pay £10m, look elsewhere. Ulloa is Brighton's player! Alan G Skinner
  • Score: 62

5:51am Wed 16 Jul 14

namgo49 says...

It's all good news this morning. The likelihood of Ulloa finally going and the guaranteed ineffectual use of 80 mins per game Lingard returning.

Just when I thought things were looking up!!
It's all good news this morning. The likelihood of Ulloa finally going and the guaranteed ineffectual use of 80 mins per game Lingard returning. Just when I thought things were looking up!! namgo49
  • Score: -43

6:08am Wed 16 Jul 14

JeffLomer says...

Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!! JeffLomer
  • Score: 7

6:21am Wed 16 Jul 14

phumps says...

Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .
Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great . phumps
  • Score: 55

6:24am Wed 16 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: 16

6:46am Wed 16 Jul 14

AlfieT says...

Simple two choices here, invest and bring in the quality that Leo clearly wants to see at the club to keep him happy, or take the money and run, over to the Lizzard.
Simple two choices here, invest and bring in the quality that Leo clearly wants to see at the club to keep him happy, or take the money and run, over to the Lizzard. AlfieT
  • Score: 14

7:21am Wed 16 Jul 14

AlanDuffy says...

Seems to me this is all about greed.......newly rich Leicester clearly want the player, but are trying to nick him for peanuts, in the meantime unsettling the player, who wants to go, but won't put in a transfer request as he ( and his agent ) will lose out. Brighton have a valuable asset, under contract to us, so if the player wants to go and Leicester want him, then they need to meet our valuation. For me, it's 90% he'll go after all the financial wranglings are sorted. Sell Leo, get Jesse back and another target man, a keeper and sort out the left back situation and we're good to go - and with a few quid in the bank!
Seems to me this is all about greed.......newly rich Leicester clearly want the player, but are trying to nick him for peanuts, in the meantime unsettling the player, who wants to go, but won't put in a transfer request as he ( and his agent ) will lose out. Brighton have a valuable asset, under contract to us, so if the player wants to go and Leicester want him, then they need to meet our valuation. For me, it's 90% he'll go after all the financial wranglings are sorted. Sell Leo, get Jesse back and another target man, a keeper and sort out the left back situation and we're good to go - and with a few quid in the bank! AlanDuffy
  • Score: 17

7:37am Wed 16 Jul 14

Beale32 says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Well done Mayfield....i totally agree. I like Ulloa and would be happy if he stays, but im not to bothered If he goes.

As you say the money needs to be reinvested in the squad not ffp.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Well done Mayfield....i totally agree. I like Ulloa and would be happy if he stays, but im not to bothered If he goes. As you say the money needs to be reinvested in the squad not ffp. Beale32
  • Score: 5

7:49am Wed 16 Jul 14

brighton bluenose says...

JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
[quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!! brighton bluenose
  • Score: 32

7:54am Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already! mark by the sea
  • Score: 8

8:04am Wed 16 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: -11

8:14am Wed 16 Jul 14

phumps says...

Personally if Leo does go I think we should test posh resolve to hang on to assombalonga
Personally if Leo does go I think we should test posh resolve to hang on to assombalonga phumps
  • Score: 7

8:21am Wed 16 Jul 14

farside says...

Have I missed something with Connor Wickham? Went back to Sunderland at the tail end of the season, played well and scored goals. Has he been made available for transfer? Nothing on the Sheffield Wednesday website and they would be front of the queue with chequebook open if there were a hint of his availability.
Have I missed something with Connor Wickham? Went back to Sunderland at the tail end of the season, played well and scored goals. Has he been made available for transfer? Nothing on the Sheffield Wednesday website and they would be front of the queue with chequebook open if there were a hint of his availability. farside
  • Score: 6

8:25am Wed 16 Jul 14

Seagull John says...

If I go to M & S every week and demand a pair of socks for £1, they will tell me to go away. If the asking price is £4 they won't sell to me until I offer £4 unless they need to get income in for new stock. As I understand it, we don't need money for new stock (players) so Leicester will have to pay the asking price (whatever that may actually be).
If I go to M & S every week and demand a pair of socks for £1, they will tell me to go away. If the asking price is £4 they won't sell to me until I offer £4 unless they need to get income in for new stock. As I understand it, we don't need money for new stock (players) so Leicester will have to pay the asking price (whatever that may actually be). Seagull John
  • Score: 14

8:51am Wed 16 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

Let's do a Liverpool and simply say he's not for sale! As soon as all parties accept that, Leo will soon get his head down and give his all for the club and his family will have a big influence. Where would you prefer to live with your kids Brighton/leafy Sussex or Leicester? What would be great would be if the club could make a significant signing to give Leo and all a real lift.
Let's do a Liverpool and simply say he's not for sale! As soon as all parties accept that, Leo will soon get his head down and give his all for the club and his family will have a big influence. Where would you prefer to live with your kids Brighton/leafy Sussex or Leicester? What would be great would be if the club could make a significant signing to give Leo and all a real lift. WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 12

9:11am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

namgo49 wrote:
It's all good news this morning. The likelihood of Ulloa finally going and the guaranteed ineffectual use of 80 mins per game Lingard returning. Just when I thought things were looking up!!
And just when I thought things were looking up, Eeyore appeared (again).
[quote][p][bold]namgo49[/bold] wrote: It's all good news this morning. The likelihood of Ulloa finally going and the guaranteed ineffectual use of 80 mins per game Lingard returning. Just when I thought things were looking up!![/p][/quote]And just when I thought things were looking up, Eeyore appeared (again). Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 7

9:12am Wed 16 Jul 14

Towner83 says...

Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity??? Towner83
  • Score: 5

9:18am Wed 16 Jul 14

Rhodes Seagull says...

Morning, I have to ask the question, " What position was CMS bought to play in"?
I thought he was a striker and the only reason he missed out last season was his injury!
If Leo does go then surley we must bring in some of his stature?
We do not seem to have the tallest of teams and JMO but we seemed to miss a lot of scoring chances when high balls came into the box.
I would be sorry to see him go as I was looking forward to him and CMS playing up front together but sure if he goes the club will find someone to take his place. Maybe even from Spain after the tour?
Morning, I have to ask the question, " What position was CMS bought to play in"? I thought he was a striker and the only reason he missed out last season was his injury! If Leo does go then surley we must bring in some of his stature? We do not seem to have the tallest of teams and JMO but we seemed to miss a lot of scoring chances when high balls came into the box. I would be sorry to see him go as I was looking forward to him and CMS playing up front together but sure if he goes the club will find someone to take his place. Maybe even from Spain after the tour? Rhodes Seagull
  • Score: 5

9:26am Wed 16 Jul 14

Captain Haddock says...

phumps wrote:
Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .
Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play.

Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected.

Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them.

We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere.

Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.
[quote][p][bold]phumps[/bold] wrote: Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .[/p][/quote]Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play. Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected. Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them. We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere. Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m. Captain Haddock
  • Score: 12

9:35am Wed 16 Jul 14

Max Ripple says...

Comments on here regarding Connor Wickham and Carlton Cole are bang on and the same goes for Stephen Ward. These players want big money albeit slightly less in Ward's case but it is still above our wage ceiling. What we can afford to spend in transfers fees is very different to what we are prepared to hand out every week in wages. £20k a week is over £1 million per year. How do we explain to other players on £6-7kper week that someone else is now getting £20k but don't you even start thinking about asking for more cos you won't get it? The Albion is a pretty fair club compared to a lot of others and they want to build a squad who will work together rather than constantly looking over shoulders to see how much the bloke next to you in the changing room is getting paid. Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham will not come to Brighton as they are greedy but average footballers. I hope Ward will drop his demands though and return to us.
As for Lingard, yes I would like to see him back here under Sami's new regime as I think he would fit in well with the quicker attacking style of play that we seem to think Sami wants. But only if the deal means he can be selected on merit. That would make the lad hungrier and try harder.
Comments on here regarding Connor Wickham and Carlton Cole are bang on and the same goes for Stephen Ward. These players want big money albeit slightly less in Ward's case but it is still above our wage ceiling. What we can afford to spend in transfers fees is very different to what we are prepared to hand out every week in wages. £20k a week is over £1 million per year. How do we explain to other players on £6-7kper week that someone else is now getting £20k but don't you even start thinking about asking for more cos you won't get it? The Albion is a pretty fair club compared to a lot of others and they want to build a squad who will work together rather than constantly looking over shoulders to see how much the bloke next to you in the changing room is getting paid. Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham will not come to Brighton as they are greedy but average footballers. I hope Ward will drop his demands though and return to us. As for Lingard, yes I would like to see him back here under Sami's new regime as I think he would fit in well with the quicker attacking style of play that we seem to think Sami wants. But only if the deal means he can be selected on merit. That would make the lad hungrier and try harder. Max Ripple
  • Score: 9

9:37am Wed 16 Jul 14

Captain Haddock says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward.

There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking!
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.[/p][/quote]Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward. There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking! Captain Haddock
  • Score: 11

9:37am Wed 16 Jul 14

Claude Back says...

Towner83 wrote:
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Good point. Exactly what I was thinking.
If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.
[quote][p][bold]Towner83[/bold] wrote: Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???[/p][/quote]Good point. Exactly what I was thinking. If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans. Claude Back
  • Score: 7

9:42am Wed 16 Jul 14

bhacharlie says...

Sell him! Get him out for as much money as we can as soon as possible. This time next year he will be slower, older and we wont be able to sell him! We need an out and out finisher that can get on the end of crosses and run off through balls, not a hold up player!
Sell him! Get him out for as much money as we can as soon as possible. This time next year he will be slower, older and we wont be able to sell him! We need an out and out finisher that can get on the end of crosses and run off through balls, not a hold up player! bhacharlie
  • Score: 2

9:52am Wed 16 Jul 14

seagullsovergrimsby says...

The asking price is £10M , if Leicester are really serious about Ulloa their bid needs to match it.
The asking price is £10M , if Leicester are really serious about Ulloa their bid needs to match it. seagullsovergrimsby
  • Score: 4

9:52am Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

namgo49 wrote:
It's all good news this morning. The likelihood of Ulloa finally going and the guaranteed ineffectual use of 80 mins per game Lingard returning.

Just when I thought things were looking up!!
dont lie.youve never thought things were looking up you miserable cockwomble
[quote][p][bold]namgo49[/bold] wrote: It's all good news this morning. The likelihood of Ulloa finally going and the guaranteed ineffectual use of 80 mins per game Lingard returning. Just when I thought things were looking up!![/p][/quote]dont lie.youve never thought things were looking up you miserable cockwomble Cockwomble
  • Score: 6

9:56am Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

Claude Back wrote:
Towner83 wrote:
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Good point. Exactly what I was thinking.
If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.
Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc..
I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,
[quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Towner83[/bold] wrote: Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???[/p][/quote]Good point. Exactly what I was thinking. If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.[/p][/quote]Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc.. I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing , mark by the sea
  • Score: 4

9:58am Wed 16 Jul 14

fratsomrover says...

The fact Leicester keep coming back suggests to me he really is no 1 on their want list and with the cash bonus they are going to get in the Prem, I do expect they'll table an offer we cannot afford to refuse.
It'll be a shame as he is the best centre forward we've had down here since Zamaora. I also know he enjoys living in Brighton and his family are very settled here, but I would imagine the prospect of playing Prem League will be too much for him to turn down, and who can blame him.
If we'd gone up last season he would have stayed, but I expect he'll go if Leicester up their offer.
Still with the money from him, Barnes, El Abd, Dickenson still in the pot, it does strengthen our arm in the purchasing field, so maybe we'll get someone really front line to boost morale.
Whoever we end up getting, I hope it doesn't impair the opportunities of March, Ince,etc who are really exciting prospects and whom I'm really looking forward to seeing more of this coming season.
It would be nice if Sammi could use his Liverpool connections to get one of their forwards who may not be getting regular playing time this season. I wait with baited breath !!!!
The fact Leicester keep coming back suggests to me he really is no 1 on their want list and with the cash bonus they are going to get in the Prem, I do expect they'll table an offer we cannot afford to refuse. It'll be a shame as he is the best centre forward we've had down here since Zamaora. I also know he enjoys living in Brighton and his family are very settled here, but I would imagine the prospect of playing Prem League will be too much for him to turn down, and who can blame him. If we'd gone up last season he would have stayed, but I expect he'll go if Leicester up their offer. Still with the money from him, Barnes, El Abd, Dickenson still in the pot, it does strengthen our arm in the purchasing field, so maybe we'll get someone really front line to boost morale. Whoever we end up getting, I hope it doesn't impair the opportunities of March, Ince,etc who are really exciting prospects and whom I'm really looking forward to seeing more of this coming season. It would be nice if Sammi could use his Liverpool connections to get one of their forwards who may not be getting regular playing time this season. I wait with baited breath !!!! fratsomrover
  • Score: 7

9:59am Wed 16 Jul 14

Joel'sGrandad says...

It's a shame that there are no other suitors for Leo and I am surprised Gus hasn't put in an offer. Leo needs to ask himself if only Leicester out of the whole PL want him, then maybe they only see him as a fringe player. Does he therefore want to warm the bench most of the time at LC or play for the Albion every game.
I hope he stays but if Leicester want him badly enough they must pay the price. UTA
It's a shame that there are no other suitors for Leo and I am surprised Gus hasn't put in an offer. Leo needs to ask himself if only Leicester out of the whole PL want him, then maybe they only see him as a fringe player. Does he therefore want to warm the bench most of the time at LC or play for the Albion every game. I hope he stays but if Leicester want him badly enough they must pay the price. UTA Joel'sGrandad
  • Score: 4

10:02am Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
Towner83 wrote:
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Good point. Exactly what I was thinking.
If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.
Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc..
I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,
there is clearly...you would imagine...etc etc...so no real snippets of fact from anyone who says they have inside knowledge?i reckon hes in no great hurry to move just wants guarantees of investment in the team.no evidence for my opinion but no less valid that anyone elses.cockwomble
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Towner83[/bold] wrote: Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???[/p][/quote]Good point. Exactly what I was thinking. If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.[/p][/quote]Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc.. I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,[/p][/quote]there is clearly...you would imagine...etc etc...so no real snippets of fact from anyone who says they have inside knowledge?i reckon hes in no great hurry to move just wants guarantees of investment in the team.no evidence for my opinion but no less valid that anyone elses.cockwomble Cockwomble
  • Score: 6

10:13am Wed 16 Jul 14

ballantrrae says...

Captain Haddock wrote:
phumps wrote:
Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .
Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play.

Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected.

Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them.

We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere.

Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.
Excellent post Captain Haddock.
Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa.
Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality.
Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on.
I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.
[quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phumps[/bold] wrote: Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .[/p][/quote]Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play. Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected. Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them. We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere. Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.[/p][/quote]Excellent post Captain Haddock. Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa. Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality. Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on. I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA. ballantrrae
  • Score: 10

10:16am Wed 16 Jul 14

AlfieT says...

Joel'sGrandad wrote:
It's a shame that there are no other suitors for Leo and I am surprised Gus hasn't put in an offer. Leo needs to ask himself if only Leicester out of the whole PL want him, then maybe they only see him as a fringe player. Does he therefore want to warm the bench most of the time at LC or play for the Albion every game.
I hope he stays but if Leicester want him badly enough they must pay the price. UTA
Good points, some on here forget how long it took to replace Murray our ex scouting team found Leo and he's been great for us. Good hold up strikers like Leo are hard to find at the right price, but for £7-8 million the club should take it, if we don't bring in the quality to back him up he will just lose interest.
[quote][p][bold]Joel'sGrandad[/bold] wrote: It's a shame that there are no other suitors for Leo and I am surprised Gus hasn't put in an offer. Leo needs to ask himself if only Leicester out of the whole PL want him, then maybe they only see him as a fringe player. Does he therefore want to warm the bench most of the time at LC or play for the Albion every game. I hope he stays but if Leicester want him badly enough they must pay the price. UTA[/p][/quote]Good points, some on here forget how long it took to replace Murray our ex scouting team found Leo and he's been great for us. Good hold up strikers like Leo are hard to find at the right price, but for £7-8 million the club should take it, if we don't bring in the quality to back him up he will just lose interest. AlfieT
  • Score: 8

10:24am Wed 16 Jul 14

dave from bexill says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
Towner83 wrote:
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Good point. Exactly what I was thinking.
If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.
Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc..
I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,
Unless it suits the club of course
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Towner83[/bold] wrote: Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???[/p][/quote]Good point. Exactly what I was thinking. If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.[/p][/quote]Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc.. I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,[/p][/quote]Unless it suits the club of course dave from bexill
  • Score: 5

10:29am Wed 16 Jul 14

SeagullOverSelsey says...

AlanDuffy wrote:
Seems to me this is all about greed.......newly rich Leicester clearly want the player, but are trying to nick him for peanuts, in the meantime unsettling the player, who wants to go, but won't put in a transfer request as he ( and his agent ) will lose out. Brighton have a valuable asset, under contract to us, so if the player wants to go and Leicester want him, then they need to meet our valuation. For me, it's 90% he'll go after all the financial wranglings are sorted. Sell Leo, get Jesse back and another target man, a keeper and sort out the left back situation and we're good to go - and with a few quid in the bank!
Brilliant post Alan-spot on !
[quote][p][bold]AlanDuffy[/bold] wrote: Seems to me this is all about greed.......newly rich Leicester clearly want the player, but are trying to nick him for peanuts, in the meantime unsettling the player, who wants to go, but won't put in a transfer request as he ( and his agent ) will lose out. Brighton have a valuable asset, under contract to us, so if the player wants to go and Leicester want him, then they need to meet our valuation. For me, it's 90% he'll go after all the financial wranglings are sorted. Sell Leo, get Jesse back and another target man, a keeper and sort out the left back situation and we're good to go - and with a few quid in the bank![/p][/quote]Brilliant post Alan-spot on ! SeagullOverSelsey
  • Score: 6

10:33am Wed 16 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

Captain Haddock wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward.

There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking!
Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.
[quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.[/p][/quote]Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward. There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking![/p][/quote]Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: -8

10:49am Wed 16 Jul 14

Chi Gull says...

Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting.

Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term.

We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.
Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting. Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term. We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances. Chi Gull
  • Score: 8

10:53am Wed 16 Jul 14

tug509 says...

brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
[quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB . tug509
  • Score: 2

10:53am Wed 16 Jul 14

rolivan says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
Towner83 wrote:
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Good point. Exactly what I was thinking.
If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.
Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc..
I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,
The Argus don't even bother putting any Albion news on the Front page so something is clearly wrong
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Towner83[/bold] wrote: Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???[/p][/quote]Good point. Exactly what I was thinking. If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.[/p][/quote]Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc.. I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,[/p][/quote]The Argus don't even bother putting any Albion news on the Front page so something is clearly wrong rolivan
  • Score: 5

10:54am Wed 16 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

As well as Wickham there are 3 other players we really should be after, Nathan Redmond Peter Crouch and Harry Maguire. Would give us fantastic attacking options and would probably convince Ulloa to stay, yes that's a lot of money's worth but I think we have it within us to sign big, if we want it enough. The riches of the premier league would more than cancel out the expense.
As well as Wickham there are 3 other players we really should be after, Nathan Redmond Peter Crouch and Harry Maguire. Would give us fantastic attacking options and would probably convince Ulloa to stay, yes that's a lot of money's worth but I think we have it within us to sign big, if we want it enough. The riches of the premier league would more than cancel out the expense. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: -4

10:59am Wed 16 Jul 14

Rhodes Seagull says...

Chi Gull wrote:
Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting.

Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term.

We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.
Hi, Glad you mentioned "Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship" Looking at SKY we are not even quoted in the first two months of the season yet we finished two seasons in the top six, is money going the other way from football to SKY? because seems to me to be very bias against Brighton and Hove FC.
[quote][p][bold]Chi Gull[/bold] wrote: Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting. Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term. We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.[/p][/quote]Hi, Glad you mentioned "Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship" Looking at SKY we are not even quoted in the first two months of the season yet we finished two seasons in the top six, is money going the other way from football to SKY? because seems to me to be very bias against Brighton and Hove FC. Rhodes Seagull
  • Score: 3

11:02am Wed 16 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

Rhodes Seagull wrote:
Chi Gull wrote:
Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting.

Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term.

We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.
Hi, Glad you mentioned "Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship" Looking at SKY we are not even quoted in the first two months of the season yet we finished two seasons in the top six, is money going the other way from football to SKY? because seems to me to be very bias against Brighton and Hove FC.
I think you could be right about the bias. It also shows up in National Press reporting and The FL Paper. Maybe since we stopped all the pies in the press room as a cost cutter!!!!
[quote][p][bold]Rhodes Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chi Gull[/bold] wrote: Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting. Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term. We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.[/p][/quote]Hi, Glad you mentioned "Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship" Looking at SKY we are not even quoted in the first two months of the season yet we finished two seasons in the top six, is money going the other way from football to SKY? because seems to me to be very bias against Brighton and Hove FC.[/p][/quote]I think you could be right about the bias. It also shows up in National Press reporting and The FL Paper. Maybe since we stopped all the pies in the press room as a cost cutter!!!! WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 1

11:02am Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run, mark by the sea
  • Score: 2

11:07am Wed 16 Jul 14

pte says...

Leicester may only want to pay 6-7m but another club might be willing to pay more. Another club might be allowing Leicester to do all the hard work negotiating a price only to step in at the last moment with a matching bid. Or once Leicester give up another club could step in with a bigger offer as some clubs don't like to get involved in an auction.

So the club shouldn't be afraid of outpricing Leicester as it's a game of poker

And as Mark says they should definitely wait for Leo to put in a transfer request
Leicester may only want to pay 6-7m but another club might be willing to pay more. Another club might be allowing Leicester to do all the hard work negotiating a price only to step in at the last moment with a matching bid. Or once Leicester give up another club could step in with a bigger offer as some clubs don't like to get involved in an auction. So the club shouldn't be afraid of outpricing Leicester as it's a game of poker And as Mark says they should definitely wait for Leo to put in a transfer request pte
  • Score: 6

11:15am Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

rolivan wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Claude Back wrote:
Towner83 wrote:
Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???
Good point. Exactly what I was thinking.
If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.
Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc..
I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,
The Argus don't even bother putting any Albion news on the Front page so something is clearly wrong
why not ask naylor or hollis or griggs and see?
[quote][p][bold]rolivan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Claude Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Towner83[/bold] wrote: Just a small question regarding the journalism of this story. Can we attribute the last couple of sentences to the man himself or is it a presumption purely based on the lack of transfer activity???[/p][/quote]Good point. Exactly what I was thinking. If the comment 'he wants Premier League football and fears the scale of investment in the squad is reducing his chances of getting there with Albion' is true, then it says a lot and shake up a few on here who think all their geese are swans.[/p][/quote]Do you remember the summer when the argus quoted from a spokesman for ulloa? There is clearly a rift with the club , the argus don't seem to have direct quotes from anyone at the club , but former players etc.. I would imagine Leo wants away , but wants to keep his 10% of transfer funds! why should he? The club should now allow anyone to leave unless they put a request in writing ,[/p][/quote]The Argus don't even bother putting any Albion news on the Front page so something is clearly wrong[/p][/quote]why not ask naylor or hollis or griggs and see? Cockwomble
  • Score: 4

11:17am Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble Cockwomble
  • Score: 5

11:18am Wed 16 Jul 14

the taffster says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Wickham and Cole are big earners at their clubs....they aren't going to take a drop to 10k a week...best solution is to get players on loan and get the parent club partly funding their wages...we could get the likes of Hughes ,looking for a season or 2 before retirement,.... I would prefer younger players from div1 and 2 to fit the bill...on realistic wages....then we can sell them to Liverpool and man city!
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Wickham and Cole are big earners at their clubs....they aren't going to take a drop to 10k a week...best solution is to get players on loan and get the parent club partly funding their wages...we could get the likes of Hughes ,looking for a season or 2 before retirement,.... I would prefer younger players from div1 and 2 to fit the bill...on realistic wages....then we can sell them to Liverpool and man city! the taffster
  • Score: 3

11:21am Wed 16 Jul 14

Chi Gull says...

The reality is that club must have a figure in mind, and if Leicester reach that figure Leo will go. It will be good business. Hopefully the club have replacements lined up to fill the gap - we shall see. Maybe an increased bid for Sam Baldock? If we get anyone currently with a PL club I can only see it being a loan.
The reality is that club must have a figure in mind, and if Leicester reach that figure Leo will go. It will be good business. Hopefully the club have replacements lined up to fill the gap - we shall see. Maybe an increased bid for Sam Baldock? If we get anyone currently with a PL club I can only see it being a loan. Chi Gull
  • Score: -1

11:23am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

ballantrrae wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
phumps wrote:
Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .
Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play.

Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected.

Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them.

We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere.

Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.
Excellent post Captain Haddock.
Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa.
Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality.
Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on.
I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.
Thanks and yes I agree, we would like a resolution to the Leicester issue asap. Any replacement should be sought and acquired comfortably before we kick off as that position on the field relies on good understanding with teammates more than most. We would want any required replacement to get as much time with new teammates as poss, preferably with at least two friendly run-outs in that period. If we keep Ulloa, as I'm staring to suspect we might, it's not an issue.
[quote][p][bold]ballantrrae[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phumps[/bold] wrote: Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .[/p][/quote]Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play. Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected. Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them. We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere. Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.[/p][/quote]Excellent post Captain Haddock. Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa. Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality. Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on. I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.[/p][/quote]Thanks and yes I agree, we would like a resolution to the Leicester issue asap. Any replacement should be sought and acquired comfortably before we kick off as that position on the field relies on good understanding with teammates more than most. We would want any required replacement to get as much time with new teammates as poss, preferably with at least two friendly run-outs in that period. If we keep Ulloa, as I'm staring to suspect we might, it's not an issue. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 7

11:28am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward.

There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking!
Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.
Perhaps but can't see it, much as Wickham is starting to look a decent proposition now.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.[/p][/quote]Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward. There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking![/p][/quote]Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.[/p][/quote]Perhaps but can't see it, much as Wickham is starting to look a decent proposition now. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 5

11:32am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
As well as Wickham there are 3 other players we really should be after, Nathan Redmond Peter Crouch and Harry Maguire. Would give us fantastic attacking options and would probably convince Ulloa to stay, yes that's a lot of money's worth but I think we have it within us to sign big, if we want it enough. The riches of the premier league would more than cancel out the expense.
Tell that to Forest.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: As well as Wickham there are 3 other players we really should be after, Nathan Redmond Peter Crouch and Harry Maguire. Would give us fantastic attacking options and would probably convince Ulloa to stay, yes that's a lot of money's worth but I think we have it within us to sign big, if we want it enough. The riches of the premier league would more than cancel out the expense.[/p][/quote]Tell that to Forest. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 4

11:35am Wed 16 Jul 14

Zamora251 says...

Its very simple, either pay 10 million or **** off!!
Its very simple, either pay 10 million or **** off!! Zamora251
  • Score: 7

11:36am Wed 16 Jul 14

JeffLomer says...

pte wrote:
Leicester may only want to pay 6-7m but another club might be willing to pay more. Another club might be allowing Leicester to do all the hard work negotiating a price only to step in at the last moment with a matching bid. Or once Leicester give up another club could step in with a bigger offer as some clubs don't like to get involved in an auction.

So the club shouldn't be afraid of outpricing Leicester as it's a game of poker

And as Mark says they should definitely wait for Leo to put in a transfer request
If we get 8million for him then take it, were make a nice profit for having him play for us for 18months, there will be only two winners us with money in the bank and Leo making a fortune on a long deal,
As much as I like him is he premiership quality, I personally think he will struggle playing top flight football, if he spends half the time arguing with the ref like he did for us sometimes saying he's being felled he will found out, he spent half the time on the floor playing up front on his own, he won't get away with that in the premiership,
Just my opinion!!
[quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: Leicester may only want to pay 6-7m but another club might be willing to pay more. Another club might be allowing Leicester to do all the hard work negotiating a price only to step in at the last moment with a matching bid. Or once Leicester give up another club could step in with a bigger offer as some clubs don't like to get involved in an auction. So the club shouldn't be afraid of outpricing Leicester as it's a game of poker And as Mark says they should definitely wait for Leo to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]If we get 8million for him then take it, were make a nice profit for having him play for us for 18months, there will be only two winners us with money in the bank and Leo making a fortune on a long deal, As much as I like him is he premiership quality, I personally think he will struggle playing top flight football, if he spends half the time arguing with the ref like he did for us sometimes saying he's being felled he will found out, he spent half the time on the floor playing up front on his own, he won't get away with that in the premiership, Just my opinion!! JeffLomer
  • Score: 0

11:36am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Rhodes Seagull wrote:
Chi Gull wrote:
Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting.

Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term.

We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.
Hi, Glad you mentioned "Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship" Looking at SKY we are not even quoted in the first two months of the season yet we finished two seasons in the top six, is money going the other way from football to SKY? because seems to me to be very bias against Brighton and Hove FC.
As usual! SKY only love PL flops, Leeds and other teams they've seen in The Prem. Shocking!
[quote][p][bold]Rhodes Seagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Chi Gull[/bold] wrote: Looking on the bright side, we could be Blackpool with only 8 players on the books, no goalkeeper, and pre-season tour cancelled !! Their early visit to the Amex could be interesting. Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship and making it difficult for clubs like ours to compete financially, even with our big gates. That's why you get good players warming the bench in the PL on big fat salaries - or average players on PL wages at relegated PL clubs who don't want to move until their contracts end. I don't see how that is good for football in the short to medium term. We just have to do the best we can in the circumstances.[/p][/quote]Hi, Glad you mentioned "Television money is increasing the gulf between PL and Championship" Looking at SKY we are not even quoted in the first two months of the season yet we finished two seasons in the top six, is money going the other way from football to SKY? because seems to me to be very bias against Brighton and Hove FC.[/p][/quote]As usual! SKY only love PL flops, Leeds and other teams they've seen in The Prem. Shocking! Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 4

11:40am Wed 16 Jul 14

Andrea Orlandigasm says...

£7 million + add-ons and let's get on with spending most of it rather than scrabbling around in the last week of August.
£7 million + add-ons and let's get on with spending most of it rather than scrabbling around in the last week of August. Andrea Orlandigasm
  • Score: 8

11:41am Wed 16 Jul 14

Max Ripple says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
As well as Wickham there are 3 other players we really should be after, Nathan Redmond Peter Crouch and Harry Maguire. Would give us fantastic attacking options and would probably convince Ulloa to stay, yes that's a lot of money's worth but I think we have it within us to sign big, if we want it enough. The riches of the premier league would more than cancel out the expense.
Crouch won't play for our money.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: As well as Wickham there are 3 other players we really should be after, Nathan Redmond Peter Crouch and Harry Maguire. Would give us fantastic attacking options and would probably convince Ulloa to stay, yes that's a lot of money's worth but I think we have it within us to sign big, if we want it enough. The riches of the premier league would more than cancel out the expense.[/p][/quote]Crouch won't play for our money. Max Ripple
  • Score: 3

11:42am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Oscar's Chin wrote:
ballantrrae wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
phumps wrote:
Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .
Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play.

Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected.

Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them.

We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere.

Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.
Excellent post Captain Haddock.
Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa.
Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality.
Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on.
I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.
Thanks and yes I agree, we would like a resolution to the Leicester issue asap. Any replacement should be sought and acquired comfortably before we kick off as that position on the field relies on good understanding with teammates more than most. We would want any required replacement to get as much time with new teammates as poss, preferably with at least two friendly run-outs in that period. If we keep Ulloa, as I'm staring to suspect we might, it's not an issue.
Hi, just to clarify, I am Capt. H. I have a second account so I can stay logged in to post on two devices - easier than logging in and out! Apologies for confusion to Ballantrrae.
[quote][p][bold]Oscar's Chin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ballantrrae[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phumps[/bold] wrote: Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .[/p][/quote]Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play. Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected. Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them. We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere. Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.[/p][/quote]Excellent post Captain Haddock. Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa. Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality. Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on. I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.[/p][/quote]Thanks and yes I agree, we would like a resolution to the Leicester issue asap. Any replacement should be sought and acquired comfortably before we kick off as that position on the field relies on good understanding with teammates more than most. We would want any required replacement to get as much time with new teammates as poss, preferably with at least two friendly run-outs in that period. If we keep Ulloa, as I'm staring to suspect we might, it's not an issue.[/p][/quote]Hi, just to clarify, I am Capt. H. I have a second account so I can stay logged in to post on two devices - easier than logging in and out! Apologies for confusion to Ballantrrae. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 3

11:45am Wed 16 Jul 14

Withdean-er says...

Sell and grab all that cash.
We can then become as team, with new recruits, with pace and power on the counter.

Not the staid, slow, predictable tactics (with slow and immobile Ulloa), that defences find so easy to deal with.

Time to move on.
Sell and grab all that cash. We can then become as team, with new recruits, with pace and power on the counter. Not the staid, slow, predictable tactics (with slow and immobile Ulloa), that defences find so easy to deal with. Time to move on. Withdean-er
  • Score: 1

11:46am Wed 16 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Oscar's Chin wrote:
Oscar's Chin wrote:
ballantrrae wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
phumps wrote:
Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .
Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play.

Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected.

Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them.

We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere.

Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.
Excellent post Captain Haddock.
Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa.
Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality.
Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on.
I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.
Thanks and yes I agree, we would like a resolution to the Leicester issue asap. Any replacement should be sought and acquired comfortably before we kick off as that position on the field relies on good understanding with teammates more than most. We would want any required replacement to get as much time with new teammates as poss, preferably with at least two friendly run-outs in that period. If we keep Ulloa, as I'm staring to suspect we might, it's not an issue.
Hi, just to clarify, I am Capt. H. I have a second account so I can stay logged in to post on two devices - easier than logging in and out! Apologies for confusion to Ballantrrae.
Meant to add that I do most catching up on here between times when out using an iPhone but prefer larger screen when I can (at home).
[quote][p][bold]Oscar's Chin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Oscar's Chin[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ballantrrae[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]phumps[/bold] wrote: Quite simple really if Leicester or anyone else don't want to pay £10m then they can do one, we all know Leo is worth £5m tops but nice to see for once we just not roll over with legs in the air and take whatever is offered rather than get what we want. As for the leics chairman and owners if you're gonna brag about having a £180m warchest it don't half make you look like numptys when you won't meet a clubs valuation of a player. As for lingard coming back don't knock it the kid has obvious talent and just may flourish under Sami's proposed style of play and if he wants to come give his all for us this season then great .[/p][/quote]Exactly! Great post. Lingad will suit Sami's style better than Oscar's and has already done well for us anyway, with four goals in seventeen and some quality play. Yes, he's not fully consistent yet but that will come with time and experience. Let's get him in if his absence from the ManUre tour gets confirmed on Friday as expected. Also, I couldn't agree more with you about Leicester's owners. Their rather ridiculous boast of an enormous warchest is probably hyperbole, but if not alerts everyone to how much money they claim to have - instantly raising every club's asking prices to them. We are not going to sell Leo cheaply as we are not that sort of club any more, but their bragging ensures we will be playing hardball. If they don't come up with the amount we want Leo won't go anywhere. Exactly what figure would tempt the Albion to sell remains unknown, but seing as we are asking for £10 million, my guess is we might settle for about £8.5 / £9m.[/p][/quote]Excellent post Captain Haddock. Judging by Leicester's rather mean attritional strategy - 4 bids starting with one less than £5 mill increasing to the latest reported £6.25 mill - I suspect that if they do make another offer it will be in the £6.5 - £7 million range. An offer of that amount I am confident would also be rejected by TB and therefore a complete waste of everybody's time apart from continuing to 'unsettle' Ulloa. Given that Ulloa's buy-out clause is £7.5 mill (apparently) then any offer less than £7,5 - £8 mill is not I believe likely to succeed especially as the Albion's valuation is supposedly £10 mill. Apart from anything else as many posters have pointed out we would have to replace him with a player of similar quality. Hopefully if Leicester do make another offer that it will be their final one so that Ulloa's situation can be sorted out one way or the other and everybody can move on. I am confident in TB making the right decision. UTA.[/p][/quote]Thanks and yes I agree, we would like a resolution to the Leicester issue asap. Any replacement should be sought and acquired comfortably before we kick off as that position on the field relies on good understanding with teammates more than most. We would want any required replacement to get as much time with new teammates as poss, preferably with at least two friendly run-outs in that period. If we keep Ulloa, as I'm staring to suspect we might, it's not an issue.[/p][/quote]Hi, just to clarify, I am Capt. H. I have a second account so I can stay logged in to post on two devices - easier than logging in and out! Apologies for confusion to Ballantrrae.[/p][/quote]Meant to add that I do most catching up on here between times when out using an iPhone but prefer larger screen when I can (at home). Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 2

11:51am Wed 16 Jul 14

albioninmadrid says...

I think 8 million is good business for the Albion,the football last season was dull with only Ulloa upfront holding the ball.I only hope the money is invested wisely in the team.
I think 8 million is good business for the Albion,the football last season was dull with only Ulloa upfront holding the ball.I only hope the money is invested wisely in the team. albioninmadrid
  • Score: 6

11:56am Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
[quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro .. mark by the sea
  • Score: 1

12:01pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season. Cockwomble
  • Score: 3

12:12pm Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
[quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request mark by the sea
  • Score: 1

12:20pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble Cockwomble
  • Score: 1

12:28pm Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
[quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ! mark by the sea
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Willie, Willie Irvine says...

I think the £10m valuation means in reality that make offer of £8m and Albion would bite their hand off, £7.5m and we'll call you back. I think Ulloa will be gone by teatime Friday, with £3-4m being allocated by the club for a replacement.

But don't quote me....
I think the £10m valuation means in reality that make offer of £8m and Albion would bite their hand off, £7.5m and we'll call you back. I think Ulloa will be gone by teatime Friday, with £3-4m being allocated by the club for a replacement. But don't quote me.... Willie, Willie Irvine
  • Score: 1

12:30pm Wed 16 Jul 14

dave from bexill says...

It's a guessing game Mark and Cockwomble isn't it regarding likely contenders for top six, especially in our league. However, my guess would be that at least half the teams think they have a realistic chance of making the top six. I would certainly add Blackburn and Derby to Marks view. Thats what makes the division so competitive and exciting for the most part, even though in my view the football itself often lacks a bit.
It's a guessing game Mark and Cockwomble isn't it regarding likely contenders for top six, especially in our league. However, my guess would be that at least half the teams think they have a realistic chance of making the top six. I would certainly add Blackburn and Derby to Marks view. Thats what makes the division so competitive and exciting for the most part, even though in my view the football itself often lacks a bit. dave from bexill
  • Score: 4

12:41pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
why not worry about failure if it actually happens.i think we are doing great.shame you dont but thats peoples attitudes i guess.two of the best ever seasons re position depite people saying every year its harder.we have decent manager.decent squad.club being run well.great chairman.great crowd.losing money but under control which cant be said for many others.yeah.bl00dy awful isnt it.doom and gloom before a ball is kicked.really.i saw a black cloud earlier.i guess thats your house under it.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]why not worry about failure if it actually happens.i think we are doing great.shame you dont but thats peoples attitudes i guess.two of the best ever seasons re position depite people saying every year its harder.we have decent manager.decent squad.club being run well.great chairman.great crowd.losing money but under control which cant be said for many others.yeah.bl00dy awful isnt it.doom and gloom before a ball is kicked.really.i saw a black cloud earlier.i guess thats your house under it. Cockwomble
  • Score: 2

1:41pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

I have always thought that the magic number for Ulloa is 8M, I just don't see him going for less. The last offer being reported as 6.25M would require a big jump in the bidding to even reach my figure let alone the club's reported 10M valuation. The reason Leicester keep coming back for Leo is because they can't get anyone else, even tho they have been bidding for a few.

I don't see the 10M as a price tag as we don't want to sell him, I think it was madepublic to simply deter clubs from bidding, and apart from Leicester it has worked. The Chinese water torture approach being applied by Leicester with their drip by drip bids deserves to fail, if only because it's a cheap method of doing business and in part designed to cause unrest within the Brighton squad. Just look at how many on here think we should just sell and move on, take less than we want but get it done and over with, that is exactly what Leicester hope will happen in the halls of power at the Amex.

The club could put an end to this, one way or another, by making a public statement re Leo, 'the price is 10M and not a penny less.' Leicester will be forced to either pay up or go away. With regards to Leo not being happy with our transfer dealings, if true, that has to be based on last year as like us, he has no idea who we might bring in this year.
I have always thought that the magic number for Ulloa is 8M, I just don't see him going for less. The last offer being reported as 6.25M would require a big jump in the bidding to even reach my figure let alone the club's reported 10M valuation. The reason Leicester keep coming back for Leo is because they can't get anyone else, even tho they have been bidding for a few. I don't see the 10M as a price tag as we don't want to sell him, I think it was madepublic to simply deter clubs from bidding, and apart from Leicester it has worked. The Chinese water torture approach being applied by Leicester with their drip by drip bids deserves to fail, if only because it's a cheap method of doing business and in part designed to cause unrest within the Brighton squad. Just look at how many on here think we should just sell and move on, take less than we want but get it done and over with, that is exactly what Leicester hope will happen in the halls of power at the Amex. The club could put an end to this, one way or another, by making a public statement re Leo, 'the price is 10M and not a penny less.' Leicester will be forced to either pay up or go away. With regards to Leo not being happy with our transfer dealings, if true, that has to be based on last year as like us, he has no idea who we might bring in this year. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 7

2:06pm Wed 16 Jul 14

lighteninglee says...

lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
[quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why? lighteninglee
  • Score: -4

2:12pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Neville says...

Leo and his agent will have had conversations with the club regarding the clubs intent to achieve Premiership football and this would have been one of the keys to him signing originally. With GP and OG scenarios and the lack of purchasing quality players they themselves questioned the clubs intent,so Leo is no different. With the past fiascos that took place over the past two seasons with failed bids and generally awful loaners then he must like many fans have real concerns over the ambitions of the club. Yes we have brilliant stadium and Academy but it is on match days on the field that really count. Are the club treading water until FFP is under control,if so then we won,t match his ambitions.
Leo and his agent will have had conversations with the club regarding the clubs intent to achieve Premiership football and this would have been one of the keys to him signing originally. With GP and OG scenarios and the lack of purchasing quality players they themselves questioned the clubs intent,so Leo is no different. With the past fiascos that took place over the past two seasons with failed bids and generally awful loaners then he must like many fans have real concerns over the ambitions of the club. Yes we have brilliant stadium and Academy but it is on match days on the field that really count. Are the club treading water until FFP is under control,if so then we won,t match his ambitions. Neville
  • Score: -5

3:05pm Wed 16 Jul 14

arc12 says...

I just hope if a compromise is made and Ulloa goes say for an agreed fee of £8m then we don't get stiffed with a payment scheme. So many transfers see only a partial amount paid upfront and then more depending on appearances / a club staying up. When Liverpool sold 'Jaws' to Barcelona for £75m only £35m is payable up front. I don't want this situation to happen to us. Cash upfront or Leicester can do one IMO.
I just hope if a compromise is made and Ulloa goes say for an agreed fee of £8m then we don't get stiffed with a payment scheme. So many transfers see only a partial amount paid upfront and then more depending on appearances / a club staying up. When Liverpool sold 'Jaws' to Barcelona for £75m only £35m is payable up front. I don't want this situation to happen to us. Cash upfront or Leicester can do one IMO. arc12
  • Score: 2

3:24pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

arc12 wrote:
I just hope if a compromise is made and Ulloa goes say for an agreed fee of £8m then we don't get stiffed with a payment scheme. So many transfers see only a partial amount paid upfront and then more depending on appearances / a club staying up. When Liverpool sold 'Jaws' to Barcelona for £75m only £35m is payable up front. I don't want this situation to happen to us. Cash upfront or Leicester can do one IMO.
agreed.
[quote][p][bold]arc12[/bold] wrote: I just hope if a compromise is made and Ulloa goes say for an agreed fee of £8m then we don't get stiffed with a payment scheme. So many transfers see only a partial amount paid upfront and then more depending on appearances / a club staying up. When Liverpool sold 'Jaws' to Barcelona for £75m only £35m is payable up front. I don't want this situation to happen to us. Cash upfront or Leicester can do one IMO.[/p][/quote]agreed. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

3:43pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Withdean-er says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
arc12 wrote:
I just hope if a compromise is made and Ulloa goes say for an agreed fee of £8m then we don't get stiffed with a payment scheme. So many transfers see only a partial amount paid upfront and then more depending on appearances / a club staying up. When Liverpool sold 'Jaws' to Barcelona for £75m only £35m is payable up front. I don't want this situation to happen to us. Cash upfront or Leicester can do one IMO.
agreed.
But paying by instalments is completely the norm. Conversely, clubs selling players to us normally agree to be paid in instalments too, so this wouldn't inhibit our spending power or adversely affect our FFP accounts results.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]arc12[/bold] wrote: I just hope if a compromise is made and Ulloa goes say for an agreed fee of £8m then we don't get stiffed with a payment scheme. So many transfers see only a partial amount paid upfront and then more depending on appearances / a club staying up. When Liverpool sold 'Jaws' to Barcelona for £75m only £35m is payable up front. I don't want this situation to happen to us. Cash upfront or Leicester can do one IMO.[/p][/quote]agreed.[/p][/quote]But paying by instalments is completely the norm. Conversely, clubs selling players to us normally agree to be paid in instalments too, so this wouldn't inhibit our spending power or adversely affect our FFP accounts results. Withdean-er
  • Score: 2

3:46pm Wed 16 Jul 14

SeagullOverSelsey says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
I have always thought that the magic number for Ulloa is 8M, I just don't see him going for less. The last offer being reported as 6.25M would require a big jump in the bidding to even reach my figure let alone the club's reported 10M valuation. The reason Leicester keep coming back for Leo is because they can't get anyone else, even tho they have been bidding for a few.

I don't see the 10M as a price tag as we don't want to sell him, I think it was madepublic to simply deter clubs from bidding, and apart from Leicester it has worked. The Chinese water torture approach being applied by Leicester with their drip by drip bids deserves to fail, if only because it's a cheap method of doing business and in part designed to cause unrest within the Brighton squad. Just look at how many on here think we should just sell and move on, take less than we want but get it done and over with, that is exactly what Leicester hope will happen in the halls of power at the Amex.

The club could put an end to this, one way or another, by making a public statement re Leo, 'the price is 10M and not a penny less.' Leicester will be forced to either pay up or go away. With regards to Leo not being happy with our transfer dealings, if true, that has to be based on last year as like us, he has no idea who we might bring in this year.
Very well put Vegas!
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: I have always thought that the magic number for Ulloa is 8M, I just don't see him going for less. The last offer being reported as 6.25M would require a big jump in the bidding to even reach my figure let alone the club's reported 10M valuation. The reason Leicester keep coming back for Leo is because they can't get anyone else, even tho they have been bidding for a few. I don't see the 10M as a price tag as we don't want to sell him, I think it was madepublic to simply deter clubs from bidding, and apart from Leicester it has worked. The Chinese water torture approach being applied by Leicester with their drip by drip bids deserves to fail, if only because it's a cheap method of doing business and in part designed to cause unrest within the Brighton squad. Just look at how many on here think we should just sell and move on, take less than we want but get it done and over with, that is exactly what Leicester hope will happen in the halls of power at the Amex. The club could put an end to this, one way or another, by making a public statement re Leo, 'the price is 10M and not a penny less.' Leicester will be forced to either pay up or go away. With regards to Leo not being happy with our transfer dealings, if true, that has to be based on last year as like us, he has no idea who we might bring in this year.[/p][/quote]Very well put Vegas! SeagullOverSelsey
  • Score: 2

4:01pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Willie, Willie Irvine says...

lighteninglee wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
Don't worry. I think explaining the Higgs Boson particle physics would be easier than explaining the thumbs up/down decisions for comments here...
[quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why?[/p][/quote]Don't worry. I think explaining the Higgs Boson particle physics would be easier than explaining the thumbs up/down decisions for comments here... Willie, Willie Irvine
  • Score: 3

4:15pm Wed 16 Jul 14

pte says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened pte
  • Score: -3

4:17pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Conelli98 says...

Willie, Willie Irvine wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
Don't worry. I think explaining the Higgs Boson particle physics would be easier than explaining the thumbs up/down decisions for comments here...
...and Pythagoras Therom !!!
[quote][p][bold]Willie, Willie Irvine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why?[/p][/quote]Don't worry. I think explaining the Higgs Boson particle physics would be easier than explaining the thumbs up/down decisions for comments here...[/p][/quote]...and Pythagoras Therom !!! Conelli98
  • Score: 1

4:22pm Wed 16 Jul 14

brightonup says...

pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
In other words it's about as predictable as Costa Rica's results in the World Cup Finals.
Pointless..........
[quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]In other words it's about as predictable as Costa Rica's results in the World Cup Finals. Pointless.......... brightonup
  • Score: 3

4:22pm Wed 16 Jul 14

gordongull says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward.

There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking!
Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.
You found your level posting rubbish, Mayfield.
You are way out of your depth trying to join in sensible debate.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.[/p][/quote]Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward. There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking![/p][/quote]Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.[/p][/quote]You found your level posting rubbish, Mayfield. You are way out of your depth trying to join in sensible debate. gordongull
  • Score: 1

4:35pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
[quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

4:49pm Wed 16 Jul 14

gordongull says...

Conelli98 wrote:
Willie, Willie Irvine wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
Don't worry. I think explaining the Higgs Boson particle physics would be easier than explaining the thumbs up/down decisions for comments here...
...and Pythagoras Therom !!!
Any relation to Charlize?
[quote][p][bold]Conelli98[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Willie, Willie Irvine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why?[/p][/quote]Don't worry. I think explaining the Higgs Boson particle physics would be easier than explaining the thumbs up/down decisions for comments here...[/p][/quote]...and Pythagoras Therom !!![/p][/quote]Any relation to Charlize? gordongull
  • Score: 6

4:52pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Neville says...

Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons.
Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa.
Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.
Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons. Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa. Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate. Neville
  • Score: -17

4:55pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

gordongull wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward.

There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking!
Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.
You found your level posting rubbish, Mayfield.
You are way out of your depth trying to join in sensible debate.
Not at all I have a very good knowledge of the football world and know what needs to happen at the Albion.
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.[/p][/quote]Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward. There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking![/p][/quote]Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.[/p][/quote]You found your level posting rubbish, Mayfield. You are way out of your depth trying to join in sensible debate.[/p][/quote]Not at all I have a very good knowledge of the football world and know what needs to happen at the Albion. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: 0

4:57pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Withdean-er says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'.

In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank.

The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.[/p][/quote]NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'. In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank. The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles. Withdean-er
  • Score: 2

4:58pm Wed 16 Jul 14

gordongull says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
gordongull wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Captain Haddock wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here?
Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him!
As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika)
Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already!
If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.
Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward.

There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking!
Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.
You found your level posting rubbish, Mayfield.
You are way out of your depth trying to join in sensible debate.
Not at all I have a very good knowledge of the football world and know what needs to happen at the Albion.
Thanks for clarifying that, Mayfield.
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Captain Haddock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]Some on here think players are going to come here and get paid peanuts! Connor wickham is on over 20k a week.. And is scoring for Sunderland, why exactly would he want to come here? Carlton cole will want more than 20k that's why no one wants him! As for ulloa , how dare he say what so many have been saying! Lack of investment! Poor players coming in, ( rodders obika) Obviously Leo wants away, make himput transfer request in! If he has not done so already![/p][/quote]If no one wants Cole he will be forced to lower his wage demands so might make him an option. Wickham I dont know but will be part of a promotion push and will get better wages once we get to the premier league. The money from the Ulloa transfer should allow us to raise the wage ceiling a bit anyway.[/p][/quote]Absolutely not! You clearly know absolutely nothing about football and in particular the Albion. We're not under any circumstances going to break our wage structure. That is pretty obvious from what's happened / happening with Grabban / Ward. There will probably be a standard maximum for strikers that's greater than the norm as goalscorers cost more in all respects but nowhere near £20k and if you think Wickham will take £11/12/13k p.w for a season on the promise that we will deliver him the Premier League football he's already getting at Sunderland now then you must be joking![/p][/quote]Yes I know all that but, there might come a time when the wage structure simply has to be tweaked a bit to allow transfers to happen, if we are to get to the premier league, that's all. Wickham may not be guaranteed a starting place at Sunderland next season and might jump at the chance of regular football. Maybe a season loan. Depends what Sunderland do in the transfer Market now.[/p][/quote]You found your level posting rubbish, Mayfield. You are way out of your depth trying to join in sensible debate.[/p][/quote]Not at all I have a very good knowledge of the football world and know what needs to happen at the Albion.[/p][/quote]Thanks for clarifying that, Mayfield. gordongull
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Wed 16 Jul 14

AlanDuffy says...

Sell Leo for no less than 7.5 m, do a deal with Wolves for Ward AND Doyle, sign Butner from Stoke on loan, get Jesse back for the season, money in the bank for January if we're challenging, FPP rules met, decent squad for Sami to work with, give the youngsters a run out, where's the problem?
Sell Leo for no less than 7.5 m, do a deal with Wolves for Ward AND Doyle, sign Butner from Stoke on loan, get Jesse back for the season, money in the bank for January if we're challenging, FPP rules met, decent squad for Sami to work with, give the youngsters a run out, where's the problem? AlanDuffy
  • Score: 10

5:06pm Wed 16 Jul 14

gordongull says...

Saves a lot of effort, each new Ulloa bid.
Everyone just recycles the same comment they posted for all the previous bids.
Saves a lot of effort, each new Ulloa bid. Everyone just recycles the same comment they posted for all the previous bids. gordongull
  • Score: 5

5:10pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

Withdean-er wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'.

In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank.

The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.
yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.
[quote][p][bold]Withdean-er[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.[/p][/quote]NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'. In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank. The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.[/p][/quote]yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 1

5:14pm Wed 16 Jul 14

ballantrrae says...

fratsomrover wrote:
The fact Leicester keep coming back suggests to me he really is no 1 on their want list and with the cash bonus they are going to get in the Prem, I do expect they'll table an offer we cannot afford to refuse.
It'll be a shame as he is the best centre forward we've had down here since Zamaora. I also know he enjoys living in Brighton and his family are very settled here, but I would imagine the prospect of playing Prem League will be too much for him to turn down, and who can blame him.
If we'd gone up last season he would have stayed, but I expect he'll go if Leicester up their offer.
Still with the money from him, Barnes, El Abd, Dickenson still in the pot, it does strengthen our arm in the purchasing field, so maybe we'll get someone really front line to boost morale.
Whoever we end up getting, I hope it doesn't impair the opportunities of March, Ince,etc who are really exciting prospects and whom I'm really looking forward to seeing more of this coming season.
It would be nice if Sammi could use his Liverpool connections to get one of their forwards who may not be getting regular playing time this season. I wait with baited breath !!!!
Good post with some excellent points.
[quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: The fact Leicester keep coming back suggests to me he really is no 1 on their want list and with the cash bonus they are going to get in the Prem, I do expect they'll table an offer we cannot afford to refuse. It'll be a shame as he is the best centre forward we've had down here since Zamaora. I also know he enjoys living in Brighton and his family are very settled here, but I would imagine the prospect of playing Prem League will be too much for him to turn down, and who can blame him. If we'd gone up last season he would have stayed, but I expect he'll go if Leicester up their offer. Still with the money from him, Barnes, El Abd, Dickenson still in the pot, it does strengthen our arm in the purchasing field, so maybe we'll get someone really front line to boost morale. Whoever we end up getting, I hope it doesn't impair the opportunities of March, Ince,etc who are really exciting prospects and whom I'm really looking forward to seeing more of this coming season. It would be nice if Sammi could use his Liverpool connections to get one of their forwards who may not be getting regular playing time this season. I wait with baited breath !!!![/p][/quote]Good post with some excellent points. ballantrrae
  • Score: 2

5:14pm Wed 16 Jul 14

ballantrrae says...

fratsomrover wrote:
The fact Leicester keep coming back suggests to me he really is no 1 on their want list and with the cash bonus they are going to get in the Prem, I do expect they'll table an offer we cannot afford to refuse.
It'll be a shame as he is the best centre forward we've had down here since Zamaora. I also know he enjoys living in Brighton and his family are very settled here, but I would imagine the prospect of playing Prem League will be too much for him to turn down, and who can blame him.
If we'd gone up last season he would have stayed, but I expect he'll go if Leicester up their offer.
Still with the money from him, Barnes, El Abd, Dickenson still in the pot, it does strengthen our arm in the purchasing field, so maybe we'll get someone really front line to boost morale.
Whoever we end up getting, I hope it doesn't impair the opportunities of March, Ince,etc who are really exciting prospects and whom I'm really looking forward to seeing more of this coming season.
It would be nice if Sammi could use his Liverpool connections to get one of their forwards who may not be getting regular playing time this season. I wait with baited breath !!!!
Good post with some excellent points.
[quote][p][bold]fratsomrover[/bold] wrote: The fact Leicester keep coming back suggests to me he really is no 1 on their want list and with the cash bonus they are going to get in the Prem, I do expect they'll table an offer we cannot afford to refuse. It'll be a shame as he is the best centre forward we've had down here since Zamaora. I also know he enjoys living in Brighton and his family are very settled here, but I would imagine the prospect of playing Prem League will be too much for him to turn down, and who can blame him. If we'd gone up last season he would have stayed, but I expect he'll go if Leicester up their offer. Still with the money from him, Barnes, El Abd, Dickenson still in the pot, it does strengthen our arm in the purchasing field, so maybe we'll get someone really front line to boost morale. Whoever we end up getting, I hope it doesn't impair the opportunities of March, Ince,etc who are really exciting prospects and whom I'm really looking forward to seeing more of this coming season. It would be nice if Sammi could use his Liverpool connections to get one of their forwards who may not be getting regular playing time this season. I wait with baited breath !!!![/p][/quote]Good post with some excellent points. ballantrrae
  • Score: 1

5:24pm Wed 16 Jul 14

pte says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
Errr during the Falmer application the club, regarding financial viability gave the inquiry a break even gate figure of 12k and we now have gates of 27k, TV money of 5m, sponsorship, merchandising and franchising on a mega scale and yet the club are still saying they are making a whopping loss despite paying mid table wages.

Who is running the club: Kenn Dodd and the Diddymen?
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.[/p][/quote]Errr during the Falmer application the club, regarding financial viability gave the inquiry a break even gate figure of 12k and we now have gates of 27k, TV money of 5m, sponsorship, merchandising and franchising on a mega scale and yet the club are still saying they are making a whopping loss despite paying mid table wages. Who is running the club: Kenn Dodd and the Diddymen? pte
  • Score: -2

5:25pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

Neville wrote:
Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons.
Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa.
Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.
Michael Mancienne from SV Hamburg, ex chelsea player great talent for 1 million. Really we could and should be pushing for his signature, quite a talent.
[quote][p][bold]Neville[/bold] wrote: Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons. Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa. Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.[/p][/quote]Michael Mancienne from SV Hamburg, ex chelsea player great talent for 1 million. Really we could and should be pushing for his signature, quite a talent. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: 1

5:45pm Wed 16 Jul 14

JeffLomer says...

lighteninglee wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
Because the site has to many idiots on here, don't take it personally mate if your new your get used to it, chin up
Up the Albion!!
[quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why?[/p][/quote]Because the site has to many idiots on here, don't take it personally mate if your new your get used to it, chin up Up the Albion!! JeffLomer
  • Score: -2

6:06pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

JeffLomer wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
Because the site has to many idiots on here, don't take it personally mate if your new your get used to it, chin up
Up the Albion!!
When it comes to assembling our squad for the coming season I think that the sale of Ulloa has very little to do with it. If he were to go then of course he would have to be replaced, but I doubt whether his sale would affect other targets.
I say this because, to my mind, the club have slapped a price on him that almost ensures that he will not be sold. There are targets out there for us to persue, and according to Sami we are doing that so we are not waiting to sell Ulloa before we press ahead.
My thoughts about Ulloa going or staying have been all over the map, I can see the good and the bad in both scenarios, but I am coming round to the opinion that Ulloa is staying put. I can't for the life of me see Leicester paying 10M, and due to the remaining time on Leo's contract, the club does have some leverage over him, so if Bloom has decided that at this time Leo is staying put, my guess is that he will.
The club has stated it's valuation of Leo but it has never said that he would be sold even if that valuation was met, chances are that he would be, but that is not certain.
If another bid is coming from Leicester, and if that bid is considerable higher than their last, the swiftness of our refusal, if that's what we do, should put an end to this saga.
[quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why?[/p][/quote]Because the site has to many idiots on here, don't take it personally mate if your new your get used to it, chin up Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]When it comes to assembling our squad for the coming season I think that the sale of Ulloa has very little to do with it. If he were to go then of course he would have to be replaced, but I doubt whether his sale would affect other targets. I say this because, to my mind, the club have slapped a price on him that almost ensures that he will not be sold. There are targets out there for us to persue, and according to Sami we are doing that so we are not waiting to sell Ulloa before we press ahead. My thoughts about Ulloa going or staying have been all over the map, I can see the good and the bad in both scenarios, but I am coming round to the opinion that Ulloa is staying put. I can't for the life of me see Leicester paying 10M, and due to the remaining time on Leo's contract, the club does have some leverage over him, so if Bloom has decided that at this time Leo is staying put, my guess is that he will. The club has stated it's valuation of Leo but it has never said that he would be sold even if that valuation was met, chances are that he would be, but that is not certain. If another bid is coming from Leicester, and if that bid is considerable higher than their last, the swiftness of our refusal, if that's what we do, should put an end to this saga. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 6

6:19pm Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
Withdean-er wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'.

In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank.

The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.
yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.
All clubs have other costs, you make it sound as though we have more staff , coaching / medical than other clubs?
Compared to other clubs ,... We have the highest gate receipts in the division
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Withdean-er[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.[/p][/quote]NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'. In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank. The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.[/p][/quote]yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.[/p][/quote]All clubs have other costs, you make it sound as though we have more staff , coaching / medical than other clubs? Compared to other clubs ,... We have the highest gate receipts in the division mark by the sea
  • Score: 0

6:21pm Wed 16 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years. WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 1

6:42pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

mark by the sea wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
Withdean-er wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'.

In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank.

The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.
yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.
All clubs have other costs, you make it sound as though we have more staff , coaching / medical than other clubs?
Compared to other clubs ,... We have the highest gate receipts in the division
Mark do you go out of your way to be foolish or does it just come by natural means?

Anyone reading my comment can see that I am responding to those that have been talking of our costs as related to our income, and who then say that we should be able to spend more, 'a paper loss,' as opposed to an, 'actual,' loss.

Read the thread, just as I did, perhaps then you will get a better understanding of my comments. I am somewhat surprised that you didn't find a way of bringing Dunk into your reply.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Withdean-er[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.[/p][/quote]NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'. In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank. The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.[/p][/quote]yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.[/p][/quote]All clubs have other costs, you make it sound as though we have more staff , coaching / medical than other clubs? Compared to other clubs ,... We have the highest gate receipts in the division[/p][/quote]Mark do you go out of your way to be foolish or does it just come by natural means? Anyone reading my comment can see that I am responding to those that have been talking of our costs as related to our income, and who then say that we should be able to spend more, 'a paper loss,' as opposed to an, 'actual,' loss. Read the thread, just as I did, perhaps then you will get a better understanding of my comments. I am somewhat surprised that you didn't find a way of bringing Dunk into your reply. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

6:45pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.
[quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 1

7:20pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Jules boy says...

mark by the sea wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
Withdean-er wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
pte wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Cockwomble wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
tug509 wrote:
brighton bluenose wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle)
Up the Albion!!
Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!!
Spot on BB .
Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky,
Cms can't be relied on for 46 games!
I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,
good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble
Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well..
No clubs get success without spending money!
Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..
surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.
Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him!
Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ...
As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie..
As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request
the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble
No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great !
If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss..
If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum !
Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case.

Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss.

I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down.

A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom

I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened
our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure.
We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not.

There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.
NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'.

In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank.

The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.
yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.
All clubs have other costs, you make it sound as though we have more staff , coaching / medical than other clubs?
Compared to other clubs ,... We have the highest gate receipts in the division
Not forgetting income generated from events, Rod Stewart, Rugby World Cup next year etc, the Amex is generating money without the football.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Withdean-er[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pte[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cockwomble[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]brighton bluenose[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: Morning, I would like to see the deal sorted one way or the other this week give us 8million he's yours anything less still our player, the longer this drags on will not be good for the club or player, no good doing this deal in two weeks time were need to replace him with quality, take 5million plus profit and let's all move on, that's if he passes his medical with his so called bad (ankle) Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]Whilst I agree that an £8m bid would be hard to refuse it should ONLY be accepted if we are going to bring in a proven goalscorer - Tony Bloom promised a competitive squad for the new season and selling our star striker and not replacing him with someone of a similar calibre would just reinforce exactly the reason why Leo appears to want to leave!![/p][/quote]Spot on BB .[/p][/quote]Getting quality players to come here for low wages, when Cardiff forest Fulham are paying top cash is going to be tricky, Cms can't be relied on for 46 games! I always think trying to save money buying poor quality costs more in the long run,[/p][/quote]good jobs theres lots of players going spare then.let stupid clubs pay over the odds too early then we will get better value with players who lower their demands.cockwomble[/p][/quote]Stupid clubs like Qpr and Leicester ? Burnley had money from parachute payments as well.. No clubs get success without spending money! Look at the premiership table , it's more about who spent the most won trophies, unless we play extremely well we won't get near a top two finish, top 6 is brilliant on our mid table budget,.. But our budget is getting smaller, Fulham , Cardiff and forest will all be top 6 .. Outsider Bournemouth and Boro ..[/p][/quote]surely any club who pays over the odds is stupid.or do you think spending more than needed is sensible.qpr spent more on wages last season than bayern munich.please explain how that is not stupid.burnley did not spend much.their parachute money was spent wisely and helped make up shortfall from low crowds.how many millions did they spend on players.you also assume a lot about fulham and cardiff.teams coming down do not always do well following season.[/p][/quote]Fulham just spent more on one player than we have spent in total in last three years! Burnley received 4 million for charlie austin , however they had cover when they sold him! Qpr are back in the premiership, not good accounting, but bankruptcy would have hit them if premier money was not guaranteed ... As you say Burnley had little crowd money, not great sponsors , but a a manager who knows what makes players tick! That's the gulf between a experienced manager and a rookie.. As for ulloa clearly the Albion have not told Leicester to stop pestering , so we are looking for more money! The only way to bridge that is for ulloa to put in a transfer request[/p][/quote]the fact you said we do very well for our budget proves larger budgets are no guarantee as we often finish above them.fulham may have spent shedloads on a player but is that it now?can they assume promotion.no.and you dont know if weve told leics to sod off.you assume it.you dont know it as fact.maybe the quoted 10m asking price is brightons way of telling them we are not selling.if ulloa puts in request he will lose out so why would he.hed be looking for leics to make up the shortfall so theyd still end up spending more.you assume far far too much based on paltry facts.cockwomble[/p][/quote]No but we lost 13 million ! We will never make a profit even with a mid table budget, add the Amex sponsorship, 24000 season tickets at premiership money , I don't think we are doing that great ! If we lose 6 million each year and never go up then TB will need to accept that loss.. If we don't field a decent side attendances will fall, as will if we stumble along in mid table.. I don't have the answer to that conundrum ![/p][/quote]Given the gates and the sponsorship I don't see how the stated "losses" are genuine rather than just paper losses. The only way the club can be losing that amount of money is if the average wage was 25k pw and we all know that's not the case. Forget the infrastructure costs as apart from interest have nothing to do with operating profit/loss. I agree if we are not challenging or meeting fan's expectations then gates will fall. Past experience tells you a Brighton team that doesn't perform or challenge could eventually level off at around 12k. It won't happen immediately because people have already bought their season ticket but I think even there sales are down. A goalkeeper, a leftback a winger and a striker and we should limp into the play-offs like last season. If the kids come in and do well we might just do it so it's not all doom and gloom I reckon we'll finish about 10th which isnt bad especially if we bring some kids on. But no one should expect promotion, though stranger things have happened[/p][/quote]our stated losses are for, 'operational costs,' these costs are not just players wages and transfer fees, but they are a huge part of it. Hyypia is an operational cost, all the coaches and medical staff fall under the same umberella, as do travel costs and policing. The, 'only,' costs that are not considered as, 'operational,' are infrastructure, wages paid to Burke and Barber are not infrastructure spending so these too become operational costs. There are many that do not work with the team but do get paid, people such as those that produce the match program, our web site builders, vidiographers, ground stewards and possibly the grounds keepers, not sure about them, they might be considered infrastructure. I read something a couple of weeks ago that suggested that around 100 people would be employed at the new training facility, obviously many of these are probably already working for the club, but a good few will be new costs and can't be written off as infrastructure costs, even tho they work in a building that is infrastructure. We have people that clean the offices ect at the Amex and the training ground, cooks that work at the Amex and the new facility, bar tenders at the Amex, are they considered infrastructure, I think not. There is a whole army of people that contribute to the operatioal costs, it's just that many of us don't think of them when talking of spending, I have suggested some, but I bet there are others.[/p][/quote]NONE of those costs you mention are 'infrastructure'. In one place or another, but it doesn't matter where, the payroll costs for everyone from Barber, to players, to the tea lady/man, will all be charged to the Profit and Loss Account. The same with external service providers e.g. website costs, repairs to the Amex and Lancing. Also, an interest paid to any party, bank. The only costs allowed to be capitalised as infrastructure (not charged to the P&LA) would be new costs in building the stadium, academy, external professional and planning/control costs in achieving those new structures, as well as large items of equipment such as the lamps for the pitch, electronic advertising boards, furniture, IT hardware and newly owned vehicles.[/p][/quote]yeah I know, that was my point. People keep talking of our income but fail to understand, 'all,' of our operational costs.[/p][/quote]All clubs have other costs, you make it sound as though we have more staff , coaching / medical than other clubs? Compared to other clubs ,... We have the highest gate receipts in the division[/p][/quote]Not forgetting income generated from events, Rod Stewart, Rugby World Cup next year etc, the Amex is generating money without the football. Jules boy
  • Score: 2

7:47pm Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.
Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current.
The punishments won't meet the promised ones.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.[/p][/quote]Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current. The punishments won't meet the promised ones. mark by the sea
  • Score: 0

7:53pm Wed 16 Jul 14

pte says...

WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
But there is no debt. TB has invested 150m not spent 150. If he decided to cash in on his investment and sell he could get a lot more than 150m. The money he has invested isn't debt but is as good as money in the bank, in fact better because he'll only get 2% if he left it in the bank. Moreover not all the money spent was his as he was the beneficiary of various government and sporting grants.

Think of it like when a property developer spends 150m building a block of flats. The money spent is not debt, it's an asset that can be converted back to cash at any time once sold.

Not having a pop at TB but he's a businessman not a mug that chucks 150m away.

People keep making the same mistake that money spent on an asset is lost. There maybe liabilities but these are canceled out by the asset values and an increase in short term operational losses can be countered by an increase in long term asset value
[quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]But there is no debt. TB has invested 150m not spent 150. If he decided to cash in on his investment and sell he could get a lot more than 150m. The money he has invested isn't debt but is as good as money in the bank, in fact better because he'll only get 2% if he left it in the bank. Moreover not all the money spent was his as he was the beneficiary of various government and sporting grants. Think of it like when a property developer spends 150m building a block of flats. The money spent is not debt, it's an asset that can be converted back to cash at any time once sold. Not having a pop at TB but he's a businessman not a mug that chucks 150m away. People keep making the same mistake that money spent on an asset is lost. There maybe liabilities but these are canceled out by the asset values and an increase in short term operational losses can be countered by an increase in long term asset value pte
  • Score: 6

7:58pm Wed 16 Jul 14

arc12 says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
JeffLomer wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
lighteninglee wrote:
Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....
And my comment gets minus 11 why?
Because the site has to many idiots on here, don't take it personally mate if your new your get used to it, chin up
Up the Albion!!
When it comes to assembling our squad for the coming season I think that the sale of Ulloa has very little to do with it. If he were to go then of course he would have to be replaced, but I doubt whether his sale would affect other targets.
I say this because, to my mind, the club have slapped a price on him that almost ensures that he will not be sold. There are targets out there for us to persue, and according to Sami we are doing that so we are not waiting to sell Ulloa before we press ahead.
My thoughts about Ulloa going or staying have been all over the map, I can see the good and the bad in both scenarios, but I am coming round to the opinion that Ulloa is staying put. I can't for the life of me see Leicester paying 10M, and due to the remaining time on Leo's contract, the club does have some leverage over him, so if Bloom has decided that at this time Leo is staying put, my guess is that he will.
The club has stated it's valuation of Leo but it has never said that he would be sold even if that valuation was met, chances are that he would be, but that is not certain.
If another bid is coming from Leicester, and if that bid is considerable higher than their last, the swiftness of our refusal, if that's what we do, should put an end to this saga.
Good point re : Ulloa - the only thing that might force the situation is if he put in a transfer request. I don't he will as he seems happy here and most of us want him to stay. I hope the situation with him is finalised one way or the other as it will be a major distraction if he was to go at the last minute for Sammi and his plans for the season.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeffLomer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lighteninglee[/bold] wrote: Good start for a Wednesday morning. Not. We are ment to be building a competitive team for the new season not makin thinks harder for Sami. Wondering if Brighton want Jesse to replace the possible soon to be departing leo....[/p][/quote]And my comment gets minus 11 why?[/p][/quote]Because the site has to many idiots on here, don't take it personally mate if your new your get used to it, chin up Up the Albion!![/p][/quote]When it comes to assembling our squad for the coming season I think that the sale of Ulloa has very little to do with it. If he were to go then of course he would have to be replaced, but I doubt whether his sale would affect other targets. I say this because, to my mind, the club have slapped a price on him that almost ensures that he will not be sold. There are targets out there for us to persue, and according to Sami we are doing that so we are not waiting to sell Ulloa before we press ahead. My thoughts about Ulloa going or staying have been all over the map, I can see the good and the bad in both scenarios, but I am coming round to the opinion that Ulloa is staying put. I can't for the life of me see Leicester paying 10M, and due to the remaining time on Leo's contract, the club does have some leverage over him, so if Bloom has decided that at this time Leo is staying put, my guess is that he will. The club has stated it's valuation of Leo but it has never said that he would be sold even if that valuation was met, chances are that he would be, but that is not certain. If another bid is coming from Leicester, and if that bid is considerable higher than their last, the swiftness of our refusal, if that's what we do, should put an end to this saga.[/p][/quote]Good point re : Ulloa - the only thing that might force the situation is if he put in a transfer request. I don't he will as he seems happy here and most of us want him to stay. I hope the situation with him is finalised one way or the other as it will be a major distraction if he was to go at the last minute for Sammi and his plans for the season. arc12
  • Score: 2

8:24pm Wed 16 Jul 14

championshipgull says...

Neville wrote:
Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons.
Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa.
Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.
You posted there were rumours, Ulloa was going to have a medical at Leicester and then he got on the plane to Spain. Are these rumours about season ticket sales coming from the same place?

The club site reported as early as early as March this year

“Brighton & Hove Albion fans have once again demonstrated their outstanding loyalty to the club as season-ticket holders have renewed in huge numbers for the 2014/15 season.

More than 20,000 existing holders have already signed up for next season and the club is expecting that number to rise significantly between now and Thursday's 5pm upfront-payers deadline.

Chief executive Paul Barber commented, "It has been a phenomenal initial response and to have so many renewing, so quickly, is excellent. It would be easy to take it for granted, but the loyalty shown by Albion fans is quite superb. “

I am starting to wonder where the rumours you are listening to are coming from Neville and if they are worth posting at all
[quote][p][bold]Neville[/bold] wrote: Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons. Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa. Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.[/p][/quote]You posted there were rumours, Ulloa was going to have a medical at Leicester and then he got on the plane to Spain. Are these rumours about season ticket sales coming from the same place? The club site reported as early as early as March this year “Brighton & Hove Albion fans have once again demonstrated their outstanding loyalty to the club as season-ticket holders have renewed in huge numbers for the 2014/15 season. More than 20,000 existing holders have already signed up for next season and the club is expecting that number to rise significantly between now and Thursday's 5pm upfront-payers deadline. Chief executive Paul Barber commented, "It has been a phenomenal initial response and to have so many renewing, so quickly, is excellent. It would be easy to take it for granted, but the loyalty shown by Albion fans is quite superb. “ I am starting to wonder where the rumours you are listening to are coming from Neville and if they are worth posting at all championshipgull
  • Score: 6

8:30pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

mark by the sea wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.
Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current.
The punishments won't meet the promised ones.
That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.[/p][/quote]Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current. The punishments won't meet the promised ones.[/p][/quote]That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 5

9:44pm Wed 16 Jul 14

FatherTed11 says...

*yawn*
*yawn* FatherTed11
  • Score: 2

9:53pm Wed 16 Jul 14

mark by the sea says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.
Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current.
The punishments won't meet the promised ones.
That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.
Why not clubs had the backing from the FA FIFA and it was accepted as law! Bosman challenged the football world and won what is basically human rights.
Private companies can invest with loans .... That is business, what FFP wants to do is change that basic right....
As for signing up , contracts that are illegal are not lawful, ie if they break human rights,
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.[/p][/quote]Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current. The punishments won't meet the promised ones.[/p][/quote]That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.[/p][/quote]Why not clubs had the backing from the FA FIFA and it was accepted as law! Bosman challenged the football world and won what is basically human rights. Private companies can invest with loans .... That is business, what FFP wants to do is change that basic right.... As for signing up , contracts that are illegal are not lawful, ie if they break human rights, mark by the sea
  • Score: 0

10:07pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

mark by the sea wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.
Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current.
The punishments won't meet the promised ones.
That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.
Why not clubs had the backing from the FA FIFA and it was accepted as law! Bosman challenged the football world and won what is basically human rights.
Private companies can invest with loans .... That is business, what FFP wants to do is change that basic right....
As for signing up , contracts that are illegal are not lawful, ie if they break human rights,
This isn't a case of "sign up or you'll be kicked out of the league," this was entirely voluntary where the clubs voted to take the action. Also, sport has a slightly special status in EU law, otherwise athletes would all have sued against drugs bans by claiming it was impinging their earnings. Anyway, it's lucky that UEFA liaised very strongly with the European Commission while the regulations were being formulated to ensure a robust legal framework, isn't it?
[quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.[/p][/quote]Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current. The punishments won't meet the promised ones.[/p][/quote]That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.[/p][/quote]Why not clubs had the backing from the FA FIFA and it was accepted as law! Bosman challenged the football world and won what is basically human rights. Private companies can invest with loans .... That is business, what FFP wants to do is change that basic right.... As for signing up , contracts that are illegal are not lawful, ie if they break human rights,[/p][/quote]This isn't a case of "sign up or you'll be kicked out of the league," this was entirely voluntary where the clubs voted to take the action. Also, sport has a slightly special status in EU law, otherwise athletes would all have sued against drugs bans by claiming it was impinging their earnings. Anyway, it's lucky that UEFA liaised very strongly with the European Commission while the regulations were being formulated to ensure a robust legal framework, isn't it? Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 3

10:08pm Wed 16 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Read this: http://www.theguardi
an.com/football/2014
/may/20/uefa-defeats
-financial-fair-play
-challenge
Read this: http://www.theguardi an.com/football/2014 /may/20/uefa-defeats -financial-fair-play -challenge Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 3

11:22pm Wed 16 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Read this: http://www.theguardi

an.com/football/2014

/may/20/uefa-defeats

-financial-fair-play

-challenge
This is a good article, it makes it very clear that no clubs had challeged the FFP rules and that only a club can, and not an individual.

On the page that I found the article there is another worth a read, it tells of how on June 6th of this year, Red Star Belgrade were kicked out of the Champions League for breaking Uefa licencing laws and for flouting the FFP rules.

I doubt that the European courts would even hear a case if it were bought, past rulings would make it a waste of time and money.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: Read this: http://www.theguardi an.com/football/2014 /may/20/uefa-defeats -financial-fair-play -challenge[/p][/quote]This is a good article, it makes it very clear that no clubs had challeged the FFP rules and that only a club can, and not an individual. On the page that I found the article there is another worth a read, it tells of how on June 6th of this year, Red Star Belgrade were kicked out of the Champions League for breaking Uefa licencing laws and for flouting the FFP rules. I doubt that the European courts would even hear a case if it were bought, past rulings would make it a waste of time and money. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 2

8:20am Thu 17 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

championshipgull wrote:
Neville wrote:
Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons.
Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa.
Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.
You posted there were rumours, Ulloa was going to have a medical at Leicester and then he got on the plane to Spain. Are these rumours about season ticket sales coming from the same place?

The club site reported as early as early as March this year

“Brighton & Hove Albion fans have once again demonstrated their outstanding loyalty to the club as season-ticket holders have renewed in huge numbers for the 2014/15 season.

More than 20,000 existing holders have already signed up for next season and the club is expecting that number to rise significantly between now and Thursday's 5pm upfront-payers deadline.

Chief executive Paul Barber commented, "It has been a phenomenal initial response and to have so many renewing, so quickly, is excellent. It would be easy to take it for granted, but the loyalty shown by Albion fans is quite superb. “

I am starting to wonder where the rumours you are listening to are coming from Neville and if they are worth posting at all
I'm inclined to agree.
[quote][p][bold]championshipgull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Neville[/bold] wrote: Did an earlier post yesterday ,directed at Albion in Staffs re Notts Frst and flouting FFP rules.I see today they are about to sign 1m bundesleague player despite showing heavey losses for the past three seasons. Also Leicester according to their chairman had 180m plus war chest so why so loathe to pay the full asking price for Ulloa. Finally re season ticket sales there are rumours we are 4000 down on last seasons numbers,which may account for the financial situation. 18000 season tickets and 3000 corporate.[/p][/quote]You posted there were rumours, Ulloa was going to have a medical at Leicester and then he got on the plane to Spain. Are these rumours about season ticket sales coming from the same place? The club site reported as early as early as March this year “Brighton & Hove Albion fans have once again demonstrated their outstanding loyalty to the club as season-ticket holders have renewed in huge numbers for the 2014/15 season. More than 20,000 existing holders have already signed up for next season and the club is expecting that number to rise significantly between now and Thursday's 5pm upfront-payers deadline. Chief executive Paul Barber commented, "It has been a phenomenal initial response and to have so many renewing, so quickly, is excellent. It would be easy to take it for granted, but the loyalty shown by Albion fans is quite superb. “ I am starting to wonder where the rumours you are listening to are coming from Neville and if they are worth posting at all[/p][/quote]I'm inclined to agree. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 1

8:30am Thu 17 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
mark by the sea wrote:
VegasSeagull wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.
Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.
Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current.
The punishments won't meet the promised ones.
That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.
Why not clubs had the backing from the FA FIFA and it was accepted as law! Bosman challenged the football world and won what is basically human rights.
Private companies can invest with loans .... That is business, what FFP wants to do is change that basic right....
As for signing up , contracts that are illegal are not lawful, ie if they break human rights,
This isn't a case of "sign up or you'll be kicked out of the league," this was entirely voluntary where the clubs voted to take the action. Also, sport has a slightly special status in EU law, otherwise athletes would all have sued against drugs bans by claiming it was impinging their earnings. Anyway, it's lucky that UEFA liaised very strongly with the European Commission while the regulations were being formulated to ensure a robust legal framework, isn't it?
Also, the rules don't restrict human or trading rights, they say if you wish to trade as a football club WITHIN UEFA you must comply (a rule voted for by it's members). You don't have to be in UEFA but remain in the 'club' you must stick to it's rules, just like any other club or industry association.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark by the sea[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: I guess that the only way TB is ever going to stand any chance of reducing the debt to him is by us making it into the PL ASAP. That being the case, and him being the ace 'Lizard' gambler, would there not be some way he could find a way to buy three or four stellar signings to give us a real chance to get up automatically this year? I'm concerned that our fans are notoriously fickle and if we drop away to mid table mediocrity we'll begin losing even more and then trying to chase our tail - so to speak. I know all about FFP but it seems that this stuff won't stand up in a European Court if challenged - which I'm sure it will be. If a company or individual wishes to 'sponsor' a few players, as long as it is done above board - is that not possible. I just feel it needs some 'creative thinking' here if we are to keep the interest built up over the past three years.[/p][/quote]Not so sure that this law would not past the test of a European court as a very similar system to FFP already exists in Europe and punishments are being handed out and adhered to. That said, you could be right, time will tell.[/p][/quote]Yes but you forget the Bosman ruling! The world followed the idea you owned a player even if contract was not current. The punishments won't meet the promised ones.[/p][/quote]That's not really a fair comparison though as that was a single man fighting a just cause against his the club. Bosman was being screwed over by the clubs, but here the clubs are the only entities involved and all had free will. FFP is something the clubs agreed and volunteered to sign up for.[/p][/quote]Why not clubs had the backing from the FA FIFA and it was accepted as law! Bosman challenged the football world and won what is basically human rights. Private companies can invest with loans .... That is business, what FFP wants to do is change that basic right.... As for signing up , contracts that are illegal are not lawful, ie if they break human rights,[/p][/quote]This isn't a case of "sign up or you'll be kicked out of the league," this was entirely voluntary where the clubs voted to take the action. Also, sport has a slightly special status in EU law, otherwise athletes would all have sued against drugs bans by claiming it was impinging their earnings. Anyway, it's lucky that UEFA liaised very strongly with the European Commission while the regulations were being formulated to ensure a robust legal framework, isn't it?[/p][/quote]Also, the rules don't restrict human or trading rights, they say if you wish to trade as a football club WITHIN UEFA you must comply (a rule voted for by it's members). You don't have to be in UEFA but remain in the 'club' you must stick to it's rules, just like any other club or industry association. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 2

8:33am Thu 17 Jul 14

Oscar's Chin says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Read this: http://www.theguardi


an.com/football/2014


/may/20/uefa-defeats


-financial-fair-play


-challenge
This is a good article, it makes it very clear that no clubs had challeged the FFP rules and that only a club can, and not an individual.

On the page that I found the article there is another worth a read, it tells of how on June 6th of this year, Red Star Belgrade were kicked out of the Champions League for breaking Uefa licencing laws and for flouting the FFP rules.

I doubt that the European courts would even hear a case if it were bought, past rulings would make it a waste of time and money.
Cheers for the link and, Vegas, I agree with you.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: Read this: http://www.theguardi an.com/football/2014 /may/20/uefa-defeats -financial-fair-play -challenge[/p][/quote]This is a good article, it makes it very clear that no clubs had challeged the FFP rules and that only a club can, and not an individual. On the page that I found the article there is another worth a read, it tells of how on June 6th of this year, Red Star Belgrade were kicked out of the Champions League for breaking Uefa licencing laws and for flouting the FFP rules. I doubt that the European courts would even hear a case if it were bought, past rulings would make it a waste of time and money.[/p][/quote]Cheers for the link and, Vegas, I agree with you. Oscar's Chin
  • Score: 0

4:37pm Fri 18 Jul 14

Kit Napier's Beard says...

Mayfield sweeper wrote:
Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.
I what about Bobby Z back at Brighton
[quote][p][bold]Mayfield sweeper[/bold] wrote: Easy solution, sell the wantaway Ulloa for 8 million or whatever and get Carlton Cole and Connor Wickham, it's a no brainer. Ulloa did ok but not the most mobile player and prone to a sulk or two. As long as the money goes back into the squad and doesn't disappear into the Albion black hole known as FFP then there shouldn't be a problem.[/p][/quote]I what about Bobby Z back at Brighton Kit Napier's Beard
  • Score: -1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree