Darthter 542 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 You have to question why we not offloading the deadwood and get the wages down Difficult to offload them, if no-one wants to buy them!!! You then have the option of canceling the contracts, but how much would that cost in compensation??? So far the signing IMHO, look pretty decent. Goian looks to be a good capture - he's been solid & composed. Bocanegra looks like he will be similar, once he settles a bit. Bedoya & McKay are unkowns at the moment. From what I've heard Bedoya did fairly well for the 20mins he played last weekend. The jury's still out on Ortiz...at the moment it's not looking too rosy, but he will suffice as a squad/backup player. Wallace has done well so far. I have no doubts that the current squad is capable of securing the league again. It will also be interesting to see what happens in January. While the Euro money will be missed, I don't think it was essential to Whyte's plans for this season. I think he's more focused on stabilising the club, winning the league, and building a team for next season's Euro assault. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 One possible scenario is that the club are put into administration, appoint a friendly administrator, use any available cash to pay off the preferred creditor (Whyte), sell the club back to Whyte on a pre-pack administration basis, we get hit with a points deduction and finish second in the league and carry on as before. BD, why are you making it sound as if it wouldn't be a big deal going into administration? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 While the Euro money will be missed, I don't think it was essential to Whyte's plans for this season. I think he's more focused on stabilising the club, winning the league, and building a team for next season's Euro assault. Who's gonna be doing the assaulting though??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 How much money has actually gone out the door this season on new players??? Maybe 3.5/4m....not too far off. So you could argue that he has fulfilled his promise - from a certain point of view!!! The Qatar club are absolutely loaded and are highly likely to have paid the full amount for Bougherra immediately, so any rational thinking on transfer funds available to the manager should be deducting that �£1.7m from what's been spent. That's where the "certain point of view" comes in. Whyte has said the �£5m will be available.....if �£4m goes out the door, regardless of what comes in, he has met his obligation!!! Folk could then argue that an extra �£1.7m was available, which is true, but when it comes to the balance sheet, it will still show �£4m was spend in new players!!! Whyte can then happily say that his obligation was met, and provide proof that it was. Having any extra is a separate arguement IMHO... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 Who's gonna be doing the assaulting though??? Hopefully a settled, well oiled team, who can play a decent game @ a sustained & consistent level. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,366 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 BD, why are you making it sound as if it wouldn't be a big deal going into administration? I don't know all the ins and outs. Any companies I'm involved with don't go into administration There would be a lot of pain (perhaps some players sold?) but I've seen a few pre-packs and the companies can often just carry on. I find the whole thing immoral as small companies can get done out of cash that they are due. Hopefully someone with more knowledge than me can expand on it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 That's where the "certain point of view" comes in. Whyte has said the �£5m will be available.....if �£4m goes out the door, regardless of what comes in, he has met his obligation!!! Folk could then argue that an extra �£1.7m was available, which is true, but when it comes to the balance sheet, it will still show �£4m was spend in new players!!! Whyte can then happily say that his obligation was met, and provide proof that it was. Having any extra is a separate arguement IMHO... That's what I call twisted logic. It's tantamount to fraudulence. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 That's what I call twisted logic. It's tantamount to fraudulence. facts are facts.....and the figures support the argument. The accounts will state that �£xm has been spend & �£ym has been brought in. Nothing fraudulent about it - simply pointing out a single line on a balance sheet, and not mentioning the rest!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 facts are facts.....and the figures support the argument. The accounts will state that �£xm has been spend & �£ym has been brought in. Nothing fraudulent about it - simply pointing out a single line on a balance sheet, and not mentioning the rest!!! And what if they had sold 2 or 3 players worth a total of �£7m to the Qatari club and were paid immediately? Would the same logic still be ok with you if �£5m had been spent while �£7m had been brought in? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted August 30, 2011 Share Posted August 30, 2011 I'm not saying that the argument is justified.....but it is a proven fact and backs up the initial statement regardless of how much "extra" is brought in. If more is brought in than goes out....that opens up a whole new argument. The point is that if Whyte is pushed on the "you said you'd spend �£5m, and you haven't", he can quite rightly argue against that and provide evidence to support his claim. In essence, he has done what he said he'd do!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.