Summer 2011 Transfer Window - Part 3.

[JAL]

I'm not sure, but two players don't make a squad. That's just my opinion, though. What if they get injured? Then you're back to square one.

Second-raters are not as bad as you make them out to be. Second-raters do not equate to playing relegation battles. That's for the third, fourth, fifth raters. I'm looking for overall improvement and strengthening of the team as opposed to having the squad overly reliant on one or two A-list players.

All subjective Black Burn. Progression is what we ask for what the fans desire for Blackburn Rovers football club.

You're right forget the two Black Burn, and make it THREE A-list players minimum that are required for this summers transfer window.

Progression.

[PAFELL]

Nope spend £26 million inclusive of Jones money. That £26 million covers all transfer fees and wages.

I think you need to suggest a decent director of football to the owners Kamy.

As much as Rovers need to improve the squad, I would prefer a sensible approach to spending. If venkys splash out say 50 mill on players transfers / wages, and everything does not go as well as they hoped. They could get cold feet and want out. Then they'd want their money back - not just what it cost for them to buy the club - but what they paid for the players. The reality is the club does not have that money.

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

I have talked to a couple of people in the last hour, things continue to move forward, but the problem is that there is now a lack of clarity if the budget that currently exist is inclusive of wages, suggestion is that the budget is inclusive of wages which changes the picture as a decision needs to be taken on whether it blown on 2 relatively expensive players (each in £8 million range transfer fee wise) or do Rovers go for 3/4 cheaper alternatives which means smaller fees and rest used for wages.

Well,well well! that's 16 million in total or the price of a Phil Jones

[Tim Southampton Rover]

I've got a funny feeling we'll be bringing RSC back to Ewood on loan again as well as a lot more loan signings.

[John]

Are we still looking for a director of football?

[UtopianParadigm]

I'm sorry, is it just me that sees a pretty clear series of events?

Nicko, Kamy, you two are pretty much my reasons for reading the messageboard (unashamed part-timer) but, particularly Nicko, you have come out with pretty clear figures for transfers, essentially revealing the club's financial clout.

It was written here that there was a bit of a manhunt for whoever the leak was. Sounds like, to me, a little bit of misinformation to protect the owners from being taken for a ride RE: transfers. If it's easy enough for little old me to hear about the Rovers' £50million warchest, I'm sure every club selling players will be able to hear about it, too.

Whether £50million was ever the figure is a separate question. However, Nicko, do you feel, after admitting that you'd been messed around, that this information could indeed be intentional misinformation?

That, for my money, is good business practice.

[Torgeir]

I have talked to a couple of people in the last hour, things continue to move forward, but the problem is that there is now a lack of clarity if the budget that currently exist is inclusive of wages, suggestion is that the budget is inclusive of wages which changes the picture as a decision needs to be taken on whether it blown on 2 relatively expensive players (each in £8 million range transfer fee wise) or do Rovers go for 3/4 cheaper alternatives which means smaller fees and rest used for wages.

So the £5m per window we have is including wages? Someone please tell me why we sacked Big Sam...

FFS.

[chaddyrovers]

RSC played fairly good last night for Paraguay.

Are we still looking for a director of football?

i hope so. maybe Nicko would like the DoF job?

[PAFELL]

Before this turns into a trust love-in. Just two points.

The Trust stopped putting money in some time ago.

The Trust sold the club to Venkys.

They may have stopped putting money in and yes they sold the club. But the way the trust ran the club was good. The club, with JW and TF were prudent and sensible with what money the club had. the club had a sound reputation in the football world and even with agents in the game. Yet in a matter of a few months, things have changed terrible and the club is seen as a joke.

Who is responcible for that the Trust or the current owners. The trust were not perfect, but they had some good points. what good points do the current owners have? They have a some money, but do not know what to do with it. Fools and money !!!!!!!!!!!

[TugaysMarlboro]

Are we still looking for a director of football?

It seems someone needs to direct something. I certainly hope so.

[imy9]

Nope spend £26 million inclusive of Jones money. That £26 million covers all transfer fees and wages.

Ok that kind of makes sense, but you say two 8 million pound players would cover what we have, have you added wages for the duration of the players contract into this as opposed to the year?

In that context surely the trust spent about 14 million on Kalinic- 6 million plus 4 year deal?

[EWOODACE1]

if venkys are willing to put in 10m then fair play to them. they havnt come out and talked about who they want and how much they will spend. these where the problems we had with them in jan. now they are doing it how we wanted by keeping quiet and people complain again.

im glad that they arent willing to plough money on big wages. as nicko/kamy and some fans have said we dont want another portsmouth.

with 26m to spend inc wages would not actually be that much. 4 players on 35k a week over 4 yrs would actually go above that so it depends on how they see the future.

one thing is that they have certainly come into a multi billion pound business without realising what is involved

now its up to them to decide whether this is for them. they have good intentions obviously but thats not enough.

i just hope IF we are sold on then we get someone who is trustworthy. no con men

[Spansterkid]

No point in Plan A, Plan B or even Plan X at the moment if you don't know what you have to spend.

Of course it could simply be that YOU got it wrong. In fact that's exactly what it looks like, again.

[Black Burn]

And when I see posts saying there is no urgency to get the best players availible within our price range it kind of infuriates me.

Particularly from someone who has not been a member for five minutes.

I don't remember saying anything about "no urgency".

I made a point that both Santa Cruz and Benni McCarthy transferred to Blackburn on 28th July in 2006 and 2007 respectively. And hence there is no reason why we should panick and go into meltdown, rebellion mode and throw the owners out just because there has been no transfers done by 4th July.

I too would like to see tranfers done as early as possible. But there's a difference between not panicking when nothing's happening and being laidback and saying there's no urgency in making signings.

You are right, though. I have not been a member for five minutes. I have been a member for about a month, and a lurker for half a year. Created an account because I couldn't access the messageboard recently when they required me to be a member or something like that. Doesn't mean my opinion is worth much less than you or someone who has been a member for decades. We're still Blackburn fans no matter how long you're a member here. In fact, you don't have to be a member here to be a Blackburn fan either.

[Mattyblue]

So £40 million for transfers has gone down to £26 million for transfers AND wages. With 18million for Jones that means Venky's were prepared to spend just £5million again this window on fees.

Can somebody enlighten me how this financial plan is going to propel us to the top end of the league?

[broadsword]

They may have stopped putting money in and yes they sold the club.

I seem to remember Nicko saying that if the club hadn't been sold to Venky's then the Trust would've re-examined how they financed the club. Sorry to repeat this a lot, but I definitely remember him saying it. Of course, they would've had to, because it wasn't a sustainable way of running the club.

I also remember Nicko saying (and I'm not repeating this to try to trip him at all, this is just my recollection) that the Trust wouldn't sell to a bunch of "numb-nuts" as some people on the Trust still lived locally and would not want to defecate on their own door-step.

Well, I think they may well have fallen down on that one. It's becoming clear that the club is a circus right now. No cohesion, no sense of purpose, no clear strategy (except making it up as you go along).

I think the problem with selling the club at such a low valuation is that you end up attracting people who think it's a bargain without seeing the big picture. The whole thing's too important and sensitive to bad decisions to arrogantly stride in and start firing off trustred football administrators before learning how to operate.

But they obviously know best.

I get the impression this could all now spiral into a cluster-fk of sizeable proportions.

[rebelmswar]

I would not have a problem with signing a couple of free transfers aswell as spending the jones transfer money and the 5-10 million pounds from the owners.

But we need to improve the quality of the squad and hopefully finish in the top 10.

I would agree with that TCO. maybe sell one or two squad midfielders aswell to make room for them plus Lowe and Cotton.

FFS.

Every player, EVERY PLAYER, regardless if he is free or not will cost money via wages, sign on bonus, whatever.

Kamy said we have approx 26 million all inclusive. That breaks down to Jones, the five million for this window, and the five million for the next. All of that money includes wages, something I have been warning about for some time.

Typically you can double anything you spend on a player to cover wages too. So when you are playing your fantasy football subtract the cost of the player twice from your remaining budget for every player you buy for cash and assume 5 million for any half decent freebie.

I am glad that it finally sunk in to our owners minds.

[Torgeir]

In any case we need to get rid of some deadweight, which should free up some more money for wages. Problem right now is we can't really sell anyone before bringing someone in first...

[nicko]

However, Nicko, do you feel, after admitting that you'd been messed around, that this information could indeed be intentional misinformation?

That, for my money, is good business practice.

I know where the lists came from. I know the level of research that was going on at the club at the time. I also double- and in some cases treble-checked how far these inquiries had gone.

You may recall that Vucinic's agent was quite 'off' with Rovers, probably because he was looking for too much dough.

You may also recall Spurs confirming/revving up the interest in Robbie Keane.

You may additionally recall that Anjukov admitted - totally out of the blue - that Rovers had tried to sign him.

On top of that there are people here and agents in the game who know that Cisse's agent spoke to Rovers and that was looking good until daft figures were bandied about.

I don't think anyone at Venky's was using 'good business sense' to leak fake names. All of the above would haveto have been taken in by a rather odd ploy.

The owners have gone from enthusiasm to much less in just over a week...only they can say why.

Yes, the transfer market is full of people looking to rip you off at every turn. But that is even more reason for knowing EXACTLY what you are doing and how much you have to spend.

[Antgrad]

The "including wages" argument doesn't completely add up. I'm not saying that some element of the available money doesn't go on wages but were we not paying Jones? I have no idea how much he was on but he had a 5 year contract didn't he that we must have taken into account before now. So if he was on say £20k that's an extra £5m to add to the availability surely? £31m including wages?

[bobsterbrfc]

Is this possibly due to samba not definitely going? Ergo, potentially less need to spend for a replacement.

[LDRover]

Looks like another window of 'keeping the powder dry' and if anyone tries to dress that up as positive in any way they need sectioning.

[rebelmswar]

The "including wages" argument doesn't completely add up. I'm not saying that some element of the available money doesn't go on wages but were we not paying Jones? I have no idea how much he was on but he had a 5 year contract didn't he that we must have taken into account before now. So if he was on say £20k that's an extra £5m to add to the availability surely? £31m including wages?

Realistically that would have been significantly chewed up in the new contract signing bonanza.

[nicko]

The "including wages" argument doesn't completely add up. I'm not saying that some element of the available money doesn't go on wages but were we not paying Jones? I have no idea how much he was on but he had a 5 year contract didn't he that we must have taken into account before now. So if he was on say £20k that's an extra £5m to add to the availability surely? £31m including wages?

Wages and agent's fees HAVE to be paid to get top players these days.

The trouble is that many of the main names on the list were looking for small fortunes.

I can see why the owners would back off about that.

But to suddenly go into reverse is not the way to do it.

And - above all - a hard-and-fast figure of a total spend has to be worked on and NOT changed.

That only doubles the problem.

[broadsword]

Looks like another window of 'keeping the powder dry' and if anyone tries to dress that up as positive in any way they need sectioning.

Surely chucking a fair amount of powder away in the form of Jones P going to Man Utd and Jones J scuttling home.

Personally I think someone needs their nadgers dangles over a cannon right now.