Thursday deadline.

[Bigdoggsteel]

12 minutes ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

That's the bit I recall.  Which would imply they were willing to chuck money at it.

Probably more that they thought we would be guaranteed promotion if they spent 5 million on transfers 

[tomphil]

28 minutes ago, J*B said:

Unleaded is often bang on and may well be on this occasion. However...

Its the opposite that I was told - by a former very Senior member of staff at Rovers - who said Mowbray had asked for a 20m investment for this season and walked away from the meeting in India with a 10m promise (again, to be clear, football clubs don't have 'transfer budgets', they have seasonal budgets to include new contracts, transfer fees, wages, agents fees etc), which I posted here. 

To be clear, that doesn't mean i'm right and Unleaded is wrong - he's certainly got form for being right and i'm absolutely not saying the 10m increase is 100%.

Which might well have meant here's ten million but if you can generate more you can use that to strengthen, one out = two in, that old chestnut to which he probably said i'd rather keep what I have and root around for a few potential bargains.

Which is probably why we nearly always end up with injury prone types.

[chaddyrovers]

1 minute ago, briansol said:

Mowbray's interview after India where he says "I think the budget we've been given is going to be substantial enough to add some quality players and not break wage structures"

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/may/tony-mowbray-qa-part-one/

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/may/tony-mowbray-qa-part-two/

I don't think its mainly wages but these stupid and daft fees for very average transfer fees. Waghorn moving for 8 mil is a pathetic and seems how crazy this market is

[JHRover]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Mulgrew and Evans new contract will depending on fitness and how many games they play this season. surely this is the right way? 

our Squad next season and beyond be

Keepers - Raya Fisher

Defender - Nyambe Lenihan Wharton Williams Bell

Midfielders - Bennett Travis Davenport Smallwood Rothwell Dack

Strikers - Nuttall Samuel. 

Plus 2 more permanent signings which would take that up 17 players under contract for next season. Plus is Platt, Tomlinson and Simmonds come through from the academy plus if we give new contracts to Graham and Mulgrew for instance that would be 20 players. Maybe 2 or 3 from the list above might more on 

 

Oh dear. That isn't good enough. That is a threadbare squad with which we could barely fill a bench. You're also including several of the U23s none of which have yet been given a run in the 1st team and so the jury is still very much out on them.

Samuel and Nuttall - I hope I'm wrong but I'm not confident on their abilities to perform at this level.

In my experience Simmonds has been hit and miss for the u23s since his arrival. A hatrick at Darwen last night doesn't make him remotely ready to play in the Championship.

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, Paul Mani said:

Haha - sound!!

FYI - It’s true btw, check it with any of the ‘real’ ITK’s and they’ll tell you the same.

Hahahahahahahahahaha......

 

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

[tomphil]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Mulgrew and Evans new contract will depending on fitness and how many games they play this season. surely this is the right way? 

our Squad next season and beyond be

Keepers - Raya Fisher

Defender - Nyambe Lenihan Wharton Williams Bell

Midfielders - Bennett Travis Davenport Smallwood Rothwell Dack

Strikers - Nuttall Samuel. 

Plus 2 more permanent signings which would take that up 17 players under contract for next season. Plus is Platt, Tomlinson and Simmonds come through from the academy plus if we give new contracts to Graham and Mulgrew for instance that would be 20 players. Maybe 2 or 3 from the list above might more on 

 

I would imagine we have around 6-7 million pounds left after the 2 signings and new contracts aswell. 

@roversfan99 this is where I got 10 million budget from. 

I wouldn't be surprise if Mowbray and Waggott spoke to India to get an increase in budget. Mowbray has said his 1st targets are still available so hopefully the next few days we see some signings. 

That's good that they are proper training and much better than under Coyle days as manager. 

Isn't the budget THE budget overall for everything not just a recruitment budget to spend ..........

[JHRover]

Derby agree fee with Peterborough for Marriott. Wow, there's another £6 million in extra ticket sales they'll have to find.....

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, JHRover said:

Derby agree fee with Peterborough for Marriott. Wow, there's another £6 million in extra ticket sales they'll have to find.....

No, their gate receipts are £7 million a season, so that will cover this deal. Then they will sell Vydra for around £10 million like they sold Ince and Will Hughes for a combined £20 million last summer. 

I explained all of this to you this morning , have you forgotten already? 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Bigdoggsteel

[Tormund]

I thought Derby were cost cutting this season...

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

I'm on holiday in Spain with a keen Sunderland fan who lives in the Midlands.  He watches them now and again but his brother is a die hard and has a season ticket there. I asked him about Fletcher earlier. He looked puzzled and said " He didn't do much for us ".

[Tormund]

3 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

Haha - sound!!

FYI - It’s true btw, check it with any of the ‘real’ ITK’s and they’ll tell you the same.

I believe you Mani, even though I don’t know what to believe.

[AllRoverAsia]

13 minutes ago, briansol said:

Mowbray's interview after India where he says "I think the budget we've been given is going to be substantial enough to add some quality players and not break wage structures"

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/may/tony-mowbray-qa-part-one/

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2018/may/tony-mowbray-qa-part-two/

Thanks for posting those links.

The full interview with Radio Lancs:

https://audioboom.com/posts/6868591-rovers-head-coach-tony-mowbray-is-back-from-india-following-a-meeting-with-the-club-owners-venkys

No mention of doing an Oliver or of asking for less!

[chaddyrovers]

Just now, JHRover said:

Derby agree fee with Peterborough for Marriott. Wow, there's another £6 million in extra ticket sales they'll have to find.....

Vydra off to Leeds JHRover. Around 8 mil to 10 million

[Dreams of 1995]

 

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

No, their gate receipts are £7 million a season, so that will cover this deal. Then they will sell Vydra for around £10 million like they sold Ince and Will Hughes for a combined £20 million last summer. 

I explained all of this to you this morning , have you forgotten already? 

You forget to deduct the cost of staffing, electricity, policing etc etc from your £7m a year have put forward as a full and final profit from ST sales. However convenient for you.

[JHRover]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

No, their gate receipts are £7 million a season, so that will cover this deal. Then they will sell Vydra for around £10 million like they sold Ince and Will Hughes for a combined £20 million last summer. 

I explained all of this to you this morning , have you forgotten already? 

Yes, the sums aren't adding up.

I thought you estimated their gate receipts were 7 million a year more than ours? Not 7 million in total. Then you can deduct from that their massive wage bill which must surely be millions and millions more than ours?

I'm struggling to reach a surplus of £7 million out of that to be honest.

 

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

Vydra off to Leeds JHRover. Around 8 mil to 10 million

Leeds not have to worry about FFP either? Must just be us.

[HowieFive0]

27 minutes ago, Wing Wizard Windy Miller said:

I recall him saying he wanted to keep the owners ambitions in check or words to that effect but not about turning down a bigger transfer budget offer. He may or may not, I don't know.

That's the bit I recall.  Which would imply they were willing to chuck money at it.

 

 

That doesnt imply they are willing to chuck money at it all ..could simply mean the owners gettiing giddy and  carried away with themselves off the back of a promotion!

TM: " Hang on Hang on ..just coz we ve been promoted once doesnt mean its a regular gimme  Mrs D ...."

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

 

You forget to deduct the cost of staffing, electricity, policing etc etc from your £7m a year have put forward as a full and final profit from ST sales. However convenient for you.

£500,000  would comfortably cover that 

 

Just now, JHRover said:

Yes, the sums aren't adding up.

I thought you estimated their gate receipts were 7 million a year more than ours? Not 7 million in total. Then you can deduct from that their massive wage bill which must surely be millions and millions more than ours?

I'm struggling to reach a surplus of £7 million out of that to be honest.

 

Leeds not have to worry about FFP either? Must just be us.

Ya, £7 million more than ours, meaning they make even more than £7 million on total gate receipts. Thanks for pointing that out. 

27,000 avg attendance x £20 x 23 home games= = £12, 420,000.00. So with season tickets etc, I will generously round that off to £11 million for gate receipts from league home games only. 

Make sense now? 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Bigdoggsteel

[Dreams of 1995]

Derby's transfer expenditure comes to approx £80m over the previous 4 years. From that they have gained approx. £37m back. This is taking fees only into account.

I'm lead to believe the selling club doesn't receive any additional funds (save bonuses/clauses) from a sale. Likewise they don't pay any fees. As an example, when Derby received approx. £37m for their players that is the bottom line save for any future % fee. The benefit is the lump sump/release of wages.

However, they have spent £80m on incomings. This sum is the fee to the selling club only. It doesn't take into account agent fees, signing on fees and, of course, the wage. 

By a very crude measurement you'd have to expect that Derby's transfer outgoings are 75% higher than their incomings taking into account the additional fees occurred. Likewise, you'd expect their wage bill has got significantly higher simply by assessing their incomings vs their outgoings.

Their ST sales are irrelevant in comparison to their gargantuan spending over the previous half a decade.

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, JHRover said:

Yes, the sums aren't adding up.

I thought you estimated their gate receipts were 7 million a year more than ours? Not 7 million in total. Then you can deduct from that their massive wage bill which must surely be millions and millions more than ours?

I'm struggling to reach a surplus of £7 million out of that to be honest.

 

Leeds not have to worry about FFP either? Must just be us.

They have the SkyLeeds TV Inc. Ltd. Corpn......... income to rely on too, every friggin season

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

Derby's transfer expenditure comes to circa £80m over the previous 4 years. From that they have gained approx. £37m back. This is taking fees only into account.

I'm lead to believe the selling club doesn't receive any additional funds (save bonuses/clauses) from a sale. Likewise they don't pay any fees. As an example, when Derby received approx. £37m for their players that is the bottom line save for any future % fee. The benefit is the lump sump/release of wages.

However, they have spent £80m on incomings. This sum is the fee to the selling club only. It doesn't take into account agent fees, signing on fees and, of course, the wage. 

By a very crude measurement you'd have to expect that Derby's outgoings are 75% higher than their incomings taking into account the additional fees occurred. Likewise, you'd expect their wage bill has got significantly higher simply by assessing their incomings vs their outgoings.

Their ST sales are irrelevant in comparison to their gargantuan spending over the previous half a decade.

Where did you get that info from in relation to ins and outs? 

If they are making £11 million per season on gate receipts its hardly "irrelevant" , regardless of how convenient it is for you to say that. 

In fact if you multiply it over 4 seasons (£44 million) and add the £37 million you claim they received from transfers, they actually make a profit of £ 1 million  

Edited July 25, 2018 by Bigdoggsteel

[JHRover]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

Derby's transfer expenditure comes to circa £80m over the previous 4 years. From that they have gained approx. £37m back. This is taking fees only into account.

I'm lead to believe the selling club doesn't receive any additional funds (save bonuses/clauses) from a sale. Likewise they don't pay any fees. As an example, when Derby received approx. £37m for their players that is the bottom line save for any future % fee. The benefit is the lump sump/release of wages.

However, they have spent £80m on incomings. This sum is the fee to the selling club only. It doesn't take into account agent fees, signing on fees and, of course, the wage. 

By a very crude measurement you'd have to expect that Derby's outgoings are 75% higher than their incomings taking into account the additional fees occurred. Likewise, you'd expect their wage bill has got significantly higher simply by assessing their incomings vs their outgoings.

Their ST sales are irrelevant in comparison to their gargantuan spending over the previous half a decade.

Absolutely. Some people just can't see what is going on in front of them and prefer to convince themselves that all these other Championship non-parachute monied clubs just build up a £10 million profit to stick under the mattress to spend on players when they want to.

Quite clear to most people that Derby and co. are spending way beyond FFP limitations and the only thing keeping them out of sanctions is clever accounting tricks and most importantly an inert and inept governing body that hasn't got the appetite to enforce their own rules, probably out of fear that more will follow the QPR route of refusing to submit. Also the risk that the entire façade will come crashing down if an owner fights them all the way.

Rovers were happy and dare I say grateful for the excuse of FFP rules to reduce spending and cut costs when really our owners would have done that either way as they've never been in this to invest significant amounts of cash.

 

[HowieFive0]

Just now, Dreams of 1995 said:

Derby's transfer expenditure comes to approx £80m over the previous 4 years. From that they have gained approx. £37m back. This is taking fees only into account.

I'm lead to believe the selling club doesn't receive any additional funds (save bonuses/clauses) from a sale. Likewise they don't pay any fees. As an example, when Derby received approx. £37m for their players that is the bottom line save for any future % fee. The benefit is the lump sump/release of wages.

However, they have spent £80m on incomings. This sum is the fee to the selling club only. It doesn't take into account agent fees, signing on fees and, of course, the wage. 

By a very crude measurement you'd have to expect that Derby's transfer outgoings are 75% higher than their incomings taking into account the additional fees occurred. Likewise, you'd expect their wage bill has got significantly higher simply by assessing their incomings vs their outgoings.

Their ST sales are irrelevant in comparison to their gargantuan spending over the previous half a decade.

Derby have already come to the end of their three year FFP cycle and complied .? so i presume they ve another three years to splurge until accountable again.

"The current three-year Financial Fair Play cycle is coming to an end, however, meaning Derby will have more flexibility when it comes to the summer transfer window."

Edited July 25, 2018 by HowieFive0

[JHRover]

Just now, AllRoverAsia said:

They have the SkyLeeds TV Inc. Ltd. Corpn......... income to rely on too, every friggin season

Ah yes.

Sky Sports essentially run the EFL through their multi-million rights package.

B Sky B were once significant shareholders in Leeds United

Sky Bet are headquartered in Leeds and have additional lucrative sponsorship arrangements with Leeds.

Murky.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, JHRover said:

Absolutely. Some people just can't see what is going on in front of them and prefer to convince themselves that all these other Championship non-parachute monied clubs just build up a £10 million profit to stick under the mattress to spend on players when they want to.

Quite clear to most people that Derby and co. are spending way beyond FFP limitations and the only thing keeping them out of sanctions is clever accounting tricks and most importantly an inert and inept governing body that hasn't got the appetite to enforce their own rules, probably out of fear that more will follow the QPR route of refusing to submit. Also the risk that the entire façade will come crashing down if an owner fights them all the way.

Rovers were happy and dare I say grateful for the excuse of FFP rules to reduce spending and cut costs when really our owners would have done that either way as they've never been in this to invest significant amounts of cash.

 

Now you said it 

[Dreams of 1995]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

Where did you get that info from in relation to ins and outs? 

If they are making £11 million per season on gate receipts its hardly "irrelevant" , regardless of how convenient it is for you to say that. 

In fact if you multiply it over 4 seasons (£44 million) and add the £37 million you claim they received from transfers, they actually make a profit of £ 1 million  

I don't know if you are being purposely disingenuous or actually aren't getting it.

The £11m you are claiming they gain per season in ST sales doesn't 100% go on transfer sales. You have policing, staffing, power etc (general overheads of a business) to deduce from that (which you conveniently summed up as half a million hahahahaha). Likewise, you also get further income from commercial activity/sponsorship. The £80m sum also doesn't include additional fees that come with any transfer (ie: huge agent fees, signing on fees, bonuses). They, like pretty much every Championship club, fails to turn a profit. 

Derby County
Company name: The Derby County Football Club
Owned by: Sevco 5112, owned by Candy Crush tycoon Mel Morris
Turnover: £22.6m (£21.5m)
Pre-tax loss: £14.7m (-£10.1m)
Staff costs: £31.9m (£21.8m)
Wage-to-turnover ratio: 141 per cent
Highest paid director: £194,583 (£449,578)
Net debt: Not stated; £3m bank loan
Bank: Barclays
Auditor: Smith Cooper
Y/E: 30 June 2016

 

That is the fees spent by Derby published June 17.

Blackburn Rovers
Company name: Blackburn Rovers Football and Athletic
Owned by: Venky's London Ltd, owned by Venkateshwara Hatcheries Private, an Indian company with interests in poultry, processed food, animal vaccines and pharmaceuticals
Turnover: £22m (£22.4m)
Pre-tax loss: £1.5m (-£17.3m)
Staff costs: £25.3m (£30.1m)
Wage-to-turnover ratio: 115 per cent
Highest paid director: £150,304 (£177,969)
Net debt: Not stated, loans of £87.3m (£87.1m) to parent and £14.2m (£12.9m) bank overdraft
Bank: State Bank of India
Auditor: PM+M Solutions for Business
Y/E: 30 June 2016

This is ours.

 

Everything about Derby's books screams breaking FFP in comparison to ours but it's only us who uses the rules as a refusal to spend in case of "non-compliance."

 

Wake up will you.

To put it into perspective in 15/16 they spent approx 40m and gained nothing. Didn't sell a player for a fee. That's a substantial increase in wages, fees spent and not a single figure to balance it back. No action was taken.