Jump to content
IGNORED

Alex Scott - £25m to Bournemouth- Confirmed


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Apologies if this has already been set out but I haven’t seen it. Can someone with a good understanding of the club’s finances and FFP explain what this sale means for the club.

Does it resolve our debt concerns in an instant? How much of it can we likely afford to reinvest in the team? What does it mean for the wage budget?

I don’t have a good understanding of our financial position or the hard numbers of our accounts, so I’d like to understand what this does for us.

@Mr Popodopolous would be your man..

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Seeing as they conducted a medical prior to signing the deal, and they've admitted we told them he was injured, they're not going to have much grounds to rescind the contract.

I'd really not worry about it all (mate).

Distance selling regs apply don't they? They can send him back inside 14 days no questions asked but they'll need to pay the £25M postage.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ExiledAjax said:

Seeing as they conducted a medical prior to signing the deal, and they've admitted we told them he was injured, they're not going to have much grounds to rescind the contract.

I'd really not worry about it all (mate).

Although they should retain all original packaging just in case a return is necessary. 

  • Like 1
  • Robin 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nathandao said:

Yes but I always forget to change it anyway so my team includes as many Ex-City players as possible :laugh:

A couple of seasons ago it was possible to get an entire FPL squad of 15 out of ex-City players, although it included loans and the likes of John Ruddy and Callum Robinson who barely featured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

How often in the last few seasons though has 2 months turned into 3 or 4? Certainly the case with Naismith and TC at the start of the year. There can be no guarantees of course on the timing of their returns.

To sell an injured player for £25m on that basis is a good negotiation from my point of view. Amazed that Bournemouth didn't pause it, after they apparently missed the severity of Antoine's shin injury from the medical in Jan.

Weimann came back quicker from his last season.  So did Joe Williams, was meant to be season ending.

Fine line between rushing them back too soon and it taking longer!  Why do you think Nige doesn’t really like putting timescales on injuries?  Every injury has its own timescale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ChippenhamRed said:

Apologies if this has already been set out but I haven’t seen it. Can someone with a good understanding of the club’s finances and FFP explain what this sale means for the club.

Does it resolve our debt concerns in an instant? How much of it can we likely afford to reinvest in the team? What does it mean for the wage budget?

I don’t have a good understanding of our financial position or the hard numbers of our accounts, so I’d like to understand what this does for us.

 

1 hour ago, Bris Red said:

@Mr Popodopolous would be your man..

 

Haha thanks, there's no real simple answer but, and @Davefevs also.

The simplest is that IMO we are now fine for cycles ending 2023-24, 2024-25 and 2025-26. We can breathe easy and perhaps be choosy about who we sell and for how much etc. That isnt to say we shouldn't or wouldn't sell anyone at all for 3 years but that combined with much hard work has put us on a stable footing. £20-25m in the bank, certainly.

It then may depend on how far we wish to push the boat out. For example if income remaimed stable over this, next and the following season we could probably add an average of £6.67-£8.33m to the cost base per year. (That assumes a £20m base fee or a £25m base fee for Scott) and wouldn't be inclusive of any further sales.

Whether we wish to go that far is a different debate, maybe we don't and the big caveat is that if we did this and didn't go up by 2025-26...we would be in a hole again probably. A big hole! 8 figures.

Debt wise, it could certainly help- presumably it comes in instalments but it could help, SL will however steadily convert to equity anyway. For as long as he is happy to.

Say 4 signings at £3m apiece wage wise 3 year deal, average wage £15k per week. That is about £7.12m per year onto the cost base.

Would keep us compliant up to 2025-26 assuming revenue reasonably similar but well..thereafter hmm!!

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

**Trigger warning - content relating to Bournemouth signing our players...**

Now that the pathway to Bournemouth is firmly in place (if they meet our asking price), does that make them the most likely destination for Tommy Conway next summer, if he comes back from injury to have a goal fest?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mozo said:

**Trigger warning - content relating to Bournemouth signing our players...**

Now that the pathway to Bournemouth is firmly in place (if they meet our asking price), does that make them the most likely destination for Tommy Conway next summer, if he comes back from injury to have a goal fest?

Depends on contract length, our price, whether we've got cover in the squad,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

Yep, just watched that.

Can't help feeling that caused us to push the sell button a bit.

A couple of months, can easily turn into longer. He certainly wouldn't have been available for Millwall tomorrow (like NP said he probably would of).

Sounds like it was a good time for all parties to get a deal done. For me, the Scott saga has been a bit of an unnecessary saga this summer. 

Luckily we have another 3 weeks to address any perceived areas of improvement in the team now.

What caused us to hit the sell button was that they met our long held valuation. 

 

Screenshot_20230811_182446.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

What caused us to hit the sell button was that they met our long held valuation. 

 

Screenshot_20230811_182446.jpg

'Bristol Live understands' means they don't know. I wasn't in favour of the way City presented the transfer as 'undisclosed record ...'. That's having your cake and eating it, but without knowning how big the piece of cake was, or even whether it was a victoria sponge or lemon drizzle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sleepy1968 said:

'Bristol Live understands' means they don't know. I wasn't in favour of the way City presented the transfer as 'undisclosed record ...'. That's having your cake and eating it, but without knowning how big the piece of cake was, or even whether it was a victoria sponge or lemon drizzle.

My personal understanding is we have recieved 20 up front with 5 million spread out over x amount of time plus add ons. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, W-S-M Seagull said:

My personal understanding is we have recieved 20 up front with 5 million spread out over x amount of time plus add ons. 

If that is true (I have no idea), that means 25m in this years accounts (doesn't matter when it would be paid for P&L/FFP, only for cashflow - it is guaranteed so has to be included in the accounts as a profit upon disposal - we would have 20m cash and a 5m debt owed to us by Bournmouth, so all 25m has been gained as an "asset") - then any addons are included in the year which they are triggered, as if they are not triggered they are not owed to us

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

My personal understanding is we have recieved 20 up front with 5 million spread out over x amount of time plus add ons. 

Doubt it. Should highlight that Bristol live are the only source suggesting 25 million + add ons. Everyone else, and by that I mean everyone, suggests 20 million + potential 5 million in add ons.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, James54De said:

Doubt it. Should highlight that Bristol live are the only source suggesting 25 million + add ons. Everyone else, and by that I mean everyone, suggests 20 million + potential 5 million in add ons.

Sky reported the same £25m transfer fee plus add-ons last night too.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

Haha thanks, there's no real simple answer but, and @Davefevs also.

The simplest is that IMO we are now fine for cycles ending 2023-24, 2024-25 and 2025-26. We can breathe easy and perhaps be choosy about who we sell and for how much etc. That isnt to say we shouldn't or wouldn't sell anyone at all for 3 years but that combined with much hard work has put us on a stable footing. £20-25m in the bank, certainly.

It then may depend on how far we wish to push the boat out. For example if income remaimed stable over this, next and the following season we could probably add an average of £6.67-£8.33m to the cost base per year. (That assumes a £20m base fee or a £25m base fee for Scott) and wouldn't be inclusive of any further sales.

Whether we wish to go that far is a different debate, maybe we don't and the big caveat is that if we did this and didn't go up by 2025-26...we would be in a hole again probably. A big hole! 8 figures.

Debt wise, it could certainly help- presumably it comes in instalments but it could help, SL will however steadily convert to equity anyway. For as long as he is happy to.

Say 4 signings at £3m apiece wage wise 3 year deal, average wage £15k per week. That is about £7.12m per year onto the cost base.

Would keep us compliant up to 2025-26 assuming revenue reasonably similar but well..thereafter hmm!!

Absolutely brilliant answer - many thanks! OTIB at its best.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, James54De said:

Were back at 20+5 this evening. 

Lots of people have got very confused either the whole add on thing. 

To simplify it we have recieved 20 million up front for Scott direct into our account. We will recieve a further 5 million over a period of time. That 5 million is what people have got confused by. Because its spread out people have confused it with add ons which it is not. We will recieve that 5 million PLUS add ons if they are achieved. 

  • Hmmm 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Lots of people have got very confused either the whole add on thing. 

To simplify it we have recieved 20 million up front for Scott direct into our account. We will recieve a further 5 million over a period of time. That 5 million is what people have got confused by. Because its spread out people have confused it with add ons which it is not. We will recieve that 5 million PLUS add ons if they are achieved. 

I’ve been on your side for most of this thread but; in my opinion.. give it a rest(?) you’re guessing just the same as everyone else, why state it as fact 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

 

Haha thanks, there's no real simple answer but, and @Davefevs also.

The simplest is that IMO we are now fine for cycles ending 2023-24, 2024-25 and 2025-26. We can breathe easy and perhaps be choosy about who we sell and for how much etc. That isnt to say we shouldn't or wouldn't sell anyone at all for 3 years but that combined with much hard work has put us on a stable footing. £20-25m in the bank, certainly.

It then may depend on how far we wish to push the boat out. For example if income remaimed stable over this, next and the following season we could probably add an average of £6.67-£8.33m to the cost base per year. (That assumes a £20m base fee or a £25m base fee for Scott) and wouldn't be inclusive of any further sales.

Whether we wish to go that far is a different debate, maybe we don't and the big caveat is that if we did this and didn't go up by 2025-26...we would be in a hole again probably. A big hole! 8 figures.

Debt wise, it could certainly help- presumably it comes in instalments but it could help, SL will however steadily convert to equity anyway. For as long as he is happy to.

Say 4 signings at £3m apiece wage wise 3 year deal, average wage £15k per week. That is about £7.12m per year onto the cost base.

Would keep us compliant up to 2025-26 assuming revenue reasonably similar but well..thereafter hmm!!

On the other hand, it may mean we spend very little for a couple of years, stay well within FFP, and SL can drastically reduce the amount he has to put in to subsidise the club. Seems the more likely situation to me. Meanwhile he looks for a buyer for the club.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robin_unreliant said:

On the other hand, it may mean we spend very little for a couple of years, stay well within FFP, and SL can drastically reduce the amount he has to put in to subsidise the club. Seems the more likely situation to me. Meanwhile he looks for a buyer for the club.

This unfortunately is also possible.

Relieves some burden on SL if true but could also mean we will not necessarily be operating at the £39m Upper Loss Limit for the next few years

(No equity=£15m, equity=Up to £39m or  could be anything between the two).

Hypothetically with the Scott sale we could still spend the same amount as £39m even if the amount we lose doesn't reflect £39m, equity etc.

It could help prime us for a sale too as you say- some Wolves fans think FOSUN are doing similar this summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

Lots of people have got very confused either the whole add on thing. 

To simplify it we have recieved 20 million up front for Scott direct into our account. We will recieve a further 5 million over a period of time. That 5 million is what people have got confused by. Because its spread out people have confused it with add ons which it is not. We will recieve that 5 million PLUS add ons if they are achieved. 

**** off. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, James54De said:

**** off. 

???

None of us know do we?

FWIW I’m going with James Piercy who is suggesting £25m Transfer Fee.  I don’t care about about the “appearance based add-ons”.  We will struggle to track those anyway.

I’ll revisit when 23/24 accounts come out in about 18 months time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

???

None of us know do we?

FWIW I’m going with James Piercy who is suggesting £25m Transfer Fee.  I don’t care about about the “appearance based add-ons”.  We will struggle to track those anyway.

I’ll revisit when 23/24 accounts come out in about 18 months time.

Pierce suggesting £25+
Tristan Cork, also BP, suggesting £22+

https://x.com/tristancorkpost/status/1689559813171073024?s=46&t=FKlkkBdrG9fuUpSMMtgUgQ

The charm of undisclosed fees, ay?  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really hope Bournemouth get relegated this season. The way GON was treated after pulling off a miracle escape was a disgrace. So glad Wolves have taken him on and look forward to it when they stuff Bournemouth. Alex can move back to us in the 24-5 season when we wave at Bournemouth as we pass them on the way up. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, OldlandReddies said:

Really hope Bournemouth get relegated this season. The way GON was treated after pulling off a miracle escape was a disgrace. So glad Wolves have taken him on and look forward to it when they stuff Bournemouth. Alex can move back to us in the 24-5 season when we wave at Bournemouth as we pass them on the way up. 

I do anyway, never mind GO'N's treatment.

If they get relegated, it'll be hilarious.

Thanks for the 25 million, and see you soon.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, OldlandReddies said:

Really hope Bournemouth get relegated this season. The way GON was treated after pulling off a miracle escape was a disgrace. So glad Wolves have taken him on and look forward to it when they stuff Bournemouth. Alex can move back to us in the 24-5 season when we wave at Bournemouth as we pass them on the way up. 

I hope they finish bottom of the P.L. with a record low points total, Luton one place and one point above them.

Sadly, I think SFC Bournemouth will stay up this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/08/2023 at 14:56, OldlandReddies said:

Really hope Bournemouth get relegated this season. The way GON was treated after pulling off a miracle escape was a disgrace. So glad Wolves have taken him on and look forward to it when they stuff Bournemouth. Alex can move back to us in the 24-5 season when we wave at Bournemouth as we pass them on the way up. 

They have decided that GON wouldnt improve them they made changes been backed by a owner and kicking on we aint passing them soon  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it disgraceful to give someone a Premier League job before they probably deserve it and then pay him 18 months salary to leave ?  I wish my employers would sack me and pay me 18 months salary!  
 

They think this new guy will do a better job than O’Neil would have done. Brave decision and time will tell.  Everyone was furious when Southampton appointed Pochettino. Worked out well for them 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/08/2023 at 14:56, OldlandReddies said:

Really hope Bournemouth get relegated this season. The way GON was treated after pulling off a miracle escape was a disgrace. So glad Wolves have taken him on and look forward to it when they stuff Bournemouth. Alex can move back to us in the 24-5 season when we wave at Bournemouth as we pass them on the way up. 

Then we pass them by and buy back Scotty for 15m basically making it a £10m season long loan. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 13/08/2023 at 17:24, And Its Smith said:

Is it disgraceful to give someone a Premier League job before they probably deserve it and then pay him 18 months salary to leave ?  I wish my employers would sack me and pay me 18 months salary!  

 

Be careful for what you wish for. My first marriage came about because Mrs Robbo #1's employers made her redundant - then took her straight back on because they realised they had sacked too many people to operate, but said she could keep the redundancy money.

While I foresaw a luxury holiday with the dosh, she said "let's use it to pay for a wedding" and I went along with it. Whatta mistake-a to make-a. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Be careful for what you wish for. My first marriage came about because Mrs Robbo #1's employers made her redundant - then took her straight back on because they realised they had sacked too many people to operate, but said she could keep the redundancy money.

While I foresaw a luxury holiday with the dosh, she said "let's use it to pay for a wedding" and I went along with it. Whatta mistake-a to make-a. 

I’m just going to have to put you on ignore now! Certainly anything you say about how City spend money is tainted  permanently!

Did she pay for the honeymoon if she did at least you got your holiday!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, REDOXO said:

I’m just going to have to put you on ignore now! Certainly anything you say about how City spend money is tainted  permanently!

Did she pay for the honeymoon if she did at least you got your holiday!

 

In the Lake District ?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...