Scott Twine - Signed on Four Year Deal - Official

[westonred]

Hows Manning going to feel if the board will not support him and get his number one target

[astrondrew]

1 minute ago, westonred said:

Hows Manning going to feel if the board will not support him and get his number one target 

It's pretty clear that they are trying but don't want to overspend. I'd expect Liam Manning is pretty pragmatic about that.

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, astrondrew said:

It's pretty clear that they are trying but don't want to overspend. I'd expect Liam Manning is pretty pragmatic about that.

“Actions not intent / words”

[Major Isewater]

1 hour ago, frenchred said:

an alternative is known to the club for approx half the £5 Burnley really wanted 

5 quid ? Now I know Uncle Steve is tightening his belt but … 

Perhaps we could have a whip round? 

Edited June 21 by Major Isewater

[Simon bristol]

55 minutes ago, westonred said:

Hows Manning going to feel if the board will not support him and get his number one target

He will know exactly what scott went for, and the history of us spending money, i dont think he will like it much if twine isnt signed!

[RollsRoyce]

3 hours ago, petehinton said:

Trying to get him…..on loan again. 
 

How embarrassing. 

I may be reading it wrong, but I would far prefer that scenario. A loan fee and wages. next summer he will be left  with one year left on his contract, and more likely to be affordable. Of course we will have a new manager then anyway. Having fun...

I am against spending any serious money on Twine as I see it as a return to bad old practice. if we are spending money, a forward is required, and we need one that we can develop and create an eventual financial upside with. 

[Loosey Boy]

Is the potential “Loan with obligation to buy” ST, a way of us freeing up more cash this summer for the No.7 and No.9?

Perhaps we’ve now realised that we can’t afford to buy all three outright this summer?

[Simon bristol]

14 minutes ago, Loosey Boy said:

Is the potential “Loan with obligation to buy” ST, a way of us freeing up more cash this summer for the No.7 and No.9?

Perhaps we’ve now realised that we can’t afford to buy all three outright this summer?

You would think this would keep funds available for that purpose, though probably commits us to spending the money next summer when we might be looking for a new keeper/ whatever we need then.

[Mr Popodopolous]

30 minutes ago, Loosey Boy said:

Is the potential “Loan with obligation to buy” ST, a way of us freeing up more cash this summer for the No.7 and No.9?

Perhaps we’ve now realised that we can’t afford to buy all three outright this summer?

 

12 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

You would think this would keep funds available for that purpose, though probably commits us to spending the money next summer when we might be looking for a new keeper/ whatever we need then.

Mainly cash flow IMO unless we are planning a bit splurge and looking to save on Twine for now..

Our headroom is £10-15m clear of the limit and I'm probably bring a bit risk averse, it could be higher.

By which I mean e.g.

Twine in, £4m fee, £15k per week. 3 year deal.

£1.33m amortisation and £0.78m wages.

Still (being conservative) £8-13m left in the headroom limit, or a shade under.

Then in 2025-26 a £22m loss is replaced by a possible £2m loss as the new starting point, offset to an extent by increased costs if we spend some of it and reduced transfer profit.

Beyond that income and costs.

I strongly suspect we are well clear in other words as we will be into 2024-25 and likely 2025-26.

Up to SL in respect of cash flow etc but Twine shouldn't really be a limiting factor aside from that.

Now whether we as a club think Twine is worth £4m is a separate issue.

Edited June 21 by Mr Popodopolous

[Sir Geoff]

1 hour ago, westonred said:

Hows Manning going to feel if the board will not support him and get his number one target

I would expect his 'behaviours' to remain the same.

[Sir Geoff]

27 minutes ago, Loosey Boy said:

Is the potential “Loan with obligation to buy” ST, a way of us freeing up more cash this summer for the No.7 and No.9?

Perhaps we’ve now realised that we can’t afford to buy all three outright this summer?

Last year the summers budget was set in March. Surely with the window now open any competent cough, cough, organisation would know their budget.

[Ska Junkie]

Okay, so thus far;

We can't agree a fee for Twine and the current price is too high.

We are interested in Miovski but the current price is too high.

We made a bid for Sinayoko but the price is too high.

Going well isn't it?

[Mr Popodopolous]

I could be wrong as I've only seen limited footage of him but I'm not wildly sold on Miovski for some reason. Can't place it.

Otoh CL clubs are also linked so I'm possibly in the wrong there.  From the bits I did see on YouTube though I wasn't terribly impressed- he was okay, just not that great. In a better side maybe he steps up, I did read one year that it was only him saving Aberdeen from the drop

Edited June 21 by Mr Popodopolous

[Cov 77]

1 minute ago, Ska Junkie said:

Okay, so thus far;

We can't agree a fee for Twine and the current price is too high.

We are interested in Miovski but the current price is too high.

We made a bid for Sinayoko but the price is too high.

Going well isn't it?

All of it pure conjecture and rumours tbh , people are believing what they want to believe , we will have to wait and see 

[Ska Junkie]

1 minute ago, Cov 77 said:

All of it pure conjecture and rumours tbh , people are believing what they want to believe , we will have to wait and see 

Sorry C77, is the bid for Sinayoko not factual? I genuinely don't know and I'm certainly not having a dig.

[Cov 77]

Just now, Ska Junkie said:

Sorry C77, is the bid for Sinayoko not factual? I genuinely don't know and I'm certainly not having a dig.

I don’t know and nor does anyone else in all honesty, a French website saying something is that a fact ? What I’m saying is that we believe that one but not things coming out that may be more positive 

[MC RISK77]

4 minutes ago, Cov 77 said:

I don’t know and nor does anyone else in all honesty, a French website saying something is that a fact ? What I’m saying is that we believe that one but not things coming out that may be more positive 

Thought I saw one source saying we had a big rejected was from L’equipe which is about as credible as it gets 

[38MC]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

4. If it’s an unconditional obligation…yep.

It’s no different than any other transfer…it’s accounted for in the year it’s done.  If we were to do this on or before 30th June in would go into 23/24’s accounts.  If done on 1st July or after it will be 24/25’s.

I don’t know if the Sinistera deal has actually happened yet, nor am I close to the terms.

Para 1 - correct

Para 2 - Again fictional figures, ignoring wages or contract length.

£5m perm transfer, let’s say 50% (£2.5m) immediately, 25% (£1.25m) end of year 1, 25% (£1.25m) end of year 2

£1m loan fee followed by unconditional obligation to buy of £4m, 50% (£2m) next summer, 25% (£1m) EOY2, 25% (£1m) EOY3

City save cash outlay of £1.5m this summer.  Burnley lose cash receipt this summer.

So why might Burnley do it.

1. They have PL money, PPs to come

2. They don’t want to run the risk of his value decreasing significantly between now and then due to length of contract term.

I’m sure there are other factors / pros and cons, but those spring to mind.

So if City don’t go £5m now, a loan with unconditional obligation has some merits against the slower receipt if cash.

But as you say, why not offer 20% / 40% / 20% / 20%?

 

Whilst I completely agree with how you present it, again and at the expense of banging the same drum, if it would be acceptable to Burnley to receive the staged payments as structured by the loan route, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t accept it as a perm transfer too.

The only reason I can fathom for the loan route is in the case where the ‘obligation’ to buy is not in reality an obligation but we could turn our back in case of injury or not meeting appearances etc. if the obligation was absolute, as suggested, then I fail to see the point. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

Could be structured with say a £1m loan fee now and a £2.5-3m fee either by or post June 30th 2025.

Could be an absolute obligation or a conditional obligation ie promotion or x appearances Idk, many possibilities.

[BCFCGav]

Nixon says ‘player will have a say so biggest bidder might not win’ in response to a Tweeter asking whose favourite. Sounds very promising for us. 

[Shauntaylor85]

1 hour ago, Ska Junkie said:

Okay, so thus far;

We can't agree a fee for Twine and the current price is too high.

We are interested in Miovski but the current price is too high.

We made a bid for Sinayoko but the price is too high.

Going well isn't it?

As I’ve said, owners like Gibson and Coventry go for it, they don’t have parachute. We just won’t push that extra boat out to maximise other good players we have. Hence why we will always be a mid table Champ club at best. Sorry to say it but it’s reality. See you in the PL Brian……

Edited June 21 by Shauntaylor85

[Mr Popodopolous]

24 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

As I’ve said, owners like Gibson and Coventry go for it, they don’t have parachute. We just won’t push that extra boat out to maximise other good players we have. Hence why we will always be a mid table Champ club at best. Sorry to say it but it’s reality. See you in the PL Brian……

Gibson and Coventry didn't get their clubs into as big a mess in the first place but I suppose we should now make a bit of a push.

Edited June 21 by Mr Popodopolous

[milo1111]

8 minutes ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

As I’ve said, owners like Gibson and Coventry go for it, they don’t have parachute. We just won’t push that extra boat out to maximise other good players we have. Hence why we will always be a mid table Champ club at best. Sorry to say it but it’s reality. See you in the PL Brian……

We did push the boat out . It’s just that the boat was being skippered by a couple of absolute ***** in Ashton and LJ. 

[redsquirrel]

i think its a bit of an insult to twine and manning to say mannings main man isnt worth 20/25% of scotts value

[NcnsBcfc]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

4. If it’s an unconditional obligation…yep.

It’s no different than any other transfer…it’s accounted for in the year it’s done.  If we were to do this on or before 30th June in would go into 23/24’s accounts.  If done on 1st July or after it will be 24/25’s.

I don’t know if the Sinistera deal has actually happened yet, nor am I close to the terms.

Para 1 - correct

Para 2 - Again fictional figures, ignoring wages or contract length.

£5m perm transfer, let’s say 50% (£2.5m) immediately, 25% (£1.25m) end of year 1, 25% (£1.25m) end of year 2

£1m loan fee followed by unconditional obligation to buy of £4m, 50% (£2m) next summer, 25% (£1m) EOY2, 25% (£1m) EOY3

City save cash outlay of £1.5m this summer.  Burnley lose cash receipt this summer.

So why might Burnley do it.

1. They have PL money, PPs to come

2. They don’t want to run the risk of his value decreasing significantly between now and then due to length of contract term.

I’m sure there are other factors / pros and cons, but those spring to mind.

So if City don’t go £5m now, a loan with unconditional obligation has some merits against the slower receipt if cash.

But as you say, why not offer 20% / 40% / 20% / 20%?

 

@Davefevs

I think in reality the club can't make any decisions at the moment until Ian Gay has been properly consulted and asked for his views.

I think he's in Madeira at the moment, so that could be holding things up.

[Simon bristol]

10 minutes ago, redsquirrel said:

i think its a bit of an insult to twine and manning to say mannings main man isnt worth 20/25% of scotts value

Agreed, for us to say, yeah we got 25 million in for Scott, but we wont sign off 3.5 million (or so) for twine when he is your new boss’s first choice and wants to come, but we are supposed to be aiming for the prem,,,tts not a good look!

[Davefevs]

3 hours ago, Tim Monaghan said:

Literally the same as we did for TGH. No issue with it. 

No, TGH was an option to buy, not an obligation (conditional or unconditional), as being rumoured here for Twine.

3 hours ago, Cov 77 said:

All of it pure conjecture and rumours tbh , people are believing what they want to believe , we will have to wait and see 

L’Equippe are as about as reputable as you get.  Up to you if you don’t think it has legs.

2 hours ago, MC RISK77 said:

Thought I saw one source saying we had a big rejected was from L’equipe which is about as credible as it gets 

Ah, beat me to it.

2 hours ago, 38MC said:

Whilst I completely agree with how you present it, again and at the expense of banging the same drum, if it would be acceptable to Burnley to receive the staged payments as structured by the loan route, there’s no reason why they shouldn’t accept it as a perm transfer too.

The only reason I can fathom for the loan route is in the case where the ‘obligation’ to buy is not in reality an obligation but we could turn our back in case of injury or not meeting appearances etc. if the obligation was absolute, as suggested, then I fail to see the point. 

You missed the final sentence….i agreed with you!

[Street red]

2 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

As I’ve said, owners like Gibson and Coventry go for it, they don’t have parachute. We just won’t push that extra boat out to maximise other good players we have. Hence why we will always be a mid table Champ club at best. Sorry to say it but it’s reality. See you in the PL Brian……

Totally agree with you 

[Mr Popodopolous]

10 minutes ago, Street red said:

Totally agree with you 

Although we did go for it to varying degrees between 2016-2021.

Not easy for a non Parachute club to get the balance right but we definitely haven't. Well we have to a point in that we have a solid base bow but we stick and twist the wrong time and we have for years.

By we, I am largely crediting NP and his team plus Gould for the solid base.

[cheddarwedlocker]

@Davefevshave you spoken to IG about whoever is apparently ‘done’ ? Hes still persisting on it

[Davefevs]

32 minutes ago, cheddarwedlocker said:

@Davefevshave you spoken to IG about whoever is apparently ‘done’ ? Hes still persisting on it

Nah, no pods at the mo’.  Is that in twitter?  There are quite a lot of ambiguous / I know but I’ll make it cryptic tweets, it’s hard to make out what he’s claiming!

[redsquirrel]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Nah, no pods at the mo’.  Is that in twitter?  There are quite a lot of ambiguous / I know but I’ll make it cryptic tweets, it’s hard to make out what he’s claiming!

i get the impression he elaborates on tit bits he gets. eg,makes a tiny bit up to make things sound better. if he was really close to tins chatting about this stuff,he would be keeping his trap shut so as not to cause tins any unnecessary problems and keep his little bits coming. he will get it wrong one day and say something he shouldnt and get binned off. imo of course

[ciderwithtommy]

Sheridan Robins task list day 1

ensure July 4th is booked off for Tory party celebrations 

call Ian Gay and relieve him of his duties 

dust off the corporate comms VHS for Mr Tinnion 

 

[mozo]

1 hour ago, ciderwithtommy said:

Sheridan Robins task list day 1

ensure July 4th is booked off for Tory party celebrations 

call Ian Gay and relieve him of his duties 

dust off the corporate comms VHS for Mr Tinnion 

 

The first of those tasks is definitely the most ridiculous!

[slartibartfast]

2 hours ago, ciderwithtommy said:

Sheridan Robins task list day 1

ensure July 4th is booked off for Tory party celebrations 

call Ian Gay and relieve him of his duties 

dust off the corporate comms VHS for Mr Tinnion 

 

You mean celebrating the last day they're in government, won't have anything to celebrate when the results come through on the 5th  !

[chinapig]

5 hours ago, redsquirrel said:

i get the impression he elaborates on tit bits he gets. eg,makes a tiny bit up to make things sound better. if he was really close to tins chatting about this stuff,he would be keeping his trap shut so as not to cause tins any unnecessary problems and keep his little bits coming. he will get it wrong one day and say something he shouldnt and get binned off. imo of course

Tinnion has shown himself to be perfectly capable of creating his own unnecessary problems. He doesn't need a sidekick to do it for him.

[JAWS]

12 hours ago, Simon bristol said:

Agreed, for us to say, yeah we got 25 million in for Scott, but we wont sign off 3.5 million (or so) for twine when he is your new boss’s first choice and wants to come, but we are supposed to be aiming for the prem,,,tts not a good look!

But SL won't be held to ransom blah blah 

[Lrrr]

2 hours ago, slartibartfast said:

You mean celebrating the last day they're in government, won't have anything to celebrate when the results come through on the 5th  !

It’s for Sunak celebrating that he can go to America 

[redsquirrel]

3 hours ago, chinapig said:

Tinnion has shown himself to be perfectly capable of creating his own unnecessary problems. He doesn't need a sidekick to do it for him.

true ,i should  have mentioned that but i try not to talk about that ....person

[Spike]

People seem to keep talking about the Scott money and Semenyo money but also seem to ignore that the club reported losses of £50 million Chris the 21/22 and 22/23 seasons, we're only allowed to lose £39-40m over 3 seasons so spending when we're only £10m away from the limit and averaging a loss of £25m a season sounds like fans not willing to accept reality. 

We're not in a great financial situation, I'd argue Pearson saved us from being in some serious sh*t and now we're discussing spending a lot of money on Twine. 

It also brings up all the Lansdown hate, I do think he's dejected about the situation but there is also a reason noone wants to buy us, we've not been in the Prem, we don't have a lot of history to make us interesting to buyers and who else is mental enough to pay £25m a season to see achieve midtable?!

I hate the fact we're not going to push for the Prem but I think a lot of the Prem talk is based off of the my of effort made to make us competitive and the top people get caught up in it all. The realism of it all is that we could go out and spend bigger, but we could also then end up breaching FFP and getting a points deduction that sees us go down to League One, just look at some of the teams who have dropped down there in the last 10 years, far bigger clubs than us. I think LJ and Ashton was an eye opener to how bad things can go if you push and fall short, Lansdown is probably thinking once bitten, twice shy. 

[Sir Geoff]

11 minutes ago, Spike said:

People seem to keep talking about the Scott money and Semenyo money but also seem to ignore that the club reported losses of £50 million Chris the 21/22 and 22/23 seasons, we're only allowed to lose £39-40m over 3 seasons so spending when we're only £10m away from the limit and averaging a loss of £25m a season sounds like fans not willing to accept reality. 

We're not in a great financial situation, I'd argue Pearson saved us from being in some serious sh*t and now we're discussing spending a lot of money on Twine. 

It also brings up all the Lansdown hate, I do think he's dejected about the situation but there is also a reason noone wants to buy us, we've not been in the Prem, we don't have a lot of history to make us interesting to buyers and who else is mental enough to pay £25m a season to see achieve midtable?!

I hate the fact we're not going to push for the Prem but I think a lot of the Prem talk is based off of the my of effort made to make us competitive and the top people get caught up in it all. The realism of it all is that we could go out and spend bigger, but we could also then end up breaching FFP and getting a points deduction that sees us go down to League One, just look at some of the teams who have dropped down there in the last 10 years, far bigger clubs than us. I think LJ and Ashton was an eye opener to how bad things can go if you push and fall short, Lansdown is probably thinking once bitten, twice shy. 

Mr Pops will be able to answer you better than me but we are in absolutely no danger of breaching FFP (PSP). We have at least £10 million headroom, so a net spend of £4/5 million spread over 3/4 years is not going to hurt us.

[Major Isewater]

30 minutes ago, Spike said:

People seem to keep talking about the Scott money and Semenyo money but also seem to ignore that the club reported losses of £50 million Chris the 21/22 and 22/23 seasons, we're only allowed to lose £39-40m over 3 seasons so spending when we're only £10m away from the limit and averaging a loss of £25m a season sounds like fans not willing to accept reality. 

We're not in a great financial situation, I'd argue Pearson saved us from being in some serious sh*t and now we're discussing spending a lot of money on Twine. 

It also brings up all the Lansdown hate, I do think he's dejected about the situation but there is also a reason noone wants to buy us, we've not been in the Prem, we don't have a lot of history to make us interesting to buyers and who else is mental enough to pay £25m a season to see achieve midtable?!

I hate the fact we're not going to push for the Prem but I think a lot of the Prem talk is based off of the my of effort made to make us competitive and the top people get caught up in it all. The realism of it all is that we could go out and spend bigger, but we could also then end up breaching FFP and getting a points deduction that sees us go down to League One, just look at some of the teams who have dropped down there in the last 10 years, far bigger clubs than us. I think LJ and Ashton was an eye opener to how bad things can go if you push and fall short, Lansdown is probably thinking once bitten, twice shy. 

It would help if we employed competent people in the first place. Can anyone, hand on heart , say that Jon Lansdown is the best man for the job of chairman ? Or Tinnion the best man available at whatever it is he does ? 
We have had people in place but carelessly lost them. What does that tell you ? 
 

[cidered abroad]

35 minutes ago, Major Isewater said:

It would help if we employed competent people in the first place. Can anyone, hand on heart , say that Jon Lansdown is the best man for the job of chairman ? Or Tinnion the best man available at whatever it is he does ? 
We have had people in place but carelessly lost them. What does that tell you ? 
 

The Lansdown's do not have a clue how to organise and run a Championship football club!

[Simon bristol]

11 minutes ago, cidered abroad said:

The Lansdown's do not have a clue how to organise and run a Championship football club!

Its been shown for 20 odd years.

[Sniper]

11 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

Its been shown for 20 odd years.

Absolutely!

Starting to think now if it's to do with the managers we've had over the years. Pearson probably the most high profile we've had unless I'm missing someone. We'll never know what the outcome would have been if he'd been given some more time and backed financially.

I know he's not everyone's cup of tea, but I'd have loved Warnock in charge, reckon he would have got us into the playoffs, but he's the Lansdown's worst nightmare I'd imagine.

I don't think we'll every get to the Premiership  

[JAWS]

1 hour ago, Spike said:

People seem to keep talking about the Scott money and Semenyo money but also seem to ignore that the club reported losses of £50 million Chris the 21/22 and 22/23 seasons, we're only allowed to lose £39-40m over 3 seasons so spending when we're only £10m away from the limit and averaging a loss of £25m a season sounds like fans not willing to accept reality. 

We're not in a great financial situation, I'd argue Pearson saved us from being in some serious sh*t and now we're discussing spending a lot of money on Twine. 

It also brings up all the Lansdown hate, I do think he's dejected about the situation but there is also a reason noone wants to buy us, we've not been in the Prem, we don't have a lot of history to make us interesting to buyers and who else is mental enough to pay £25m a season to see achieve midtable?!

I hate the fact we're not going to push for the Prem but I think a lot of the Prem talk is based off of the my of effort made to make us competitive and the top people get caught up in it all. The realism of it all is that we could go out and spend bigger, but we could also then end up breaching FFP and getting a points deduction that sees us go down to League One, just look at some of the teams who have dropped down there in the last 10 years, far bigger clubs than us. I think LJ and Ashton was an eye opener to how bad things can go if you push and fall short, Lansdown is probably thinking once bitten, twice shy. 

He's in the wrong job

[M.D]

2 hours ago, Spike said:

It also brings up all the Lansdown hate, I do think he's dejected about the situation but there is also a reason noone wants to buy us, we've not been in the Prem, we don't have a lot of history to make us interesting to buyers and who else is mental enough to pay £25m a season to see achieve midtable?!

I have to disagree with that point.

If SL wants to just sell Ashton gate, and both football teams (men and women) then I would see us as a very attractive proposition for an investor looking at a club with a large catchment area with unlocked potential.

Big IF though and at what price, that may make us unattractive to buy and invest in.

[Scrumpylegs]

I think that what we have to look at is simply whether Scott Twine is worth the 4 million or so that he’ll cost? Difficult question of course and only time will tell. At the end of the day the player will cost the market rate and that is affected by supply and demand. We know that Scott Twine is in demand and the fact that other clubs are interested will push up the price, unfortunately. Whilst 4 million is a lot of money I believe that he’s particularly valuable to us for the following reasons:

We’re not blessed with other players of his type.

He will give us different options and balance the midfield.

He will be dangerous from set pieces and other teams will fear what he is capable of.

We’ve lacked a player to link up midfield and the forwards for a while now - he will provide this.

He will score goals and provide assists.

He’s 24 years old and may still improve over the course of his contract.

Manning has shown in the past that he is able to get the best out of him.

Then again, he could be Kasey Palmer mk2! Would say though, given all the above he’s worth the risk in my opinion.

 

[pj76]

I wouldn't dare to even suggest I was ITK but I was chatting to a city player today and I definitely got the impression they thought he would stay. 

Fully prepared to be wrong.

[View from the Dolman]

If anyone wants an idea of how Burnley are operating, they've just appointed an assistant coach without having a manager/head coach in place. 

https://x.com/BurnleyOfficial/status/1803850336810975539?t=n3ZoRQNpHw6vrG2gxjxkwA&s=19

[Mr Popodopolous]

Not City related except for the Twine bit, but Birmingham as per Nixon set to spend or budget to spend £20m this summer. In League One.

Does their £25m pre tax loss in 2022-23, the fact they seemed to make a 6 month loss despite the Bellingham profit mostly being by December 31 and rise in income and the fact that while income rose 2nd half of season, the Bellingham £11m sell on wasn't repeated- does that all get wiped.

If it is fresh income that gets discounted on return to the Championship save for equity to go to the Upper Loss Limit. If it is financial however Twine is Birmingham bound it sounds like.

Edited June 23 by Mr Popodopolous

[Mr Popodopolous]

Their income will also potentially fall this summer, so too the cost base.

The possible loss on relegation included the Bellingham 8 figure sum.

If we got relegated I very much doubt we would spend £20m or anything close to it. Hell as a Championship club post Covid etc.

[Mr Popodopolous]

League One transfer record fee is reportedly £3m.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Their income will also potentially fall this summer, so too the cost base.

The possible loss on relegation included the Bellingham 8 figure sum.

If we got relegated I very much doubt we would spend £20m or anything close to it. Hell as a Championship club post Covid etc.

Owner equity and SCMP rules is your answer

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, Davefevs said:

Owner equity and SCMP rules is your answer

Thanks. It'll be intriguing as not even Ipswich did this under the Americans. They spent big for League One but not like that..presumably they had an eye on Championship P&S too and their losses at point of takeover were much lower.

[Davefevs]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks. It'll be intriguing as not even Ipswich did this under the Americans. They spent big for League One but not like that..presumably they had an eye on Championship P&S too and their losses at point of takeover were much lower.

But we both know that some journos pump out “£20m transfer budget” headlines without really understanding that it’s not that much if it’s over 4 year contracts.  Wages, maybe, but Brum can cover £20m (£5m amortisation next season) with some owner equity…

…and pray they come straight back up.

[Mr Popodopolous]

7 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

But we both know that some journos pump out “£20m transfer budget” headlines without really understanding that it’s not that much if it’s over 4 year contracts.  Wages, maybe, but Brum can cover £20m (£5m amortisation next season) with some owner equity…

…and pray they come straight back up.

That is true, yeah Wages, Agents Fees, Loan Fees.

I'd like us to go £10m this summer, but maybe covering all it isn't that much. Even £10-15m or would that be excessive.

Back to Birmingham they have been touted to exceed the League One transfer record more than once in the summer, it will be interesting to see.

[TammyAB]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Not City related except for the Twine bit, but Birmingham as per Nixon set to spend or budget to spend £20m this summer. In League One.

Does their £25m pre tax loss in 2022-23, the fact they seemed to make a 6 month loss despite the Bellingham profit mostly being by December 31 and rise in income and the fact that while income rose 2nd half of season, the Bellingham £11m sell on wasn't repeated- does that all get wiped.

If it is fresh income that gets discounted on return to the Championship save for equity to go to the Upper Loss Limit. If it is financial however Twine is Birmingham bound it sounds like.

[ORANGE500]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Not City related except for the Twine bit, but Birmingham as per Nixon set to spend or budget to spend £20m this summer. In League One.

Does their £25m pre tax loss in 2022-23, the fact they seemed to make a 6 month loss despite the Bellingham profit mostly being by December 31 and rise in income and the fact that while income rose 2nd half of season, the Bellingham £11m sell on wasn't repeated- does that all get wiped.

If it is fresh income that gets discounted on return to the Championship save for equity to go to the Upper Loss Limit. If it is financial however Twine is Birmingham bound it sounds like.

I don't know if Twine will be at Ashton Gate this coming season(probably/hopefully )but there is virtually zero expectation he will drop to league one. He is not going to Birmingham. 

[GrahamC]

2 hours ago, View from the Dolman said:

If anyone wants an idea of how Burnley are operating, they've just appointed an assistant coach without having a manager/head coach in place. 

https://x.com/BurnleyOfficial/status/1803850336810975539?t=n3ZoRQNpHw6vrG2gxjxkwA&s=19

Would expect that will have changed by the middle of this week.

[Sir Geoff]

19 minutes ago, ORANGE500 said:

I don't know if Twine will be at Ashton Gate this coming season(probably/hopefully )but there is virtually zero expectation he will drop to league one. He is not going to Birmingham. 

Interested to know why not ? He hasn't exactly set the Championship alight. A move to a bigger club than he is currently at. To a team that is expected to rip up the division next year. Come back  to the Championship as an established member of that successful team, in 12 months time. An increase in wages, not too far from his home. I'm sure a decent CEO at Birmingham would be able to sell that scenario to him.

Either that or plod along in a below mid table Championship side for 12 months instead.

[Mr Popodopolous]

25 minutes ago, TammyAB said:

Thanks, I'm trying to unpick the puzzle. They must be carrying some big losses.

I reckon their 2 year losses to this season barring any late transfers could be £25m we know about and £10-15m to June 2024?

[Spike]

20 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

It would help if we employed competent people in the first place. Can anyone, hand on heart , say that Jon Lansdown is the best man for the job of chairman ? Or Tinnion the best man available at whatever it is he does ? 
We have had people in place but carelessly lost them. What does that tell you ? 
 

At no point have I endorsed that Lansdown is running the club well, in fact I'd be very much in agreement with you but what I did say was that he's pretty much the only person willing to conver our losses year after year, even with all the abuse he gets. I do not think he has the right head for running a football club, but I do not for a second doubt that he loves the club because I can't think of many people who would willingly spend as much as he's spent without asking for anything in return. 

You can dislike the man because he's not turned the club into what we, and he, wants it to be but this whole painting him as some evil waste of space whilst he financially prevents us from being in a huge financial crisis seems very unfair. 

19 hours ago, M.D said:

I have to disagree with that point.

If SL wants to just sell Ashton gate, and both football teams (men and women) then I would see us as a very attractive proposition for an investor looking at a club with a large catchment area with unlocked potential.

Big IF though and at what price, that may make us unattractive to buy and invest in.

We know that he cannot really sell Ashton Gate and both clubs as an asset though, the Rugby is involved, the basketball is involved, that's why I think it's such a hard sell to make. 

We talk catchment areas a lot too but the realism is that doesn't help if you can't spend too raise the clubs position to maximise from that area. Lansdown has turned Ashton Gate into a beautiful stadium, given us incredible training facilities and invested tons into making the club more appealing to the players but the ultimate factor that makes that area worth anything is success. A new owner can buy with all the potential in the world but when we're operating at a loss they can't invest in a manner that makes us competitive whilst FFP exists. 

As a buyer I'd be insanely impressed with our facilities, with almost everything to do with the club but the key things that would prevent me are the inability to spend big due to FFP. We simply cannot just throw money at a promotion push and hope it pays off before FFP catches up with us, the gamble simply isn't worth it when you look at some of the clubs we'd need to compete with and the parachute payments of some clubs too. A new owner could take that gamble but if it failed the realism is that you're more likely to end up in League one rebuilding than you are to reach the Premier League. 

 

21 hours ago, Sir Geoff said:

Mr Pops will be able to answer you better than me but we are in absolutely no danger of breaching FFP (PSP). We have at least £10 million headroom, so a net spend of £4/5 million spread over 3/4 years is not going to hurt us.

So here is what I'm saying, in 22/23 we lost £22m, in 21/22 we lost £28.5m meaning we're averaging around £25m loss a season. The 23/24 season just finished meaning we've reached the 3 year rolling point of needing to be under £40m loss over 3 years. So prior to this season we were at a loss of £50.5m, we sold Semenyo for £9-11m depending on add ons, so let's say that puts us at a loss of £40m, then we take the Alex Scott sale that was reported as £25m, we're now at a loss of £15m and everyone thinks we have money to spend, but remember we're operating at a loss of £25m a season average so we add on this seasons loss, only because we went from £28.5m to £22m we'll be generous and only say we lost £20m this season, that puts us at £35m loss over 3 seasons making us complient with FFP. 

Now comes the issue, if we spend that £5m we're already an extra £5m down going into next season where we actually have more wriggle room but also less assets to sell. We certainly don't have £35m coming from 2 players meaning our saving grace of selling Semenyo, Scott and Pearson working wonders on a shoestring budget is not going to save us again. The simple fact is that we have wriggle room at this very moment but had we not made those sales we'd be up shit creek which is probably why Scott was pushed out of the door whilst Pearson had no say, it was simply a case of sell or face financial crisis. 

Going forward we have less assets to sell, we're still operating at a loss and any big investments that do not pay off could be the undoing of our financial stability. I get that our fans want us to compete, I'm starting to think I may be dead before we make the Premier League but I also understand that playing a gamble by spending beyond our means is terrible odds and more likely to end in relegation than it is promotion. 

For me, our only chance is to buy low and sell high which means our real investment should be in identifying talent before others, our investment should be in better scouting or creating ties with Premier League clubs who are willing to sell excess talent to us with option to buy from us in future deals. We simply can't take the throw money and hope it sticks approach. 

 

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, Spike said:

We know that he cannot really sell Ashton Gate and both clubs as an asset though, the Rugby is involved, the basketball is involved, that's why I think it's such a hard sell to make. 

Price whichever bit(s) accordingly and it will sell.

The business is already split into separate legal entities, you can sell whichever bits you want / someone else wants.

[Major Isewater]

7 minutes ago, Spike said:

You can dislike the man because he's not turned the club into what we, and he, wants it to be but this whole painting him as some evil waste of space whilst he financially prevents us from being in a huge financial crisis seems very unfair. 

I don’t dislike SL. He seems a decent enough chap. 

I do dislike the  ‘ it’s my club’ and I do what I want which alienated him from a big percentage of supporters and shows a stunning arrogance and contempt towards those who make the club what it is . Without the fans there are no football clubs. 
He has been more of an asset than a negative during his tenure but now we are listing as he has replaced good professionals in their sphere with , I’ll be kind , less experienced managers who don’t give the impression of being at the necessary level in the increasingly cutthroat football industry. 
The financial deficits have , in large measure, been down to his own bad or unlucky decisions, COVID apart. so it’s only right that he should assume responsibility. After all as he himself said it’s his club. 
Without Uncle Steve there would still be a Bristol City Football Club and there will be long after him and us are released from this mortal coil. 
 

[George Rs]

3 hours ago, ORANGE500 said:

I don't know if Twine will be at Ashton Gate this coming season(probably/hopefully )but there is virtually zero expectation he will drop to league one. He is not going to Birmingham. 

Not sure about that tbf, would be a very interesting move but not an obvious no go. 

At no point in his career has Twine looked like a complete championship player. He has some very nice technicals and his set pieces are brilliant, however he still lacks in other areas.

Going to a clearly wealthy Birmingham side in league one, who are willing to spend might not be the worst idea for him personally. Wouldn’t be a very big wage difference between the two clubs, at a level he can shine at and in Brums mind help them come straight back up and emulate what Ipswich did this season.

Obviously saying and doing it are very different things but that’s quite a glamorous proposal compared to coming to a perennially midtable championship side. 

[Davefevs]

24 minutes ago, George Rs said:

Not sure about that tbf, would be a very interesting move but not an obvious no go. 

At no point in his career has Twine looked like a complete championship player. He has some very nice technicals and his set pieces are brilliant, however he still lacks in other areas.

Going to a clearly wealthy Birmingham side in league one, who are willing to spend might not be the worst idea for him personally. Wouldn’t be a very big wage difference between the two clubs, at a level he can shine at and in Brums mind help them come straight back up and emulate what Ipswich did this season.

Obviously saying and doing it are very different things but that’s quite a glamorous proposal compared to coming to a perennially midtable championship side. 

Yep.

Exhibit A: Sam Morsy (and he had far greater pedigree than Twine)

[Simon bristol]

4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Yep.

Exhibit A: Sam Morsy (and he had far greater pedigree than Twine)

Yes, pay any footballer x amount per week and he would sign for anyone,, a rebuilding birmingham in league 1 on 20 grand a week for 3 years would probably have some appeal!

[Spike]

56 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

Yes, pay any footballer x amount per week and he would sign for anyone,, a rebuilding birmingham in league 1 on 20 grand a week for 3 years would probably have some appeal!

I agree, I don't think Brum will be down there long, they'll be able to offer more to him and most of all he's confident at walking that level which means his profile raises as he shines. The only negative for him is that if he wants to push on from a footballing point of view it's a step back, but what's his alternative? Sign with us, probably end up mid table and that's if Burnley will even allow him to go to a team in the same league as them, I certainly don't see them allowing that unless we're offering them a very good deal. 

At the moment I have to think Brum is the move he'd choose unless he's happy here and we can agree a deal that suits Burnley and judging by no deal appearing to be close I'd hazard guess we're not willing to pay what they want and they're unwilling to lower the price with a team they'll be playing. 

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

3 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

Without Uncle Steve there would still be a Bristol City Football Club and there will be long after him and us are released from this mortal coil. 
 

I admire your optimism, but I think it’s only a matter of time before an established league club goes bust, and one going might create a domino effect.