The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 26th August 2017

nedley · Aug 28, 2017

robertgoulet said:
Hercules mentioned it a day or two ago. Said we have to keep a tight net spend but starting next year it's on.

I'm not sure why we can't be a little bit more flexible and borrow against projected income.

I'm not talking about doing a Leeds...

stevenurse · Aug 28, 2017

Why doesn't the hercules stuff go in the RO?

nailsy · Aug 28, 2017

coy-spurs1882 said:
i am quite confused about this too but i guess banks treat football clubs differently as the business profile of a football club is different to a manufacturing company or a retailing company. they may consider the transfer spending as a significant figure when they judge a football club's profitability and liquidity, most importantly, the ability to repay the loan and interest, since transfer of football players involve millions of pounds which is rarely seen in other industries[/QUOTE]

I'm not sure that's true. Developing new products usually costs millions in many industries. I'm not sure if the banks specifically would have said that we need a net zero spend, or if we just needed to stay profitable over that period.

brasil_spur · Aug 28, 2017

U.S. Spurs Fan said:
My guess is that Poch wants Martial who would be a true difference maker. Levy obviously won't pay up because it would probably cost around 50-60 million and that would be too much spending for what we have sold. So is Hercules saying that Levy has a choice - pay up for someone like Martial and make Poch happy or be cheap as usual and watch Poch start to get antsy and look at other places.

I'm not sure Poch can realistically expect Utd to sell Martial. Frankly the only way I see it happening is if we sell them Rose and Utd signing Perisic, neither of which look on the cards right now.

However I do feel that there are other players out there we could sign that Poch would be happy with, but these players need to be actively targeted and deals closed quickly, which we haven't yet done.

I actually rate Benteke, he's been playing in fairly shite Palace team lately. But I wouldn't want us to sign him.

nailsy · Aug 28, 2017

stevenurse said:
Why doesn't the hercules stuff go in the RO?

He's asked for it to be kept out.

A&C confirmed his source has been verified.

kernowspurscoach1977 · Aug 28, 2017

coy-spurs1882 said:
i agree that the players (and poch) should be responsible for the awful performances in last two games, but DL should also be blamed for not getting the transfers done before the season starts, this should be separately considered.
considering poch got us 2nd and 3rd in the league, i don't think "get what poch wants" is a harsh expectation to DL, do you?

Do you think we were awful against chelski?

I didn't

stevenurse · Aug 28, 2017

nailsy said:
He's asked for it to be kept out.

A&C confirmed his source has been verified.

Ah OK. Wasn't doubting, just thought it was weird

Hawkey77 · Aug 28, 2017

lukespurs7 said:
Watching MITD2 Willian, Mane, Salah all the type of player we need.

How many times in recent years have fans of City, Arsenal, Pool etc watched MOTD and said "Kane/Eriksen/Dele/Toby etc are exactly what we need."? We've a sensational side full of top top players, don't lose your shit cos of an inevitably slow start. It'll come good, it always does with Poch.

brasil_spur · Aug 28, 2017

Everlasting Seconds said:
I think it sounds very strange that a bank would specify demands about net transfer spends. Demands about income, expenditure and profit in general, sure, but for transfers specifically sounds strange. Especially given the large annual profit of late.

Well profit comes from net transfer spend really. The biggest costs of clubs like Chelsea, Utd, Liverpool and City are players - both transfer fees and wages. So net spend in transfers feeds directly into healthy club profits and also shows the banks a level of maturity in our approach to finances, I.e. We won't do a Leeds with our new stadium financing.

arunspurs · Aug 28, 2017

People say they would rather want Janssen to stay than buying Benteke. From what I have seen, Poch doesn't trust Janssen. Even when we are dropping points, Janssen isn't being called up. Janssen has played 1 minute in 1st 3 games. And I don't think he touched the ball in that minute.

It is pretty clear Poch wants another one in forward department. But question is who ? I can't see where this pacy forward in the market who is 'on sale' & conforms to our current week wage structure.

I am skeptical with the forward scenario. Only way thats going to happen is
a) We pay huge money for someone
b) We get someone good on loan from a team that don't need the player now.

We have 4 days to go in transfer window. I just want the deals done for Aurier, Barkley for starters to get some freshness into squad before dreaming about the forwards

Danners9 · Aug 28, 2017

arunspurs said:
People say they would rather want Janssen to stay than buying Benteke. From what I have seen, Poch doesn't trust Janssen. Even when we are dropping points, Janssen isn't being called up. Janssen has played 1 minute in 1st 3 games. And I don't think he touched the ball in that minute.

I am skeptical with the forward scenario. Only way thats going to happen is
a) We pay huge money for someone
b) We get someone good on loan from a team that don't need the player now.

I'd rather neither Benteke or Janssen. Not keen on Benteke for us, and the fee would be massive anyway, and Janssen seems to be the forgotten man.

Your scenario A would require the groundwork to be well on the way, and maybe it is - we have read a few snippets about that - but whoever it is will either come in as backup to Kane or a sub for Alli/Eriksen, or into the only starting position up for grabs at the moment, where Son/Sissoko have been starting recently. Scenario B leads to Origi at the moment and that doesn't set the pulses racing either.

SpursDave88 · Aug 28, 2017

Hawkey77 said:
How many times in recent years have fans of City, Arsenal, Pool etc watched MOTD and said "Kane/Eriksen/Dele/Toby etc are exactly what we need."? We've a sensational side full of top top players, don't lose your shit cos of an inevitably slow start. It'll come good, it always does with Poch.

I'm sorry, why is a slow start inevitable - we are already 5 points worse of than last year over the same set of fixtures. Chelsea won 30 of their 38 matches last season to win the league. So far we have failed to win two out of three.

Danners9 · Aug 28, 2017

Harry Barber said:
I hope whoever comes in will leapfrog Eriksen. That guy seriously needs some completion for his place and a kick up the arse.

Competition across the front line would be great, but also expensive.

absolute bobbins · Aug 28, 2017

Everlasting Seconds said:
I think it sounds very strange that a bank would specify demands about net transfer spends. Demands about income, expenditure and profit in general, sure, but for transfers specifically sounds strange. Especially given the large annual profit of late.

it sounds strange because it’s bollocks

viktorviktor · Aug 28, 2017

absolute bobbins said:
it sounds strange because it’s bollocks

Not so. Banks will look at different asset classes as more or less risky. Players must be one of the most risky assets you can invest in. They can get injured, their contract can run out, the market for players might fold. I could see a bank telling the club not to over commit to risky assets while undertaking risks related to building a stadium.

chaching · Aug 28, 2017

viktorviktor said:
Not so. Banks will look at different asset classes as more or less risky. Players must be one of the most risky assets you can invest in. They can get injured, their contract can run out, the market for players might fold. I could see a bank telling the club not to over commit to risky assets while undertaking risks related to building a stadium.

Correct they would also probably be looking for a certain amount of positive cash flow and with the large value of transfers that would be one of the easiest ways of managing cash flows.

Deleted member 22380 · Aug 28, 2017

alexis said:
Looks like
Aurier
Sanchez
Sancho
Foyth
Barkley
And that would be a fuck up for you, really ?

Yes. Because all of them apart from Aurier should of been done before the season starts.

worcestersauce · Aug 28, 2017

The Big E Train said:
Yes. Because all of them apart from Aurier should of been done before the season starts.

Aurier's appeal hadn't gone through before the season started Sancho hadn't decided to leave City before the season started PSG hadn't given up on Foyth before the season started and Everton wouldn't sell Barkley before the season started.

Gb160 · Aug 28, 2017

worcestersauce said:
Aurier's appeal hadn't gone through before the season started Sancho hadn't decided to leave City before the season started PSG hadn't given up on Foyth before the season started and Everton wouldn't sell Barkley before the season started.

Yeah but apart from them...

shelfmonkey · Aug 28, 2017

Hawkey77 said:
How many times in recent years have fans of City, Arsenal, Pool etc watched MOTD and said "Kane/Eriksen/Dele/Toby etc are exactly what we need."? We've a sensational side full of top top players, don't lose your shit cos of an inevitably slow start. It'll come good, it always does with Poch.

Normally I would agree with that, but something seems different this season already.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 26th August 2017

John Duncan's Love Child

Palacios' neck fat

SC Supporter

SC Supporter

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

Palacios' neck fat

Well-Known Member

SC Supporter

Well-Known Member

Available on a Free Transfer

Well-Known Member

Available on a Free Transfer

Am Yisrael Chai

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 22380

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope

Well done boys. Good process

Weird is different, different is interesting.

Similar threads