• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

ENIC

braineclipse said:
Trying to see if an acceptable deal can be done for a "top bracket player" and having other targets in place if that deal can't be reached is a bad thing?
Click to expand...

Lol depends on the alternative ... but the jackpot with kulu but can't think of any others
 
Gazza said:
Lol depends on the alternative ... but the jackpot with kulu but can't think of any others
Click to expand...

Of course. On the DoF/transfer committee to identify the right targets.

But I don't want us to stop trying to sign players we may not be able to sign. What's the alternative? Just having way more money to spend? Or not trying to make ambitious deals.
 
Thought before the January window we could trust that the manager/DoF would be backed. Within reason, not a massive spending spree. But backed with a couple of signings and a solid "net spend".

Didn't think we'd fix all our problems, but take some steps in the right direction. As we've been trying to do in most recent transfer window.

Imo Levy/ENIC lived up to that expectation. Two players, solid net spend, backing the manager and DoF within reason.
 
braineclipse said:
Thought before the January window we could trust that the manager/DoF would be backed. Within reason, not a massive spending spree. But backed with a couple of signings and a solid "net spend".

Didn't think we'd fix all our problems, but take some steps in the right direction. As we've been trying to do in most recent transfer window.

Imo Levy/ENIC lived up to that expectation. Two players, solid net spend, backing the manager and DoF within reason.
Click to expand...

Ally gold said at the beginning of the window the plan was to bring in an attacker and a rwb. We did that.
 
braineclipse said:
Thought before the January window we could trust that the manager/DoF would be backed. Within reason, not a massive spending spree. But backed with a couple of signings and a solid "net spend".

Didn't think we'd fix all our problems, but take some steps in the right direction. As we've been trying to do in most recent transfer window.

Imo Levy/ENIC lived up to that expectation. Two players, solid net spend, backing the manager and DoF within reason.
Click to expand...
Why would anyone think differently unless they have an agenda, or are just plain stupid?
 
braineclipse said:
Thought before the January window we could trust that the manager/DoF would be backed. Within reason, not a massive spending spree. But backed with a couple of signings and a solid "net spend".

Didn't think we'd fix all our problems, but take some steps in the right direction. As we've been trying to do in most recent transfer window.

Imo Levy/ENIC lived up to that expectation. Two players, solid net spend, backing the manager and DoF within reason.
Click to expand...

Err...our net spend was 5m quid.

'Solid net spend'?

I think we were the fourth-lowest net spenders across the 20 PL sides in January (iirc), so doesn't quite stack up.

We punted Porro's fee into the summer (when we will also have to pay for Kulu), and we only have an option to buy in Danjuma.

And we waited 31 days to do even that business. To me it looked like we just did what we always do - opportunistically looked for deals and then spent ages negotiating them down while dropping points in the interval.

And as Conte continually points out, that has to change. This club cannot act like that and expect to win things, abandoning on-field results to negotiate endlessly over 5p.

Fair enough, it got us Porro in the end, which makes this a 6/10 window. But I'd say it isn't the sort of statement of intent that we needed.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Err...our net spend was 5m quid.

'Solid net spend'?

I think we were the fourth-lowest net spenders across the 20 PL sides in January (iirc), so doesn't quite stack up.

We punted Porro's fee into the summer (when we will also have to pay for Kulu), and we only have an option to buy in Danjuma.

And we waited 31 days to do even that business. To me it looked like we just did what we always do - opportunistically looked for deals and then spent ages negotiating them down while dropping points in the interval.

And as Conte continually points out, that has to change. This club cannot act like that and expect to win things, abandoning on-field results to negotiate endlessly over 5p.

Fair enough, it got us Porro in the end, which makes this a 6/10 window. But I'd say it isn't the sort of statement of intent that we needed.
Click to expand...

Conte has got 11 players and ~£280M in committed spend in a season and half (one summer window), if the player is here, why would it matter when/timing we pay for them?

What more intent do you expect? matching Chelsea?
 
Raziel said:
Conte has got 11 players and ~£280M in committed spend in a season and half (one summer window), if the player is here, why would it matter when/timing we pay for them?

What more intent do you expect? matching Chelsea?
Click to expand...

Well, I'm responding to @braineclipse's point about January, specifically - that it was a 'solid net spend'.

It wasn't, relative to (almost) everyone else, who spent more than we did.

As for matching Chelsea, yeah, I'd give an awful lot for that, but I know it's impossible, sadly. Coulda been us too, since Boehly wanted to buy us but was rebuffed by ENIC.

Failing that, though, I'd say 'if the player is here' is the key point in your argument for me - yes, the player got here, on Jan 31, when we were badly in need of him throughout the month - but who knows how our limp losses to Arse, City and Villa might have gone if he was indeed here on Jan 1.

At this end of the league, time spent haggling is time lost and points dropped. We've never learned that as a club, and probably never will.
 
Raziel said:
Conte has got 11 players and ~£280M in committed spend in a season and half (one summer window), if the player is here, why would it matter when/timing we pay for them?

What more intent do you expect? matching Chelsea?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't bother.

'Time well spent' is the personal initiative to focus on here.
 
Someone did a history of all transfer compilation

9bqjpa8t1kfa1.png
 
Raziel said:
It's supposed to be from current to as far back as we have data (think it's sourced off transfermarket), for us that's 889 transfers in, 871 out.

A look basically shows the data gets extremely spotty pre about 1991
Click to expand...

We seem about in the right place for net spend then? Possibly a few spots higher.
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
What a huge club United are, manage to have a massive net deficit (up there with the dopers) despite all the interest payments and money the Glaziers bleed out of them.
Click to expand...

United are a completely different animal

If you took out the leveraged debt they got saddled with, the interest they have paid and the owner dividends, what they could have spent is absolutely another level
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back