Erasmus wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 6:17 pm

Interesting point about the promotion under Coyle and whether it was a gamble. I think what actually happened was the Brendan Flood came forward with significant financial support, which we accepted and used. Then subsequently the financial crash ruined some of Brendan's business interests leaving us to repay loans as demanded by the administrator. So at the time it wasn't so much of a gamble as no one could foresee the financial problems that caused us such problems.

It was a gamble because he used his business for the loans not his own personal wealth - I would be interested to hear from anyone who can point me to such an instance that hasn't resulted in problems in the medium term, happy to be corrected with genuine examples in English football all the recent examples I am aware of have ended in administration or in the case of Bury worse.

randomclaret2 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 5:11 pm

Maybe the question to ask is where would we be if we hadnt taken that chance and hadnt gone up that year ?

Agreed, I’d argue that everything that has happened since has been positively influenced by that gamble.

And however we look at it, the kidney was in the form of a loan so needed paying back.

arise_sir_charge wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 7:50 pm

Agreed, I’d argue that everything that has happened since has been positively influenced by that gamble.

And however we look at it, the kidney was in the form of a loan so needed paying back.

Yes it worked out for us and looking back it was good for the club.
But we got very lucky.
We went up through the play offs....deservedly so I accept.

If the fans would have been presented with a scenario that without promotion we would go into administration and start the next season with a 12 point deduction and the associated fire sale of players that comes with administration I am not sure how many would have thought it was an acceptable gamble for the club. It’s very likely we would have been relegated to the first division.

I know this is all ifs and buts but that doesn’t mean it was an acceptable gamble. We often point to the wreckless behaviour of other clubs and whilst we aren’t talking the silly amounts of debt at Bolton etc without promotion we would have been in situation of not being able to repay Modus and nobody on the board able to put in further investment.

Chester, I think that may be hindsight speaking. It would have been hard for the other board members to refuse Brendan Flood's offers at a time when there seemed little risk attached to them. In 2007/08 everyone seemed to presume that the strong economy would just go on and on.

Erasmus wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:46 pm

Chester, I think that may be hindsight speaking. It would have been hard for the other board members to refuse Brendan Flood's offers at a time when there seemed little risk attached to them. In 2007/08 everyone seemed to presume that the strong economy would just go on and on.

Strong economies NEVER go on and on. Every empire fails once complacency sets in.

TVC15 wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 8:31 pm

Yes it worked out for us and looking back it was good for the club.
But we got very lucky.
We went up through the play offs....deservedly so I accept.

If the fans would have been presented with a scenario that without promotion we would go into administration and start the next season with a 12 point deduction and the associated fire sale of players that comes with administration I am not sure how many would have thought it was an acceptable gamble for the club. It’s very likely we would have been relegated to the first division.

I know this is all ifs and buts but that doesn’t mean it was an acceptable gamble. We often point to the wreckless behaviour of other clubs and whilst we aren’t talking the silly amounts of debt at Bolton etc without promotion we would have been in situation of not being able to repay Modus and nobody on the board able to put in further investment.

I don’t know TVC15, that works both ways. If you’d told fans we are going to take this risk, but if it works we will get promoted, spend 6 of the next ten years in the top flight, have a team containing England internationals, spend comparative millions on players, beat Blackburn every time we play them, have a season in the UEFA cup and beat some of the best teams in the land along the way, I reckon a few would have said “go on then”.

arise_sir_charge wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 10:12 pm

I don’t know TVC15, that works both ways. If you’d told fans we are going to take this risk, but if it works we will get promoted, spend 6 of the next ten years in the top flight, have a team containing England internationals, spend comparative millions on players, beat Blackburn every time we play them, have a season in the UEFA cup and beat some of the best teams in the land along the way, I reckon a few would have said “go on then”.

Haha - I ain’t knocking it really. Been the best of times for me as as a supporter of more than 40 years and travelling away and watching us lose at some horrible grounds (though to be honest like most Burnley fans I enjoyed that too !!)

But I think the point I was making is in that particular season we did pretty much gamble with the livelihood of the club - we definitely did not do that with all the subsequent promotions or maintaining our position in the premier league. We had a massive slice of luck in going up and avoiding what would have been a financial disaster. We’ll take that luck - as fans we deserved it !!

Back to transfers

Liverpool now looking to loan out Wilson

When we got promoted 4 or 5 years ago, and someone said to you that we will remain in the PL for 5 years and we were to spend £1m in our most important window when the PL clubs spent £1.25 billion what would you have said

Ooooooh! Fancy that!

jojomk1 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 8:30 am

Back to transfers

Liverpool now looking to loan out Wilson

That can now only be to a championship club.

Will be interesting to see if that's only until January or for the whole season.
Wonder what Liverpool and the lad are feeling now, could have had a fee and/or playing in the premier league.

MACCA wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:10 am

Will be interesting to see if that's only until January or for the whole season.
Wonder what Liverpool and the lad are feeling now, could have had a fee and/or playing in the premier league.

Not included in their Champions League squad so shows just how much they don't rate him
And still, they wanted big money - glad we kept away from that deal

Erasmus wrote: ↑

Thu Oct 08, 2020 9:46 pm

Chester, I think that may be hindsight speaking. It would have been hard for the other board members to refuse Brendan Flood's offers at a time when there seemed little risk attached to them. In 2007/08 everyone seemed to presume that the strong economy would just go on and on.

There were people questioning it at the time, I remember being one of them. The trouble with property businesses is that they are often like a house of cards and if one part gets in trouble they all fall down.

Given that Wilson is still at Liverpool it's fairly clear that they overvalued him. Will be interesting to see what happens with him eventually.

jojomk1 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:39 am

Not included in their Champions League squad so shows just how much they don't rate him
And still, they wanted big money - glad we kept away from that deal

I agree. Sounds like Liverpool were trying to take the p1ss and we decided it wasn't go to work.

aggi wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:52 am

Given that Wilson is still at Liverpool it's fairly clear that they overvalued him. Will be interesting to see what happens with him eventually.

One of those situations that could go really wrong for him and Liverpool. If he moves to a team that doesn’t suit his style/he performs poorly, he’s going to end up losing any interest from Prem teams, so big pressure on him now. For Liverpool that means any fee dropping to the low millions.

Could tear it up of course, but still not sure that would see his value increase much beyond what we agreed to pay?

No idea what went on, but if it’s true we offered a total of £16m, I think Liverpool were very very foolish to turn it down. Or not changing it to a loan with an option to buy when the Tarks deal fell through.

Well he's not going to tear it up at Liverpool as it looks like he won't be given enough chance to do that.

Which means come January, he probably won't have played any/many minutes.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:03 am

I agree. Sounds like Liverpool were trying to take the p1ss and we decided it wasn't go to work.

Another scenario is that we had an agreement in principle but we dropped out when the Tarks deal fell through.

Might’ve expected Liverpool to understand that situation though and offer a loan with an option/obligation to buy.

Think a Prem loan would ultimately be better for his value than a Championship loan move, and sure he’d prefer it, so good for all parties.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:11 am

Another scenario is that we had an agreement in principle but we dropped out when the Tarks deal fell through.

Might’ve expected Liverpool to understand that situation though and offer a loan with an option/obligation to buy.

Think a Prem loan would ultimately be better for his value than a Championship loan move, and sure he’d prefer it, so good for all parties.

Possibly. And yes, not sure what Liverpool would have lost my loaning him out. We pay a % of his fee and we put him in the shop window for Liverpool. Again, they may have tried to get us to pay a large loan fee.

Can we start a new thread, maybe talking about transfers?

burnley007 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:18 am

Can we start a new thread, maybe talking about transfers?

Which ones would those be?

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:14 am

Possibly. And yes, not sure what Liverpool would have lost my loaning him out. We pay a % of his fee and we put him in the shop window for Liverpool. Again, they may have tried to get us to pay a large loan fee.

Yep, quite likely. Although we were paid a £2m loan fee for Gibson, so maybe £2-3m is not unreasonable? With the sum deducted from end transfer if concluded. I think that’d have been fair.

Obviously something went on but it seems a bad outcome for him/Liverpool as much as us that no agreement was reached.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:11 am

Another scenario is that we had an agreement in principle but we dropped out when the Tarks deal fell through.

Might’ve expected Liverpool to understand that situation though and offer a loan with an option/obligation to buy.

Think a Prem loan would ultimately be better for his value than a Championship loan move, and sure he’d prefer it, so good for all parties.

It's a possibility the loan option wasn't explored, Liverpool preferred him sold & we wanted to buy him outright but the valuations didn't match, now Liverpool have no other choice sticking to there rigid valuation & no takers other than to loan him out to alleviate the wage burden, that's what I personally think the situation is.

jojomk1 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 10:39 am

Not included in their Champions League squad so shows just how much they don't rate him
And still, they wanted big money - glad we kept away from that deal

Not sure that not being included in Liverpool's Champions League squad means they don't rate him, it just means that the current champions of England and recent European Champions believe they have better players in his position which they do and which is why he doesn't play very often.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 11:27 am

It's a possibility the loan option wasn't explored, Liverpool preferred him sold & we wanted to buy him outright but the valuations didn't match, now Liverpool have no other choice sticking to there rigid valuation & no takers other than to loan him out to alleviate the wage burden, that's what I personally think the situation is.

If that were the case & there was no other reason, Liverpool really shot themselves in the foot. There’s no way he will play given signings of Thiago & Jota. And there’s no way a Championship club will be able to cover his reported wages. Same with Shaqiri, was expecting he would leave for the same reason.

jojomk1 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 8:30 am

Back to transfers

Liverpool now looking to loan out Wilson

So why were we not in for a loan with an option to buy ??????

Wasn't that because Pool were playing hard ball and wanted him off their books and £15-20million in their bank and were not wanting to loan him. Now they have little option unless any team in the lower divisions can afford the transfer fee and match his present salary

BOYSIE31 wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 1:17 pm

So why were we not in for a loan with an option to buy ??????

Because we were told we have no money, and we were needing to sell before we could buy.

Tarky going may have meant we could have brought in 2 or 3, that didnt happen so SD stated we wouldn't be bringing anyone in.

I'm sure he mentioned it Thursday before the window shut Monday, that he thought that was it, no incomings for us.

MACCA wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 1:23 pm

Because we were told we have no money, and we were needing to sell before we could buy.

Tarky going may have meant we could have brought in 2 or 3, that didnt happen so SD stated we wouldn't be bringing anyone in.

I'm sure he mentioned it Thursday before the window shut Monday, that he thought that was it, no incomings for us.

Which you'd expect basically rules out anything before the next deadline, too.

Wasn't the Danny Ings transfer to Southampton something similar? A Southampton fan told me that he was on loan for a year with a guarantee that they would buy him for 18 million at the end of the season. He did ok in his first year but I think quite a lot of their would have been happy to see him go back after the first season. I don't think they see it that way now.

I can't see the Burnley board saddling themselves with a promise to pay anyone millions in the future.

Yesterday MediaPro who buy the rights for L1 in France have refused to make their October payment, as advertising revenues have gone through the floor they want to renegotiate the TV rights package. Something similar in England could see clubs losing millions. It'll be interesting to see how many clubs will fall foul of the FFP rules in the current climate.

arise_sir_charge wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 12:36 pm

Not sure that not being included in Liverpool's Champions League squad means they don't rate him, it just means that the current champions of England and recent European Champions believe they have better players in his position which they do and which is why he doesn't play very often.

They rated him so much they were willing to let him go if we had come up and met their high/unrealistic demands

Plus, if he was that good, how come nobody else signed him on

Bournemouth/Derby/Swansea on loan maybe

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 1:10 pm

If that were the case & there was no other reason, Liverpool really shot themselves in the foot. There’s no way he will play given signings of Thiago & Jota. And there’s no way a Championship club will be able to cover his reported wages. Same with Shaqiri, was expecting he would leave for the same reason.

Regarding covering his wages there’s no guarantee we would have been able to without negotiating a reduction, 1 thing during the negotiations which was noticeable apparently when the deal stalled & the club walked away 24hrs later media outlets were reporting that Liverpool had dropped there asking price but did we go back to work out a compromise meet in the middle so to speak, the valuation disparity was hugh despite whichever source you choose to believe or disbelieve.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 1:51 pm

Which you'd expect basically rules out anything before the next deadline, too.

Well the Newcastle display, or lack of it, could have forced a small gamble you'd hope.

Also I'm sure we would have been making sure all the internationals came back fully fit, whilst using the extra time to see how Mee, Lowton and the other walking wounded progressed injury wise.

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 2:27 pm

Regarding covering his wages there’s no guarantee we would have been able to without negotiating a reduction, 1 thing during the negotiations which was noticeable apparently when the deal stalled & the club walked away 24hrs later media outlets were reporting that Liverpool had dropped there asking price but did we go back to work out a compromise meet in the middle so to speak, the valuation disparity was hugh despite whichever source you choose to believe or disbelieve.

I think the most likely situation was that we were negotiating, were a way off Liverpools valuation and when Tarks fell through we walked away as were clearly not going to be able to reach agreement. Probably not Liverpool being greedy, or our fault, really. Albeit I think Liverpool would've been better agreeing a loan to us than Championship in terms of preserving his value.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 1:51 pm

Which you'd expect basically rules out anything before the next deadline, too.

Depends if that deal was always expected to be additive to anything else in the pipeline - i.e. Dawson. If so, there may still be some hope, but those deals were prioritised.

NewClaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 2:56 pm

I think the most likely situation was that we were negotiating, were a way off Liverpools valuation and when Tarks fell through we walked away as were clearly not going to be able to reach agreement. Probably not Liverpool being greedy, or our fault, really. Albeit I think Liverpool would've been better agreeing a loan to us than Championship in terms of preserving his value.

On a loan vs loan & the PL vs championship of course the value would have been preserved if not increased but as I already stated Liverpool wanted to sell him only & the club wanted to buy him only, at that point in time the loan wasn’t a option it’s a option now because it’s only thing Liverpool can do because nobody is willing to meet their set valuation. You say Liverpool would have been better off loaning him to us or another PL side [I agree 100%] I don’t think you are grasping nobody wanted him on a loan basis, whatever was happening with tarks was irrelevant because we wasn’t even in for a defender we’d actually let 1 go to Norwich & West Ham couldn’t afford JT & Leicester by then were in advanced talks on the brink of signing somebody else which has now been completed.

dibraidio wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 2:11 pm

...

Yesterday MediaPro who buy the rights for L1 in France have refused to make their October payment, as advertising revenues have gone through the floor they want to renegotiate the TV rights package. Something similar in England could see clubs losing millions. It'll be interesting to see how many clubs will fall foul of the FFP rules in the current climate.

We've already had similar in the Premier League with the Chinese rightsholder, PPTV, pulling out. Think that has cost us £7m or so and probably double that in the upcoming seasons.

dibraidio wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 2:11 pm

Yesterday MediaPro who buy the rights for L1 in France have refused to make their October payment, as advertising revenues have gone through the floor they want to renegotiate the TV rights package. Something similar in England could see clubs losing millions. It'll be interesting to see how many clubs will fall foul of the FFP rules in the current climate.

much much more than that going on between Mediapro and the French Ligue - I have been posting about it for months on the MMT thread and I started by saying that it reminded me of itv digital and we know how that went

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 5:22 pm

much much more than that going on between Mediapro and the French Ligue - I have been posting about it for months on the MMT thread and I started by saying that it reminded me of itv digital and we know how that went

No wonder Mike Garlick is being ultra careful with the cheque book

jtv wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 5:43 pm

No wonder Mike Garlick is being ultra careful with the cheque book

Big difference between ultra careful and superglued shut

Presumably some of the ST/matchday revenue loss will now be offset by the PPV income?

I see Lansbury might be available. Pity that window closed a few days ago.
https://www.footballinsider247.com/thre ... next-week/

warksclaret wrote: ↑

Fri Oct 09, 2020 9:54 am

When we got promoted 4 or 5 years ago, and someone said to you that we will remain in the PL for 5 years...what would you have said

Just enjoy the season and stop talking ********.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football ... e-22806143

Sturridge RW?

It's not surprising that with less than one week left of the EFL transfer window, that is usually our main market, this thread and any mention of links with any other players has gone completely cold.

This is going to be a long, hard season. Especially if we don't get investment before January.

A bit on Dawson. Watford actively trying to offload him...

https://the72.co.uk/196183/watford-will ... -ham-keen/

Best bit of business we did in the window was keeping Tarkowski

Top Claret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 11, 2020 11:58 am

Best bit of business we did in the window was keeping Tarkowski

That depends on how much he wanted to go, which by all accounts was a lot. He may not be motivated to play for us.

I'd take Dawson.

Top Claret wrote: ↑

Sun Oct 11, 2020 11:58 am

Best bit of business we did in the window was keeping Tarkowski

Like a new signing.

I'm surprised this was still on the first page.

We may need a CB but I can't see anything before January.