Mills to Leicester 5 Million

[DOYLERSAROYALER]

Just as I thought this debt ridden game driven by "greed and sky" couldn't get any crazier a fellow Championship Club clamber out of the woodwork to offer a £5m fee for an average to decent (on his day at best) tier 2 player with just 1 year left on his contract!!

Great Business/PR/etc Hammond!! - forget the £90m estimated premiership payments for promotion, at this rate were be making that in tier 2 just from buying and selling, less the high tier 1 opperating costs - the surreal world that is ........................

Finally, a special congratulations to Sven, you certainly have the midas touch in persuading backers to spend big! Bit of advice though, you really need to scout more than just cup and play-off games live on sky to get a true and rounded view of your potential aquisition.

Mills was at Man City when Sven was manager there, and Sven says in his interview that he saw the potential at that stage ....make of that what you will

[under the tin]

It really makes me laugh, this forum.

If the club says that sh1t tastes like chocolate, then some of you instantly want to smear it all over your grandchildren's birthday cake.

Sure, operating costs in any business need to be kept under control, but it is not in any sense "good business" to take your eye off your income streams.

Their must be plenty of long suffering kids out there who would opt to have sh+t rubbed in their face rather than listen to yet another wrist slitting diatribe from a bloke hiding behind a pair of sh*t tainted glasses.

In fact, why has the Megastore never sold STG's? What a revenue raiser that would be! We'd have fans spending 3 nights camping in the car park just to reach the front of the queue!!

/\/\/\/\/\ That was wrist slitting?
Let me try an analogy, then.

You own a car.
You're short of money for petrol.
Do you
a) Try and get a paying passenger, so he can chip in with the petrol costs
b) Sell one of the car's alloy roadwheels to a scrappy in order to buy petrol
Clear enough?
You have to make a distinction between income, and capitalising assets.

[Uke]

Sure, operating costs in any business need to be kept under control, but it is not in any sense "good business" to take your eye off your income streams.

They didn't, transfer fees are the club's income stream

[Royal Lady]

LOL @ Woodcote STILL bemoaning Coppell. Of course, had Coppell spent all this "transfer budget" that you speak of, whilst in the second year of the Prem, whether we'd stayed up or not, we'd have had an even bigger black hole to fill - Coppell saved money by not buying any more players and, therefore, not paying extra wages - I dread to think what our deficit would have been like had he not been so prudent.

[Mr Angry]

Whats the matter with some people on here!!

All clubs sell and buy players; all players have a valuation and if another club meets or exceeds that valuation, he gets sold. It then allows the selling club to invest in other areas, or buy in other players. Thats the business of football, and all clubs do it (Man Utd with Ronaldo, Liverpool with Torres etc).

To bleat that selling Mills shows RFC's "lack of ambition" is as lazy a statement to make as it is stupid, not least because its fair to say that Mills divided opinion, both as to his capabilities and his character; odd now that some are bemoaning the fact that we have lost the greatest CB the footballing world has ever seen.................

It is a fantastic piece of business for us, and of course the club will have at least one replacement CB (and possibly 2) lined up, and to think otherwise simply because RFC choose NOT to advertise the fact is ignorant in the extreme.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

LOL @ Woodcote STILL bemoaning Coppell. Of course, had Coppell spent all this "transfer budget" that you speak of, whilst in the second year of the Prem, whether we'd stayed up or not, we'd have had an even bigger black hole to fill - Coppell saved money by not buying any more players and, therefore, not paying extra wages - I dread to think what our deficit would have been like had he not been so prudent.

Thing is he's not wrong though, is he?

[STAR Liaison]

Because, quite clearly it works.

Ok, I'm a patient man, so I'll explain...

If the average operating loss without selling players is £4m then if we budgeted for no operating loss it stands to reason we'd have £4m less to spend on players' wages, management and essential infrastructure.

And I'm hopeful you'd agree that if we took that course of action the chances of challenging for promotion would be much reduced.

The reason we don't go down that route, and why we are able to budget for an operating loss, is because we are pretty secure in the knowledge that, due to the excellence of the adademy and scouting network / recruitment policy (and the vision and long-term investment in those areas), we will always have good players who can be sold at an excellent profit to make up for the shortfall.

That my friend, whether you get it or not, is GOOD BUSINESS!!

Those who have read the notes of the June managment meeting will uderstand that you have hit the nail on the head. BM has the option of keeping his stars and reducing the squad (assuming that is the only way of reducing the wage bill) or selling a portion or one megastar to fund the rest.

Following the end of season progress STAR asked if the financial position had changed from this time last year. It has not and the playing manager has a budget he needs to keep within – it is his decision whether to sell one star player or several less valuable players to have a larger and deeper squad. RFC is still in the position of being self-sustaining and any expectation of the Chairman increasing the funding is completely unrealistic. It is an amazing fact in the current economic climate that there is still an assumption that wages will rise again this season from players and agents.

[Royal Rother]

It really makes me laugh, this forum.

If the club says that sh1t tastes like chocolate, then some of you instantly want to smear it all over your grandchildren's birthday cake.

Sure, operating costs in any business need to be kept under control, but it is not in any sense "good business" to take your eye off your income streams.

Their must be plenty of long suffering kids out there who would opt to have sh+t rubbed in their face rather than listen to yet another wrist slitting diatribe from a bloke hiding behind a pair of sh*t tainted glasses.

In fact, why has the Megastore never sold STG's? What a revenue raiser that would be! We'd have fans spending 3 nights camping in the car park just to reach the front of the queue!!

/\/\/\/\/\ That was wrist slitting?
Let me try an analogy, then.

You own a car.
You're short of money for petrol.
Do you
a) Try and get a paying passenger, so he can chip in with the petrol costs
b) Sell one of the car's alloy roadwheels to a scrappy in order to buy petrol
Clear enough?
You have to make a distinction between income, and capitalising assets.

What on Earth are you waffling on about?

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

Whats the matter with some people on here!!

All clubs sell and buy players; all players have a valuation and if another club meets or exceeds that valuation, he gets sold. It then allows the selling club to invest in other areas, or buy in other players. Thats the business of football, and all clubs do it (Man Utd with Ronaldo, Liverpool with Torres etc).

To bleat that selling Mills shows RFC's "lack of ambition" is as lazy a statement to make as it is stupid, not least because its fair to say that Mills divided opinion, both as to his capabilities and his character; odd now that some are bemoaning the fact that we have lost the greatest CB the footballing world has ever seen.................

It is a fantastic piece of business for us, and of course the club will have at least one replacement CB (and possibly 2) lined up, and to think otherwise simply because RFC choose NOT to advertise the fact is ignorant in the extreme.

All true although you may be a little harsh with your adjectives

The thing that worries me is whether we can, as a club, sustain this record of buying cheap and selling high whilst still remaining competitive. It will only take one significant failure - for example, signing a CB that won't turn out to be half as good as expected (or even half as good as Mills) - to put us in hot water. And if we lost of Championship status, then what?

[JimmytheJim]

It really makes me laugh, this forum.

If the club says that sh1t tastes like chocolate, then some of you instantly want to smear it all over your grandchildren's birthday cake.

Sure, operating costs in any business need to be kept under control, but it is not in any sense "good business" to take your eye off your income streams.

Their must be plenty of long suffering kids out there who would opt to have sh+t rubbed in their face rather than listen to yet another wrist slitting diatribe from a bloke hiding behind a pair of sh*t tainted glasses.

In fact, why has the Megastore never sold STG's? What a revenue raiser that would be! We'd have fans spending 3 nights camping in the car park just to reach the front of the queue!!

/\/\/\/\/\ That was wrist slitting?
Let me try an analogy, then.

You own a car.
You're short of money for petrol.
Do you
a) Try and get a paying passenger, so he can chip in with the petrol costs
b) Sell one of the car's alloy roadwheels to a scrappy in order to buy petrol
Clear enough?
You have to make a distinction between income, and capitalising assets.

great analogy...

[under the tin]

Sure, operating costs in any business need to be kept under control, but it is not in any sense "good business" to take your eye off your income streams.

They didn't, transfer fees are the club's income stream

That might be your opinion, mate, but some of us view capitalising player assets merely papers over the shortcomings in the traditional income areas like ticket sales, corporates, merchandising etc.

[Royal Rother]

What shortcomings does the club have in those areas then?

[PieEater]

I'm sorry to see him go, he scored a lot of vital goals including the one in the playoff final and had one thing the other centre halfs didn't have (although not a lot) and that was pace. With Ivar and Zurab gone we will need someone with pace to partner slomo Pearce.

The reality was that he turned down a contract renewal and only had a year left on his contract so his days at the club were always numbered. Hammond's done a decent job of getting £5m for him rather than see him go for nothing next year and it reduces the need to sell other key players.

I'm not so happy about seeing rival teams strengthen as we weaken, that along with more teams on boosted parachute payments will make this season harder than the last and I seriously can't see us much above being mid table. You have to wonder how Leicester are going along with the Financial Fair Play regulations that they've just agreed to abide by.

[rob the royal]

Brendan Rodgers take on all this?

"He's the type of centre-half I like, first and foremost I like them to defend, but I like centre halves that can be with a ball. He's a player that doesn't get rid of the ball, he passes it and he is that type I like... [when I was at Reading he used to pass the ball all the time, long sweeping passes, like David Beckham... in fact I gave him Beckham's phone number so that he could get some tips. Anyway, I'm just name-dropping now but seriously, he's a quality player and a fine gentleman, a lot of the time he'd pass the ball to the fans, that was especially touching as I think it was his way of giving something back to them after he gave them the finger]...

[brendywendy]

surely thats the whole poínt though.other streams arent enough,so sales are needed.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Good move by RFC, decent move for Mills as well.

Also good to see that RFC have gone away from saying the manager has money, I prefer this honest style approach.

We can replace Mills without going out and paying big fees, also if we are seen to be a good club to join as a youngster and progress then it must make it easier to sign up promising youngsters that otherwise would go elsewhere.

[Gordons Cumming]

LOL @ Woodcote STILL bemoaning Coppell. Of course, had Coppell spent all this "transfer budget" that you speak of, whilst in the second year of the Prem, whether we'd stayed up or not, we'd have had an even bigger black hole to fill - Coppell saved money by not buying any more players and, therefore, not paying extra wages - I dread to think what our deficit would have been like had he not been so prudent.

.............but if he had spent that money we might have generated that single,extra, measly point that would have kept us up and generated loads more cash.

Just a thought...

[RoyalBlue]

Because, quite clearly it works.

Ok, I'm a patient man, so I'll explain...

If the average operating loss without selling players is £4m then if we budgeted for no operating loss it stands to reason we'd have £4m less to spend on players wages, management and infrastructure.

And I'm hopeful you'd agree that if we took that course of action the chances of challenging for promotion would be much reduced.

The reason we don't go down that route, and why we are able to budget for an operating loss, is because we are pretty secure in the knowledge that, due to the excellence of the adademy and scouting network / recruitment policy (and the vision and long-term investment in those areas), we will always have good players who can be sold at an excellent profit to make up for the shortfall.

That my friend, whether you get it or not, is GOOD BUSINESS!!

You may well be right, however football is about so much more than just "GOOD BUSINESS". It is about passion, excitement, the pain of failure and the joy of victory. We don't turn up every week just to check that the club are still solvent.

Exactly. Maybe we should drop out of the standard football league structure and form the 'Good Business' league because, regardless of all the horror stories/warnings of clubs going to the wall in their dozens, few in the football league appear to want to play by the same rules as us.

As for the 'look where we've come from, wonderful stadium etc. argument' - yes, we have come on a long way but so have numerous other clubs. The Mad Stad is no longer so unusual. Lots of clubs now have decent stadiums. If you stand still, others catch up and then overtake you.

[under the tin]

What shortcomings does the club have in those areas then?

The concensus on here is that the club is operating at an annual £2M loss.
If the club generates an extra £2M in ticket sales, perimeter advertising, executive boxes................

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

What shortcomings does the club have in those areas then?

The concensus on here is that the club is operating at an annual £2M loss.
If the club generates an extra £2M in ticket sales................

So we spend £3m on a player for example, to generate £2m, not sure that stacks up. We have a solid fanbase of about 18-000 people they are not all full paying adults, from the figure I just mentioned in my last post we would need attendances of 24000 to obtain the extra £2m you talk about, and like it or not that is not going to happen at the moment.