28 May 2012 22:09:51
You will not pay the 10mill for Hooper as you are a small time club
5th richest, we have the cash thank you skate
We wont pay the 10million for hooper because hes not worth 10 million dont you meen. Newcastles cisse was less the 10million. Hooper isnt even that good hes lazy for one. Hes not any better the billy sharp
Obliviously hooper isnt worth 10 mill you person thats why not because saints are a small time team bloody hell do you have a brain
Our owners could buy your club 100 times over. I don't think £10m in a season turning over £100m is a big deal. In the Championship we offered £6-£7m. Whoever you are, take your bitterness elsewhere you brain dead muppet.
Rich owners or not, FFFP rules mean you cant spend more than the club generates....time to get real {Ed001's Note - not true, owners can input a limited amount into the club, off the top of my head, it is around the 30m mark a season. Try checking here: http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/ and learning about them, rather than speaking from ignorance.}
"The permitted level of acceptable deviation and shareholder equity investment will reduce over time from £4m and £8m respectively in 2011/12 to £2m and £3m by 2015/16."
what were you saying Ed? ignorance was it??
regardless whether owners put any money into their respective clubs, they must, at the very least, break even. only monies generated by the club, ie ticket sales/sponsorship/merchandise, etc are calculated.
so....if your moneybags chairman sticks in 30m, and buys players amounting to 20m, then the club MUST generate £50m to comply, and this is also regardless of tv money.
ignorance is bliss Ed....maybe you should try reading some of your own material {Ed001's Note - or perhaps you should try and read it all and realise that the owner can pay for all sorts of other things, allowing the club to save money towards transfers etc. I was incorrect with the 30m, I agree, I was just talking off the top of my head, but you are talking out of your backside with made up figures and not looked at it all. Owners can pay for the youth academy etc, without affecting the FFP, there are also numerous other infrastructure items they can fund completely. Which means the club does not need to make as much money as you seem to be day dreaming about. Perhaps you also missed the part where it mentions that clubs only have to show an improvement on a yearly basis and an intent to improve their position towards meeting those requirements? Obviously that wouldn't suit your blinkered and simply wrong view that rich owners can not fund the clubs in any way. Also you seem to think that by 2011/12, it means that it happens now, when in fact the ruling quite clearly states that it will only be implemented on 3 year's worth of accounts, so not until the 2015/16 season will any punishments become manifest. Plenty of time for an owner to boost funds and then gradually reduce his investment over the following years to show the improvement requested under the ruling.}
Ed001 is right. Ignore this muppet. Just taking selected bits of the law and applying a juvenile understand and intellect to it.
It's far more complicated than just capping the amount of spending, don't be so naive and assume your 5 minute glance at the documentation behind it and your daily info from The Sun put you in any position to make a correct statement regarding how much Southampton FC are allowed to spend. We've just potentially spent £7million on Rodriguez so I doubt a couple extra million on Hooper would have been a problem. The only problem we had was that he isn't worth £10million, and if you want him that badly then keep him and destroy his career and international hopes in that piss poor league of yours! The whole hooper saga has been the most tabloid coverage Celtic have received in the last 20 years.
No-one is talking about youth academies and infrastructure....eveyone's banging on about having a rich owner and throwing money about left, right & centre on transfers....THAT is what i am talking about, and THAT is where the FFP rules really come into effect.
the only people who are dreaming are those on here thinking because southampton have finally hopped on the gravy train, that their super duper mega rich owner is able to go out and buy anyone he wants....well, he can't, simple fact......so please, don't show yourself up and belittle me with petty name calling and cheap insults {Ed001's Note - but you have shown absolutely no understanding of the fact that a rich owner can still put huge amounts of money into the club, which in effect would be used to finance transfers. Ask Chelsea, who are using Roman's money to sign Hazard, Marin and almost certainly Hulk.}
Just had a 7m offer accepted for Jay Road so stick that in your pipe and smoke it! A skate talking about fair play and spending rules! classic... what next
Ha, nice one Ed. Jealous bitter fans clutching at straws can't argue when simple facts speak for themselves. Saints on the march. Cheating skates finished. Brighton couldn't keep up. Massive, gigantic, brilliant Celtic are still boring in their now 1 team league. Any one else want a pop?
Stop having an air of superiority and thinking you are right (to the moaning little fan having an argument with Ed001).
It is far more simple than saying we can or can't throw a certain amount of money in. But having a rich owner facilitates the liquidity of assets so they can be invested in things such as transfers rather than being spent on other required expenses like maintenance, wages etc.
In addition we are in the process of making £15million from the sale of AOC, so in the context of the original post claiming "a little club like Southampton couldn't afford £10million for a player" both owner wealth and youth academy are relevant when analysing such a statement:
The rich owner allows a liquidity of assets so that when we cash in on said youth academy talent, we can directly use those funds to spend in excess of £10million in the transfer window, irrespective of FFP rules.
Make sense now? Now hop off your high horse and get back to school, you evidently need a bit of humility and to learn some basic economics.