Southampton Rumours Archive August 04 2014
Use our rumours form to send us soutthampton transfer rumours.
04 Aug 2014 22:17:31
apparently we have moved to try and sighn agbonglahor from villa, rather have bent if i'm honest much better record in front of goal
Believable2
Unbelievable9
Bent was part of the reason for Fulham's relegation last season, don't start trying to convince our team to buy old people who used to be good enough as that will drag us right down the league Redknapp style.
Agree8
Disagree1
In all honesty mate I know none of the southampton heirarhy on personall terms so I imagine any suggestions from me would fall on deaf ears
Agree5
Disagree0
04 Aug 2014 21:49:50
Italian media reckon Taider has signed his contract and Saints will announce it tomorrow. Given that he has been mentioned numerous times over the last few weeks, seeing is believing now.
Believable5
Unbelievable0
I heard he is undergoing medical tomorrow and if he passes will sign straight after
Agree4
Disagree0
This transfer will only happen if Ramierez leaves to join Genoa on Loan
Agree2
Disagree6
Ramirez is going no where!! Koeman will get the best out of him.
Agree6
Disagree0
04 Aug 2014 14:11:35
Ed007 please tell me this samaras rumour ain't true if it is I fear we may get relegated, and kl on her way out witch a handbag full of cash
Cheers ed
Believable9
Unbelievable5
{Ed007's Note - As far as I knew Samaras was close to signing for Sevilla and I just don't see him as a Koeman type of player.}
Cheers ed
Agree4
Disagree2
As stated below by someone, with whom I agreed, there are some figures out there which are convincing.
It suggests that Southampton have only 20 million to spend on transfer fees alone, based on debt levels and ground costs. This is far lower than the 40-50 million that I expected and even this figure was derided by some fans as too low.
I can't confirm it is 20 million but it would go some to explaining why the club has been reticent in bidding. And why the club is continually linked with free transfers and loans
Agree3
Disagree7
He is utter useless no thanks. if we sign him the board are complete persons and I can't believe we would take a backwards step like that. rather have etoo than him who is going free and he is half way on the way to his pension.
Agree3
Disagree1
Look - villa have £220m in debts - chelsea - £960m - qpr £177m - etc. southampton, swansea, west brom £0 net debt.
So we will be here for a long time now - we won't blow up if the backers decide to a. not invest for a year or b. sell to another.
We are owned by 3 generation swiss industrialists - they are not known for pimping their rides or running businesses with high debt. They are small c and probably big C conservative in everything and if you take the long view this is a great and strong moment for us. I won't even mention what happened to Portsmouth (whoops I did) - but remember how you felt 4 years ago.
Agree7
Disagree2
Agree with FU2 on both monies and the business model employed by the Liebherr's.
They have built up a group of companies with a turnover of of 10 billion annually. They do not do debt or silly borrowing but have reinvested profit to build the business over the years.
As for saints spending I would suggest that some people need to check out a league table of prem clubs who spent the most during this pre season. Forget the usual suspects topping the charts and check where we are in relation to clubs of a similar size. You may be surprised.
Agree3
Disagree1
05 Aug 2014 10:35:59
We are bottom with net spend of £76m profit. Spending £20m on players, receiving £96m from transfers.
Swansea are next, £3m profit after receiving £17m from transfers.
Agree1
Disagree1
Currently we are bottom of the net spending league table, with a profit of £76m. 96 recieved through transfers, £20m spent.
Swansea are next with a £3m profit, after receiving £17m in fees.
Agree1
Disagree0
Saints miff how goes it? We are talking what we have spent not what we have earned:
So here we go for this window so far in terms of transfer spend
Man city 18million
palace 990k
hull 20million
burnley 3million
villa 0 (yep nothing and believed to have financial liabilities of over 100 million hence no one buying them)
Leicester 8million
QPR 16 million with debt burden equal to what we picked up from the prem.
I could go but I think I make the point. I suspect that by the time Koeman has finished we will have spent over 30 million on new signings and with no significant debt to worry about.
Support your team and give thanks that we have sane owners because looked what happened to us when we didn't
Agree4
Disagree1
I'm all for running the club within its means. But I think we need two more good quality signings if we are to continue to be a top half club. There is still time to recruit players. We signed ramires in the last day.
I just think you have to take into consideration the amount of money we have brought in, when discussing money spent. No other team have sold their key players like us.
Agree1
Disagree0
Agree with you saintsmiff some real quality would be nice as we have certainly shipped some, virtually all home grown.
Kruger has just been interviewed on radio five live and I think it is clear from what he has stated that the new board and Kman were aware of what was going to take place this summer.
They have managed it by getting the best price for the club on those players who left. They did not want to sell but players wanted to go.
I think at this moment in time it is also fair to say from what he said that they and 'the owner' are committed to taking the club forward
Agree0
Disagree0
04 Aug 2014 16:00:33
Southampton now favourites to sign javier Hernandez! Would be the marquee signing most of us would hope for imo
Believable7
Unbelievable11
04 Aug 2014 18:18:48
Agreed but I would be very interested to see a lot of fans views to him saying he was too good for us
Agree2
Disagree3
We may be favourites to sign him but I doubt we'll be able to agree terms, his wages are huge and he wants CL football
Agree6
Disagree3
Sadly our image abroad is we a pinot club with no ambition that are bring deserted by quality so by should they join us. Its unfair but image goes a long way to making players decide to come to AFC
Agree2
Disagree2
04 Aug 2014 14:52:19
Saints have one player booked in for a medical today, that player is Stefan Kießling a agreement was reached over the weekend. Fee believed to be around £14 million.
Believable6
Unbelievable11
04 Aug 2014 15:18:17
17 goals in 38 appearances but 30 years old. No 11 for Bayer Leverkusen but is willing to give up playing in Europe for Saints? Don't think we would pay out £14 plus his wage demands. Could be good but don't see why it would happen.
Agree7
Disagree4
I hope this is not true. Good finisher but slow and for 14 mil I would want a bit of pace and someone who is a bit younger
Agree4
Disagree4
I agree with Saint90. Looks a good player, consistent scorer in Germany, but £14m for a 30 year old - This just goes against the way Saints seem to do business (Little or no re-sale value)
Agree4
Disagree1
Would be good maybe. But can't see this one happening.
Agree2
Disagree0
14 mil for a player that turns 31 in january? don't think so somehow. Pelle is 2 years younger and has been far clinical in the past few years and cost 8, work that out
Agree3
Disagree0
04 Aug 2014 16:46:09
cant spend 14m on one player with only around 20m left in pot and a gk & cb still needed at around 8/9m each plus wages
Agree3
Disagree3
Lukey boy
one argument for kiebling is that he was in a harder league than pelle, but still I think pelle is better
Agree3
Disagree1
Saintjean I agree the bundesliga is a lot more competative then the eridivisie, but we sold a proven premiere league player in lambert for 4 mil who is only 18 months older then this guy. He will need time to adjust as well, the reported fee is laughable in my opinion
Agree2
Disagree1
04 Aug 2014 18:20:24
Kiessling would be class but not for £14 mill
Agree3
Disagree0
Saintgroucho: exactly
From the figures I saw today, Southampton have less than half of the 40-50 million I thought there was to spend on transfer fees alone.
Agree2
Disagree4
Saintgroucho: wrong! Only 20 mill left?! Did you pluck that figure out of the air?!
I admit we won't spend 90 mill but koeman has been promised all the funds he needs. I will stick my neck and say a figure of about 60 million to be spent by koeman!
Agree4
Disagree0
You are having a laugh if you think th figure is 20 million. The board will spend wisely. I can't see why people are concerned with loans. If we get them for no fee and a percentage wage then that to me is good is business. I thi k if the right player comes at the right price we will buy and try to build. However with all the fans raging and telling Kl to F off I could see why she is reluctant to dig deep and spend big money. If Koeman is as good as they say he is then the time for Action is January not now. We need to see who performs and who does not, then we can identify areas we need to strengthen. If we play as well as we did last year will will attract decent players at the start of 2015 and have the funds to finance it. If we loo at the end aim which is CL football then we need to remember we need a solid base from which to launch our assault.
Agree3
Disagree0
Saint_Ben_Basingstoke
you are forgetting that £30mil will probably be used to clear the training ground debt and £22mil will go on unpaid transfer fees from last year. Plus we have already signed pelle and tadic for what is estimated to be about £18.5mil.
So that's £70.5mil spent already. Leaving about £22mil if transfer figures in the press are to be believed.
Who knows? Hoffstetter did say that transfer revenue would not be used to pay for the training ground. They would improve the commercial aspects of the club that cortese neglected and pay for that over a period of time. but maybe the people and companies they owed money to weren't ok with that?
Whatever the case the actual figure left to spend is maybe somewhere between £20mil & £50mil and I would be very surprised if they didn't try to leave some in the pot for January and next summer.
Agree1
Disagree0
05 Aug 2014 06:36:31
92m from transfers
30m training ground
22m existing transfer payments
20m just under on pelle etc
so about 20m left
thats the way I read it
Agree0
Disagree2
Clearly failed his medical then as no announcement
Agree0
Disagree0
The outstanding debt for existing transfers is being managed by income through the club. This debt was predominantly from the osvaldo signing where we paid something like 7m up front with the rest in instalments. The club who sold him to us uses those instalments as an income so wouldn't necessarily want it all paid now. It wasn't just os before someone replies with a simple maths lesson for me, my understanding is that Ramirez, osvaldo, lovren and Rodriguez had these instalments tied to their deals.
Agree0
Disagree0
20 million + sky income!the sold players have accumulated lots of dough but how much if it is up front and how much will we get over the next few years?
Agree0
Disagree0
05 Aug 2014 13:30:04
Serious transfer targets IMO:
Forster: £9m?
Redmond: £8m?
Rojo: £15m?
I think the board have a budget, and I think if they can't get rojo for cheaper than £15m, they will turn their attention to van djiik. But I think around £20m is the sort of money I would expect the board to spend and I would be quite happy with that.
Agree2
Disagree0
05 Aug 2014 23:10:04
redmond would be a great signing but let's first snap up a top quality cb and then move on to signing wide players.
redmond or zaha
Agree1
Disagree0
04 Aug 2014 09:18:47
Demetri Mitchel on loan from Manchester United and Tottenham's Nacer Chadli being offered for Schneiderlin
Rumours aside, I was hoping to see these signings Saints were meant to make this weekend. Hopefully announcements will be made today.
Believable6
Unbelievable6
If we are only interested in cheap loans at the moment, I'm afraid this means Leihber and co are saving all player sales money for when they sale the club off, I hope the wool has not been pulled over big rons eyes
Agree8
Disagree8
04 Aug 2014 12:30:01
I think it follows the way Saints did business last season. Osvaldo was a bit of a wildcard choice and yet we spend £15m on him. If Saints had loaned him in instead it would only have been 6-12 months wages spent. That is probably £1.5-2m, but he would have gone back and both parties would have moved on. Instead of a £1.5-2m loss we are instead probably going to lose around £7-10m. As a business it is better to loan in players, especially if our youngsters step-up within the year and do better than the loan signings.
Buying players makes for a better club statements for sure, but we also don't want to do what Tottenham did, even though Saints are capable of it.
Agree6
Disagree1
04 Aug 2014 12:56:09
I think the players we have got in on loans with the potential to buy are great ideas. I hope to hell we are buying a few. We need players in all three areas who want to play for the club and badge. I am concerned that we were told 2 SIGNINGS would be announced and to all intents and purposes they are loans. However. Ihave little doubt wheels are turning. let's face it, we are being linked to every player in the world from neynar to keegan lol. Whilst I think the papers ate just lazily linking us to all fringe players I think we will get a few in. I am praying as I type this
Agree4
Disagree3
Koeman did say "hopefully" we can get 2 or 3 signings done on the weekend. Nothing was definate, and after the silent arrival of bertrand I don't think anybody but the club knows what is happening behond the scenes. Hopefully more will come sooner rather then later
Agree6
Disagree1
As difficult as it is, we need to remain patient. Saints are in a strong position, and will be able to bring in decent quality replacements.
To be honest, I don't mind how we spend the cash, so long as we do well this year. If we have cash left over after the transfer window, I won't be surprised, or upset. We just need to get behind the players on the field.
Agree6
Disagree3
There is a lot of work being done by Southampton to bring in players
But you can't force players to sign.
Rojo's agent is touting him to a number of other clubs, trying to provoke concrete bids.
Agree3
Disagree2
Saint90. everyone keeps saying we don't want to do what spurs did last season. Why? They finished 6th didn't they? 2 places and a fair number of points higher than us. I'd be ecstatic with that! Lol
Agree2
Disagree1
04 Aug 2014 15:58:02
A team that spent £100m plus wages on a team that did not get further than the play-offs in the Europa cup and only made 6th in the league is a flop. Lucky for them they made £90m on PL prize money and TV showings. However, the previous year they spent £60m and reached 5th. The year before that they were 4th and only spent £8m.
Tottenham fell down because clubs knew they had the money from the Bale sale last year. Prices were inflated for players that in the end didn't really cut it. Whether Levy can afford that, I am not certain, but I doubt it as he has only spent £7.5m so far this season.
Saints finished 8th spending £36m. The year before we spent £32m on getting 14th place. This year other clubs know we have money and are driving hard bargains to over-inflate player prices. Saints are not going to give in just to get the players in. Saints are probably putting aside £57m for outstanding transfer fees, loans and to pay off the training facility instead, but that leaves about £40m to work on new signings. If we spend £40m this year and are able to maintain last year's position that is still better business than Tottenham who spent £150m to fall 2 places over two years.
Agree6
Disagree2
Levy does not own spurs and as far as I aware does not put any of his own money into the club. The person who affords spurs lives abroad (tax probably) and phones levy and sanctions spending.
I have read one serious article that also suggested that levy and the manager (spurs have a lot of managers so I am not just referring to mp) that on some signings they have had no say.
Some of the remarks that Tim Sherwood made while he was keeping the seat warm for MP could be seen to back this up.
Agree0
Disagree0
05 Aug 2014 11:44:23
ENIC Group owns 85% share capital in Spurs. Levy owns ENIC Group with Joe Lewis, although Lewis owns his part through Tavistock Group. Unless Lewis is the guy abroad that you mention, Levy is the main owner of Spurs and, as Chairman, is responsible for all the day-to-day business of Spurs.
Levy does have a board of directors through. Franco Baldini was one such director who was made responsible for most of the transfer decisions. Both Levy and Baldini overruled AVB on some of the player choices and AVB was made to work with them. That did not work and AVB lost his job.
To say that Levy had no say on the signings is just not right. I am curious about the source of that info though.
Agree0
Disagree0
Source BBC football preview from monday evening last season. journalist for either the times or the telegraph (sorry cannot remember) when in discussion about the management merry go round at spurs.
May have not heard correctly of course but that is what I remember.
And yes lewis was the guy mentioned as living abroad and phoning in the decisions.
Will be interesting to see how MoPo gets on particularly if by xmas they are not in the running.
Agree0
Disagree0
Just google relevant search themes to confirm who owns spurs. Yes it was Lewis mentioned on the BBC and he would appear to be very much in control of ENIC. Hope that helps.
Agree0
Disagree0
07 Aug 2014 21:27:13
Just seen that Celtic might go through due to Legia Warsaw using a player that wasnt eligible to play. what's the word in the Forster deal if this is the case?
Agree0
Disagree0
04 Aug 2014 08:53:54
According to The Daily Star Mauricio Pochettino is ready to use Nacer Chadli as bait to convince Southampton to sell Morgan Schneiderlin. Is he any good or is he one of the flops that Spuds brought last season, no matter what the club says to us I think Schneiderlin will go which will be a massive loss.
Believable7
Unbelievable4
Chadli was one if the few who actually played well for spurs last year. I wouldn't mind money + chadli as lond as we replace schneiderlin with someone like clasie or dembele.
Agree6
Disagree4
Came from fc twente, same team tadic came from, was a bright prospect in Holland, hasn't shone at all in the bpl, may be down to game time, but he has been a flop
Agree7
Disagree2