Topic: Some unanswered but relevent questions.

[TSC]

Coffeehead--TSC

Both, unsurprisingly, missed the point.

Because it's all about how much to spend and if Rafa doesn't get a big kitty, well there you go.

I guess you soon forget Rafa spent 10.7 mil on Alonso and 6 mil on Garcia along with other players when he first came. Not to mention the club had committed to Cisse 14.5 mil.

Then a year on he spends, 6.3 On Morientes, 6 mil on Reina, 5.6 on Sissoko, 7 mil on Crouch.


Then another year later.. 5.8 mil on Agger, 6 mil on Bellamy, 6.7 on Pennant, and 9 mil on Kuyt.

of course there were minor deals in all those years for other players.

Then G&H take over....the owners with no money but loans from banks:
Lucas Leiva Gremio £5,000,000
Mikel San José Domínguez Athletic Bilbao £270,000 
Sebastian Leto Club Atlético Lanús £1,800,000 
Fernando Torres Atletico Madrid £20,200,000 
Andriy Voronin Leverkusen Free*
Yossi Benayoun West Ham  £5,000,000
Ryan Babel Ajax £11,500,000 
Charles Itandje Lens Undisclosed 
Emiliano Insúa Boca Juniors £1,300,000*
Martin Skrtel Zenit St Petersburg £6,500,000
Javier Mascherano Media Sports Investment £17,000,000

Now all we hear about is 20 mil net.

Yet, I see we have a record for a striker, a record for a midfielder, and a record for a defender.

And people still whinge about Rafa not being given money. About Rafa has been told to sell in order to buy in spite of the fact the loans from earlier this year have his transfer budget as part of the loans. Widely reported at the time of the loans. But of corse it's loans. Loans = bad. All Rafa knows is he has a kitty, fairly substantial and teams always sell players during the close season.

But it will NEVER be enough for some unless we spend 20 mil on 2-3 players a season.

One thing that does happen is player transfer values go up. We all know English players are over priced.

However, I will stand by my earlier post of how Rafa goes about his business. I said he'll spend big on "some" players as he sees fit. But Rafa thinks and plans "squad". When a spine member gets injured or losses something , Rafa will attempt to buy big to replace. But there aren't 11 members of the spine. And that is why Rafa will spend mediocre/decent money on "squad" players and buy more of those than the big money buys.

Guess we'll see the next few years. But I bet the whinge will be Rafa needs 30-40 mil more each season.

You see mate you're completely missing the point.  My post wasn't in defence of Rafa.  It was in response to being owned by a transparent idiot like Hicks.

Those figures and players you quote?  Most of 'em were pre Hicks anyway, so irrelevant to the debate.

I've been jumped on a few times because I'm not of the opinion 'Rafa is God'.  I think his record is questionable after 4 years of no league challenges.  But that's another debate.

The fact is it is almost impossible to judge Rafa on a like for like basis with what he would see as his peers such as Fergie and whatever clown is in charge of Chelsea, oh and Wenger, until he has a budget comparable.  Forget Wenger, he has done well given his resources.  Yet still once again is trophiless.

In terms of revenue and funds allowed we're nowhere near Fergie or Chelsea.  And certrainly won't ever be in a position to polish their shoes while the current joke regime is in charge.

So don't bullshit about Rafa 'doing it his way'.  And us being disappointed to expect big signings. 

I'm looking forward to the day when you either give up the ghost of defending the indefensible, or realising if you are a Liverpool supporter even you must eventually come over to the right side.

Or maybe you're one of those idiots that hate to recognise they've made a mistake originally.  And instead of admitting it and eating a wee bit of humble pie you carry on trying to dig yourself out of an increasingly deeper hole.

[The Bill Hicks Appreciation Society]

4pool, the point is they LIED. They said they wouldn't be heaping debts on the club like the Glasers because and to paraphrase the c*nts; We learned from their mistakes.

Loans = Bad when we haven't got the stadium we were promised and we're 350mil in debt. Loans = Bad when we can barely meet the interest payments and Loans = Bad when it places the club at risk of  going into administration if we dont make the champions league one year which comes with it an automatic points reduction.

[4pool]

Well I suspect the theory is to spend big to get quality players.

Yet, Man utd pay big once someone shows promise elsewhere. Chelsea just pay big.

Wenger is a closer analogy.

Ask yourself why Rafa has spent so much time buying up youngsters? Ans your self why 3 have been promoted to the first team?

Rafa wants to build with youth supplemented by experience. And he'll buy some talent if he feels he doesn't have the talent coming through at certain positions. Which is why his 4-5 year plan is just now coming to fruition. And hopefully the Academy will keep developing talent.

But the summer transfer thread would be a boring place if we don't spend 40-50 mil every season. Why.... Bayern Munich lost the Champions League semi final one season 2000 and bought no one and won it the next 2001. Wonder what their summer transfer thread was like that season..lol

[trooper7]

4pool hicks wants young players, because they are cheap, and cant afford big players.
If we(Rafa)  had enough money we would surely go for big name players.
And go for the league next season.
But with Hicks in charge we will have to wait for 3/4 seasons at least to become competitive.

[LFCfan4Life]

* Is it realistic to expect a transfer budget for this summer?

Yes

* If it is, where is the money going to come from if we are now committed to paying interest on the loans recently taken out by Kop Holdings?

Working capital £30m? plus player sales im sure that the banks have looked at the figures and agreed that KOP can make the interest payments you've got any yearly profit plus £47m PL tv right plus CL tv rights plus the extra gate receipts,  money for winning your tie in a round and tv money from any other cup games

* Who is going to "sign the cheque" so to speak, given the gaping chasm that supposedly still exists at board level.

im guessing that Rick Parry would be in charge since hes the Chief Executive and would only need to go to the owners if more money was needed than already allocated.

* Is this just another front in the Tom Hicks PR campaign? If so, where does it leave Benitez in the grand scheme of things if he has tied his colours to the Hicks mast?

i dont think he has. but as he said hicks talked to him so he replied its up to gillet to do the same or atleast reply to any emails he gets from Rafa

[MFletcher]

The argument that Gillett and Hicks have allowed Rafa to spend on players is negated by the fact that it is the banks' money - they've invested nothing. Moores could quite easily have taken loans out to cover transfer fees, but he didn't want to plunge the club into debt.

My view is that this summer is, unfortunately, a write off given the ownership situation. Rafa will have to keep us ticking over until it's sorted one way or the other. At the minute, he has to assume that Hicks/Gillett are the twats calling the shots and the men providing the money (a laughable concept for them) - and he has to work to that budget.

[fletcheri]

I beleive the money for transfers will come from from the normal working capital of the club with massive money coming from the new sky deal,transfers and us reaching the semis of the champions league a negative effect comes from the (in my oppinion) don't by the new kit or anything from the club campain.Financially our problem is the new stadium and untill these two clowns sort themselves out we will be living our club in the tabloids

[Red_in_Holland]

A percentage of the refinancing was specifically for team investment.  Plus assuming that no spade goes into the ground, there is that money for the new stadium available also.

Hicks won't mind spending, it will be covered when he sells up, Gillett will go along also.

Rafa knows he can spend, otherwise he wouldnt say a word.  Or he would moan publicaly.

RiH

[Finn Solomon]

I have to applaud TSC and coffeehead's efforts in this thread. 4pool's fantastical arguments backed up with logic of entirely his own invention, in a world where Rafa is Wenger and having no money to spend is a good thing, look almost reasonable if there was no one around to tear them apart. Keep up the good work, men. 

[richmond-red]

Well I suspect the theory is to spend big to get quality players.

Yet, Man utd pay big once someone shows promise elsewhere. Chelsea just pay big.

Wenger is a closer analogy.

Ask yourself why Rafa has spent so much time buying up youngsters? Ans your self why 3 have been promoted to the first team?

Rafa wants to build with youth supplemented by experience. And he'll buy some talent if he feels he doesn't have the talent coming through at certain positions. Which is why his 4-5 year plan is just now coming to fruition. And hopefully the Academy will keep developing talent.

But the summer transfer thread would be a boring place if we don't spend 40-50 mil every season. Why.... Bayern Munich lost the Champions League semi final one season 2000 and bought no one and won it the next 2001. Wonder what their summer transfer thread was like that season..lol

FFS off on another tangent. Bayern won the Bundesliga 3 years on the run in this time period. I suspect if we won the PL 3 times on the trot a semi-final loss in the CL would hardly merit a complaint or 2.
Of course you have to spend big to get quality.  The problem is that with Hicks in charge we won't be able to spend big.

[dane]

Even the name 'Kop Holdings' grinds with me... implying that with their ugly US Dollars they could ever come in and actually have rights over the most legendary supporters in the history of football.

[The_Last_Don]

From what i've read, Rafa has to sell first in order to buy, hence the 'mish-mash of players' statement from O'Neill

[The_Last_Don]

Dont know if this has been mentioned anywhere else, but the last third of this article sheds some light on our situation:

http://www.teamtalk.com/football/story/0,16368,1776_3510187,00.html

[minusone]

I still expect Hicks to have money available for Rafa this summer despite all the issues.
Telling Rafa you have a budget of zero, work with it, is tantamount to inviting him to leave.
Which, obviously will cause a riot with fans.

Hicks is at the least still playing PR games so he will maybe try appease us with a big name signing or by backing Rafa a bit in the transfers market.

[Xabier Alonso Olano]

What stumps me the most about working out the transfer budget for this close season is the players being linked away.

Xabi. Possibly the biggest fee, but with figures I have seen ranging from 9m to 12m (no sauces, I can't be arsed to find them again) for him,  which seem low. Now if Barry is his direct replacement and Xabi does leave, I'm not sure its worth the extra 2m that we could possibly make from selling Xabi for 12m and signing Barry for 10m for example. Which makes me think that either Rafa wants something different to what Xabi offers or Xabi wants to leave for personal reasons.

JP: Again, considering that Valencia is his replacement, the difference between fees mooted is small. The style of play is the biggest difference between the pair, again maybe Rafa wanting something different from a new player. But also with his, the Mancini link (at a proposed 4m) would be a cheaper option than Valencia; in transfer fee anyway, wages would make it about even over a long contract.

Crouch: Most of the talk from Rafa has constantly said that he wants Crouchie to stay. Regardless of a fee. And with very few links being made to new strikers (unless Babel is converted/nemeth promoted)  its hard to foresee this sale in terms of helping towards the transfer budget conundrum.

Carson: The most obvious fee and sale. Doesn't need immediately replacing.

JAR: Again the fee wouldn't be huge considering his contract (and lack of ability  ) but would need a replacement (one from Arbeloa/ Insua possibly).

Now I know that this list is purely specualtive and working on the thinnest sauce ever spread across a burger... But its point is to draw attention to why some of the players may be released regardless of the money on offer. But then again, it is hard to see the logic in getting rid of JP and Xabi to fund moves for Valencia and Barry per say. In addition possibly. But not specifically instead of, unless Rafa thinks they offer something different to take us forward.

Maybe this does point to a small transfer outlay? Maybe Rafa thinks a little tweak in personel is all required to take us on from 13 draws into four or five draws (for example). I don't know. But they seem the only viable options to me.

[RAFA - 6 - 19]

if rafa wins the title soon with the resources given to him it will be a miracle but he will get no credit for it

he has spent about the same as spurs yet is expected to win the title

[Romford_Red]

I think the situation is simple...

Under G & H there is cash about, but not vast amounts. The reason Benitez is moving so quickly (which is uncharacteristic of him especially with the Euro08 finals coming up) is to spend that money BEFORE what appears to be an inevitable take-over, so that the cash doesn't go missing during a take over, we don't miss the transfer window entirely due to take over wrangling and that he might even get a second lump of cash after the take over.

Wily man that Rafa

[kwalityproducts]

we must sell some of the players on huge wages that don't deserve the shirt...kewell is one of them....i hope rafa will get rid of a few before adding to the squad.....if barry comes that is a big if then we will lose a big/very good player.....possibly xabi...i don't think midfield is the problem....we need decent wingers...a must for any top team!!

[coffeehead]

Coffeehead--TSC

Both, unsurprisingly, missed the point.

Because it's all about how much to spend and if Rafa doesn't get a big kitty, well there you go.

I guess you soon forget Rafa spent 10.7 mil on Alonso and 6 mil on Garcia along with other players when he first came. Not to mention the club had committed to Cisse 14.5 mil.

Then a year on he spends, 6.3 On Morientes, 6 mil on Reina, 5.6 on Sissoko, 7 mil on Crouch.


Then another year later.. 5.8 mil on Agger, 6 mil on Bellamy, 6.7 on Pennant, and 9 mil on Kuyt.

of course there were minor deals in all those years for other players.

Then G&H take over....the owners with no money but loans from banks:
Lucas Leiva Gremio £5,000,000
Mikel San José Domínguez Athletic Bilbao £270,000 
Sebastian Leto Club Atlético Lanús £1,800,000 
Fernando Torres Atletico Madrid £20,200,000 
Andriy Voronin Leverkusen Free*
Yossi Benayoun West Ham  £5,000,000
Ryan Babel Ajax £11,500,000 
Charles Itandje Lens Undisclosed 
Emiliano Insúa Boca Juniors £1,300,000*
Martin Skrtel Zenit St Petersburg £6,500,000
Javier Mascherano Media Sports Investment £17,000,000

Now all we hear about is 20 mil net.

Yet, I see we have a record for a striker, a record for a midfielder, and a record for a defender.

And people still whinge about Rafa not being given money. About Rafa has been told to sell in order to buy in spite of the fact the loans from earlier this year have his transfer budget as part of the loans. Widely reported at the time of the loans. But of corse it's loans. Loans = bad. All Rafa knows is he has a kitty, fairly substantial and teams always sell players during the close season.


One thing that does happen is player transfer values go up. We all know English players are over priced.

However, I will stand by my earlier post of how Rafa goes about his business. I said he'll spend big on "some" players as he sees fit. But Rafa thinks and plans "squad". When a spine member gets injured or losses something , Rafa will attempt to buy big to replace. But there aren't 11 members of the spine. And that is why Rafa will spend mediocre/decent money on "squad" players and buy more of those than the big money buys.

Guess we'll see the next few years. But I bet the whinge will be Rafa needs 30-40 mil more each season.

What the hell has that got to do with anything? You implied Rafa has a Platonic list; an ideal enshrined in is mind completely divorced form funds and that as long as he meets his targets you're happy.

I said, because it's true, that his list of targets at any given time is dependent on his situation and the funding available to him.  Nothing you've said above changes that: so what if he ought Alsonso for 10.6m? He had the funding at that time to do so so he did; that's MY whole point. If he'd been told he could only spend a max of 7m on a player that season you can bet he'd have developed an alternative list without Alonso on it.

There's nothing complicated in what I'm saying; it's what applies to all managers at all times. It's only because you use the 'Rafa got his targets so I'm happy' argument to defend the Hicks tenure without admitting that his targets will always be dependent on what he's allowed to do, that the subject even comes up.

I'll ask you AGAIN. Why wasn't Torres or a player of equal stature on Rafa's list of targets prior to 2007? Are you really expecting us to believe that he thought a player like Bellamy was more important to us back then? Or could it simply be what I'm saying, namely the moment he learned he had more money to spend his list started featuring the likes of Torres?

But it will NEVER be enough for some unless we spend 20 mil on 2-3 players a season.

It's you who are pretending that this is an argument about Galacticos. As usual, you're arguing points that others aren't making. And now somehow, out of thin air,  you've moved the goal posts to trying to pretend that we're denying the amount of money made available to him in 2007. It's obvious he had substantial funds and, more importantly, the green light to spend more on individual players (one 20m player is better than three 7m ones). The fact that a) it was borrowed money b) we'd just earned a new record TV deal and earned funds from getting to another CL final and c) there was clearly a point around Athens when Rafa felt he wasn't going to get any money, i.e Hicks and Gillett were embarrassed into making more available, tends to take the shine off of Hicks' part in all of this, however.

[coffeehead]

Well I suspect the theory is to spend big to get quality players.

Yet, Man utd pay big once someone shows promise elsewhere. Chelsea just pay big.

Wenger is a closer analogy.

Ask yourself why Rafa has spent so much time buying up youngsters? Ans your self why 3 have been promoted to the first team?

Rafa wants to build with youth supplemented by experience. And he'll buy some talent if he feels he doesn't have the talent coming through at certain positions. Which is why his 4-5 year plan is just now coming to fruition. And hopefully the Academy will keep developing talent.

But the summer transfer thread would be a boring place if we don't spend 40-50 mil every season. Why.... Bayern Munich lost the Champions League semi final one season 2000 and bought no one and won it the next 2001. Wonder what their summer transfer thread was like that season..lol

That's a very naive post; Or maybe it's a knowing post deliberately designed to cast others into a bad light. Rafa's attempts at buying youngsters are well known and greatly appreciated. We don't need you to tell us that. Whether any of them will ever come through to become regular and influential parts of the team is another matter. Academy systems are always great gambles.

But in the meantime, the quality of our squad has long been so far inferior to our rivals that the only way to win the league and other prizes in the immediate term is, sadly, by obtaining the services of great players and mostly - not always - but mostly that means spending big. For all your talk of Rafa buying lots of cheap players - your implication that they were all his preferred targets; that he prefers cheap players to high quality expensive ones, we haven't moved forward very much in the league.

And the reason for that is obvious to all but you: because of stupid board decisions, Rafa has been forced to spend low sums on mediocre players who end up failing to make the required impact and who often have to be replaced anyway. The amounts he has spent in total could have bought him a smaller number of far better, enduring players and I've no doubt that would have been his preference, had he been allowed. Instead, four years on we're still in the position where substantial investment is needed, despite a massive spend on 'not good enough' players.

Ask yourself, seriously, do you really believe this has been Rafa's plan? To be stuck having to buy the likes of Bellamy and Pennant and freebies like Voronin, spend huge sums in total on then and four years later STILL need to spend substantial sums to make the step up?

[4pool]

Geez..you had to answer one post twice? Basically saying the same thing.

Kuyt.

Remember him? The one Moores loaned the club money for.

Blows your argument away Rafa wasn't given money for his targets.

You instintively think Rafa wants big money transfers. That given 100 mil Rafa will go spend 30 on this one and 20 on that one etc.

My take on Rafa is he wouldn't do that.

So you miss my point all along.

I think Rafa gets more enjoyment and satisfaction out of finding an Agger or Skrtel for that money than spending 30 mil on a Rio Ferdinand.

That spending good money on an Alonso or Garcia or even Mascherano is better than the money Man Utd and Chelsea spend on their midfielders. If Rafa had the money United spent on Carrick and Hargreaves do you seriously think Rafa would have bought them for those figures? (Irrespective of needing them or them wanting to come to Liverpool)

And that is the bloody point.

Rafa has said time and again, he will spend money on what he thinks is a players value for the position he is looking at. He won't be held to ransome. Which is another way of saying once a player gets so expensive he loses something. Maybe desire or whatever. But Rafa is all about the player and the players versatility and mentality. Not about ££££££'s.

I know if Rafa doesn't spend, the theory will be he wasn't given the money. Regardless if DIC do take over, my opinion won't change on how Rafa operates. In fact some may be harping DIC got stingy when that wouldn't be the case..imho.

[Romford_Red]

Can you two just agree that you're not just missing each others point (whatever they may be), but you're taking high speed trains in the opposite direction?

As for the topic question, I hope my earlier post is right, but until I hear concrete news about transfers/take-overs/stadium building over the summer, I am going to be relying on blind faith that we'll have enough cash to get the right players to be a true force again next season. Anything else is just too depression inducing.

[hide5seek]

So 4pool how come RAfa hasn't brough Alves?

[4pool]

So 4pool how come RAfa hasn't brough Alves?

Shouldn't the question be how come no one has?

The answer is his club didn't want to sell him.

Now they might do.

Can't buy what's not available.

[jckliew]

Financing of new players will come from

a) sales of players
b) Credit form bankers

aint no way the owners are gonna pump in more $$$ in a standoff.......also the credit crunch is biting hard on the yanks

so dont expect yer 20mil signings..... 

[Romford_Red]

Shouldn't the question be how come no one has?

The answer is his club didn't want to sell him.

Now they might do.

Can't buy what's not available.

Where can I get a passport cover like that???

[coffeehead]

Geez..you had to answer one post twice? Basically saying the same thing.

Kuyt.

Remember him? The one Moores loaned the club money for.

Blows your argument away Rafa wasn't given money for his targets.

It would if that had been my argument. Try reading what people say before replying half cocked. 

You instintively think Rafa wants big money transfers. That given 100 mil Rafa will go spend 30 on this one and 20 on that one etc.

No. try reading what people say instead of replying half-cocked 

My take on Rafa is he wouldn't do that.

So you miss my point all along.

I think Rafa gets more enjoyment and satisfaction out of finding an Agger or Skrtel for that money than spending 30 mil on a Rio Ferdinand.

Speculative. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. Still irrelevant to the point: he'll choose his targets based on his situation at the time; as everyone does.

That spending good money on an Alonso or Garcia or even Mascherano is better than the money Man Utd and Chelsea spend on their midfielders. If Rafa had the money United spent on Carrick and Hargreaves do you seriously think Rafa would have bought them for those figures?

If he'd had that money who knows whom he would have bought; well actually we do have an idea. he'd have bought a Mascherano. Which he did. When he had the money. QED

Rafa has said time and again, he will spend money on what he thinks is a players value for the position he is looking at. He won't be held to ransome.

Arthur? 

Which is another way of saying once a player gets so expensive he loses something. Maybe desire or whatever. But Rafa is all about the player and the players versatility and mentality. Not about ££££££'s.

That's an interesting one actually; he mostly came out with those statements when he was desperately trying to tie up the Simao and Alves deals, bearing in mind that with at least one of them the selling club was acting unprofessionally and ended up hiking the price after agreement had been reached. Try and keep the context in mind.

We heard no similar comments when he was spending much more on Torres and Masch so perhaps you should actually take those comments on face value: they have nothing to do with cost but rather the value of the player. If a (in his opinion) 10m player is being hawked at 15m he wont be held t ransom. Very sensible. That in no way implies he won't spend 25m on a player he regards as worth 25m.

I know if Rafa doesn't spend, the theory will be he wasn't given the money. Regardless if DIC do take over, my opinion won't change on how Rafa operates.

What a hilariously stupid comment; I wish you'd made it prior to the Torres and Masch purchases so we could all laugh (perhaps you did; I can;t be bothered to look)

[hide5seek]

Shouldn't the question be how come no one has?

The answer is his club didn't want to sell him.

Now they might do.

Can't buy what's not available.

 

Though he's supposed to be Rafa's top target for how long?

We all know if you offer the right money most players can be brought.

Rafa has not been given the right money or I doubt half the players he has brought here he'd bothered with.

[4pool]

Where can I get a passport cover like that???

Got mine at the club shop at Anfield 2006.

Not sure if they still offer them.

[4pool]

Coffeehead..

No wonder people get bored of our arguments. You move the goal posts and talk out of both sides of your mouth.

Bought Masch when he had the money.
Well the only way we could have gotten Masch and played him was a loan deal due to West Ham's third party deal. We went by the book in order to secure his services. Man utd waited until the end of the season in order to buy Tevez. Maybe you will understand the contractual differences. But our loan deal was with the agreed upon price for a permanent deal and we also had to fight so that Masch could play for us as he had already played for two clubs. Man utd didn't.  We then paid in the time frame stipulated to buy the player outright. Had nothing to do with --when Rafa was given the money as it was all agreed up front. Supporters impatience with getting it done is different than letting the deal expire and Masch move on.

Again both sides of your mouth. First you claim "he'll choose his targets based on his situation at the time; as everyone does."  Then "bearing in mind that with at least one of them the selling club was acting unprofessionally and ended up hiking the price after agreement had been reached." But yet you whinge about Rafa not having enough money. When in fact Rafa won't pay over the odds and the other club knew that. Rafa does choose his targets as everyone does and HE is the one who evaluates their worth and what he will spend.

I mention Agger and Skrtel and the "low" fees Rafa spent on them and contrasted that with a 20-30 mil defender. You may thinkRafa would jump at the chance to spend that much on a defender. I don't. Same with high value midfielders. As much as Rafa may value a Messi or Ronaldinho --he won't be putting them in his "target" book. Even if he had 100 mil to spend...imho.

Anyway it's all about opinions. I've given mine as to Rafa's "mentality" when it comes to transfers as seen in the 4 years he's been with us. And will play out again and again in the future. All to the complaints of those who think spending big money on every position is the only way forward to catch those above us.
Rafa is about "team" and not a collection of high priced talent.

[coffeehead]

Coffeehead..

No wonder people get bored of our arguments. You move the goal posts and talk out of both sides of your mouth.

Bought Masch when he had the money.
Well the only way we could have gotten Masch and played him was a loan deal due to West Ham's third party deal. We went by the book in order to secure his services. Man utd waited until the end of the season in order to buy Tevez. Maybe you will understand the contractual differences. But our loan deal was with the agreed upon price for a permanent deal and we also had to fight so that Masch could play for us as he had already played for two clubs. Man utd didn't.  We then paid in the time frame stipulated to buy the player outright. Had nothing to do with --when Rafa was given the money as it was all agreed up front. Supporters impatience with getting it done is different than letting the deal expire and Masch move on.

Again both sides of your mouth. First you claim "he'll choose his targets based on his situation at the time; as everyone does."  Then "bearing in mind that with at least one of them the selling club was acting unprofessionally and ended up hiking the price after agreement had been reached." But yet you whinge about Rafa not having enough money. When in fact Rafa won't pay over the odds and the other club knew that. Rafa does choose his targets as everyone does and HE is the one who evaluates their worth and what he will spend.

I mention Agger and Skrtel and the "low" fees Rafa spent on them and contrasted that with a 20-30 mil defender. You may thinkRafa would jump at the chance to spend that much on a defender. I don't. Same with high value midfielders. As much as Rafa may value a Messi or Ronaldinho --he won't be putting them in his "target" book. Even if he had 100 mil to spend...imho.

Anyway it's all about opinions. I've given mine as to Rafa's "mentality" when it comes to transfers as seen in the 4 years he's been with us. And will play out again and again in the future. All to the complaints of those who think spending big money on every position is the only way forward to catch those above us.
Rafa is about "team" and not a collection of high priced talent.

I know you're desperate to have the last word and 'win' the argument, but this post doesn't really make much sense, sorry. It certainly doesn't really refer to anything I'm saying in any meaningful way.

PS My apologies for boring everyone

[dgoh]

i'm not bored, just dizzy... hahaha

[woof]

Mancs just posted a loss in millions. This has been attributed to the way Glazier load the loan on the club. The way we are heading, it will happen here and if there's any miscalculation with the payments or world economic catastrophe, we could end up having to sell all our prized possession. The sooner G&H get out, the better.

I don't think we will expect a huge transfer kitty this season.

[Barnes & Beardsley]

When the Glazers refinanced the loans in 2005 and pilled on millions in debt, Man UTD’s season spending was £12.65m net in ‘05. In 06 they made a profit of £5.8m after selling Van Nistleroy and Obi Mikel and spent £12.6 net in ‘07.

Contrary to popular belief, the deals for Carrick, Nani, Anderson and Hargreaves were all negotiated using the common ad-on fees. (Appearances, goals, international caps and club and personal success).

Carrick £14m rising to £18.6m
Nani £8 rising to £17.3m
Anderson £8m rising to £20.4m
Hargreaves £16.8m rising to £20.2m
Tevez £10m two year loan fee

They have also had to sell before buying. Like £30.2m in ‘07.

To answer the question; the funds will come from player sales, more broadcasting money, prize money and money from the refinance loans set aside. H&G will sign the cheques.

Both clubs are heavily in debt after the takeovers. They just have better means to generate revenue to pay it off.

[Barnes & Beardsley]

Slightly off-topic and should probably be in another thread, but it relates to money. The board should have really capitalised on our Champions League success in terms of sponsorship and partnerships since ‘05. It’s worrying that we are still with Carlsberg who managed to successfully negotiate deals despite generating lower revenue for us. Look at AIG (£14m per year) Samsung (£10.2m) Emirates (£12.5m) compared to our £7.3m. It’s even less than Mansion (£8.5m).

Questions need to be asked and lot of things need to be addressed in the boardroom. Look at our sponsors; Carlsberg, Adidas, Unibet, MBNA, Gettyimages, Lucozade Sports and LSSA compared to Man UTD’s; AIG, Nike, Budweiser, Audi, Air Asia, Betfred, Hestiun, Kumho Tires and Tourism Malaysia.

We fall way short to the other three in terms of generating revenue through marketing and merchandise. I mentioned about larger stadiums and success in another thread, but we have really missed out on revenue over the last 15 years and should’ve capitalised on being the most successful team in England, one of the most successful in Europe and one of the most supported all over the world.