Hotchilidog
Well-known member
- Jan 24, 2009
- 8,733
No. Tony paid for it. Doesn't count against FFP either.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Leicester Bid £3 /£5/£7.5 million for Ulloa
- Thread starter Ulloa's Soul Patch
- Start date
No. Tony paid for it. Doesn't count against FFP either.
Willy Dangle
New member
- Aug 31, 2011
- 3,551
Ok but it's not there to be spent, it would have been absorbed into minimising our losses / debt.
portslade seagull
Well-known member
This .... It might change if mega bucks are received for Ulloa though
portslade seagull
Well-known member
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,672
Ulloa can play with a team wanting to counter-attack, remember the Hull goal and a few others. If we pass the ball to his feet he can hold it up or give it back to someone easily. What he can't do is get any joy if we're punting balls vaguely near him with no support.
Blue Valkyrie
Not seen such Bravery!
All this talk of selling Ulloa is so very depressing, especially as we need so many new players anyway without having to find yet another striker.
fat old seagull
New member
Spot on.
Rookie
Greetings
- Feb 8, 2005
- 12,090
Do like this little rumour being trotted out now and again.
What short fall? Bloom has funded the whole thing.
Guess it was all planned that Bridcutt would down tools to get his way. The club had no intention to sell him otherwise. And what about the large bids that went in after he went.
nwgull
Well-known member
This. Bloom is very rich and has funded the training complex out of his own pocket. As you say, it's a one off investment so doesn't affect FFP limits.
I don't get why people think Bridcutt needed to be sold. If he did, then the club wouldn't have turned down his transfer request; the move only went through in the end because he effectively went on strike. That's not the actions of a club that needs to sell.
Agreed, but selling him are the actions of a club that react to a player throwing a hissy fit, sulking and going on strike by giving in to what the player wants. Not necessarily actions that you want to create a precedent around. The counter argument is that we got a decent amount for him...
Kumquat
New member
- Mar 2, 2009
- 4,459
Depends entirely on the player. If he is not going to perform as a result then get rid. Bennett for us and Suarez for Liverpool have proved that good negotiations with the player and them being reasonable can work, but it doesn't always. I don't think that Bloom has ever exuded the signs of a man to give in.
are you seriously suggesting that hanging on to a player who wants away, putting them in the stiffs, fining them wages etc... and then have them walk away for nothing at the end of their contracts anyway... is a sensible alternative??
and what sort of signal would that be to other young, ambitious players who might consider signing for us??
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,672
Agree with this especially the bottom point.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
7.5 million upwards would be hard to resist. Big question is, how much if any of the funds received would would find it's way into this seasons budget? If we, for the sake of argument, had a 10 million budget at the moment does anyone really believe it would be boosted to 17.5 million after the sale? We may get a fortune for him but if we are not willing to spend big on his replacement without dipping into what is available for players at the moment, I'm not sure I wouldn't rather it all fell through and he stayed even though I am not his biggest fan on last seasons performances.
Papa Lazarou
Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
I think that as long as the books are balances as to hit the FFP regulated levels of debt, any additional money (or at least the vast majority of it) will be ploughed straight back into the playing side. It would be madness on the part of Tony Bloom to basically miss such an opportunity to build a potentially promotion winning team, with the money saved on wages from last season and the transfer fees we've accrued.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
I totally agree and I hope that you are right.
Err, no. No, I wasn't suggesting that.
I was simply suggesting that there are consequences of whatever decision the club makes.
Take Bridcutt and Ulloa, for example. If it's true (or even if Leo simply believes it to be true) that the club's hand in selling Liam was, to some degree at least, forced by Bridcutt going on strike, then I would suggest that if Leo wants away, he may now be more tempted to go on strike to make it happen than he may have before seeing Liam use that tactic. S'all.
Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!
Primary data is fact
How does this work? Surely any transfer fees received during the current accounting period ending 30th June (eg for Bridcutt, Barnes and El Abd) go towards reducing the losses for 2013/14?
Papa Lazarou
Living in a De Zerbi wonderland
I guess we need someone like [MENTION=31]El Presidente[/MENTION] to answer that.