Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Transfer Spending Policy

Do the club continue with sensible value for money spending or break the bank?


  • Total voters
    114




mejonaNO12 aka riskit

Well-known member
Dec 4, 2003
21,481
England
Without wanting to be "that guy", isn't EVERY signing seen as "value for money" by the club.....otherwise they wouldn't pay it.
 


Kinky Gerbil

Im The Scatman
NSC Patreon
Jul 16, 2003
57,845
hassocks
As the other thread about "bribes" shows - think some underestimate how much players cost.

Most PL Clubs ask for a loan fee/signing on bonus for a player.
 


whitelion

New member
Dec 16, 2003
12,828
Southwick
Without wanting to be "that guy", isn't EVERY signing seen as "value for money" by the club.....otherwise they wouldn't pay it.

I think a lot of clubs pay "over the odds" for various reasons.

Making a statement of intent (pleasing the fans).
In order to secure a player in a bidding war.

Etc etc.
 






Nixonator

Well-known member
Feb 8, 2016
6,733
Shoreham Beach
You would need to quantify what 'sensible' and 'break the bank' mean in actual figures.

There is clearly money available. Sensible for me would be spending every penny of it without TB having to subsidise losses. What we are clearly trying to avoid are ridiculous contracts that could get us in trouble down the line.
 


Mackenzie

Old Brightonian
Nov 7, 2003
33,508
East Wales
Other. Tony Bloom knows what he's doing, he's had a very detailed database on footballers for years, it's how he's earned his fortune. We're in good hands and I'm completely relaxed about the forthcoming season.
 








Thunder Bolt

Ordinary Supporter
Spending the most money doesn't guarantee success, as evidenced by last season. I think the club do get value for money, the majority of the time, so let it continue.
 


brightonrock

Dodgy Hamstrings
Jan 1, 2008
2,482
Surely it'll be a mix. Tony will never be the type to overspend - quibbling over a million or so for a left back (eg Suttner) might seem overly frugal but it frees up that cash for a striker. We'll want money to be spent in the right areas, and the fact a good #9, #10 or winger tend to come at a premium, means we'll be looking at loans, frees and bargains in other areas.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 




Husty

Mooderator
Oct 18, 2008
11,973
Perfectly happy with the club's policy, we're going about things in the right way rather than pissingmo ey up on the wall on 'names'. I'd rather lose gallanty than win for a couple of years then do a Leeds or Pompey.
 


beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,265
Spending the most money doesn't guarantee success, as evidenced by last season. I think the club do get value for money, the majority of the time, so let it continue.

true, but unless you've got something special going on, not spending money when you have £100m coming in isnt going to bring success either.
 








martin tyler

Well-known member
Jan 25, 2013
5,826
The club will already have a rough idea what they are going to spend and how many players that needs to cover.
We will only pay what we think a player is worth but there are wages to consider, whether the person signing on will fit into any wage structure if we are relegated, are they willing to take a pay cut if so. Obviously agents are not keen on this sort of thing. Lots of complicated issues before any one player signs on the dotted lines
 


Blackadder

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 6, 2003
16,077
Haywards Heath
Went for Hybrid as I do believe we should have sensible spending but I would like to push out the boat for that elusive striker that could provide the goals that keep us up.
 


KVLT

New member
Sep 15, 2008
1,675
Rutland
I think a lot of clubs pay "over the odds" for various reasons.

Making a statement of intent (pleasing the fans).
In order to secure a player in a bidding war.

Etc etc.

There's also the odd situation like with Andy Carroll to Liverpool for £35 million. They needed a striker to replace Torres and everyone knew they had £50 million in the bank from the sale of him to Chelsea.

£50 million for Torres was bad enough, although I personally feel the pressure Torres felt having cost so much is ultimately what led to his failure to perform, but Andy Carroll for £35 million back then was never going to represent anything close to value for money.
 




The_Viper

Well-known member
Oct 10, 2010
4,345
Charlotte, NC
Went for Hybrid as I do believe we should have sensible spending but I would like to push out the boat for that elusive striker that could provide the goals that keep us up.

This was my thought process as well, teams don't NEED a big time striker to stay up, but it really, really helps.
 


Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
16,560
Fiveways
Other. Tony Bloom knows what he's doing, he's had a very detailed database on footballers for years, it's how he's earned his fortune. We're in good hands and I'm completely relaxed about the forthcoming season.

This. People like to go on about how much money has ploughed into the club (c£0.25bn last time I looked), whereas I'm probably more impressed by the way he spends his money, rather than the amount. That said, I think the options could be better put, as there really isn't anything remotely resembling VFM out there now; there might be in a comparative sense, but the PL/English football bubble keeps on inflating. It'll burst at some point, but I don't know how or when.
 



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here