I wonder what Burke would have done with all this dosh?

[symyjym]

I've always had a feeling that the relaxation of the purse strings was directly linked to TBs confidence in the manager. We know he wasn't overly impress with Oscar and I suspect the same may have quickly become the case with Hyppia too. Maybe now he has a bit more confidence in CH to get the right people in so he's allowed to splash the cash a little more. Of course this may well be just my over active imagination leading me to this assumption.

Sure he had a trust issue after what happened with Poyet and was reluctant to spend, but to say, as fact that “We know he wasn't overly impressed with Oscar” is a baseless assumption. Can you expand on why you believe this to be the case?

 

[symyjym]

The surplus on player trading for the year was £1.7m.

Just to confirm. Money not spent/saved on the budget?

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Oscar’s budget was committed to Gus's players plus Kemy. Sometimes budgets sound like managers can spend where in reality Oscar had zero. £4m came in from Bridcutt and Barnes, and Stephens was brought in for about £400k as an emergency because of Crofts injury.

The surplus on player trading for the year was £1.7m.

Just to confirm. Money not spent/saved on the budget?

Sorry but I don't understand the question.
Player trading is the amortisation (depreciation) charge of player registration fees (ie the annual cost of player purchases to the club) less the amount received in transfer fees during that same financial year. Showing a PT surplus of £X means you received that amount more than the amortisation charge.
Comparing the headline in/out transfer fees for a particular year (even more so if they're being guessed at or taken from media reports) doesn't show anything particularly useful imo; and using this criteria as evidence of re-investment in players (or not) makes little sense.
In 2013/14, when Barnes and Bridcutt were sold, BHA showed a PT surplus of £1.7m and posted a loss of £10.6m; during the previous season there was a PT deficit of £1.1m and the annual loss was £15.3m.

 

[Alex Alex Dawson oo! oo!]

Arrrggghh, they replaced Barnes, Koosh, Buckley, Ulloa, Bridcutt all on permanent contracts.

You can't have it both ways, esp in a rising economy.

Those players were bought in probably for more money than the ones they replaced, therefore the budget has risen.
But the quality didn't rise with the (inflated) economy so it ended with a net loss.

Now it would appear the club is paying for the quality, up front, but it still has to cover the wages.


So why didn't it dig a little deeper last season, give Sami a fighting chance, and more importantly give us something to watch.

Barnes, Koosh and Bridcutt left during the previous (2013/14) season and are accounted for in the published accounts for that financial year. The playing/football budget seems also to have increased that year when the club posted a loss of £10.6m.

The financial accounts for the 2014/15 season, during which Baldock, Stockdale, Colunga, COG and Holla were purchased, won't be published until early 2016. It'll be interesting to see what the loss was with the sales of Ulloa and Buckley included. There may be a drop in turnover as well as some obvious extra costs associated with the new training ground (eg £700k of annual depreciation and the running costs), compensation payments and the ever increasing football/player related costs.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Cog only did it for one season, never did understand why we went for him. Saying that I don't think he is as bad as some on here make him out to be. Not a goal scorer but does give us something different.

But he has proven he scores goals. But for us a squad player, as you say gives us something different, csn take the pressure off the mid. I suspect we use him on occasions under pressure