Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Johan Berg Gudmundsson - Burnley bid accepted

1235789

Comments

  • edited July 2016
    Leuth said:

    To be fair, breaking even in the top leagues in 2016 is more or less completely impossible, no?

    Not so in the Premier League now, but the point is 1) the rising scale of the losses (and negative impact of additional spending) and 2) that the regime's one specific objective was to move towards break even in the FL. This was always unattainable, as it was even when Murray asserted the opposite in 2009/10 to the incredulity of his own senior management, but it is the benchmark this regime set publicly.

    It's hardly unfair to judge them by it.
  • Leuth said:

    To be fair, breaking even in the top leagues in 2016 is more or less completely impossible, no?

    Is your real name Manuel ? ;0)

  • Leuth said:

    To be fair, breaking even in the top leagues in 2016 is more or less completely impossible, no?

    Not so in the Premier League now, but the point is 1) the rising scale of the losses (and negative impact of additional spending) and 2) that the regime's one specific objective was to move towards break even. This was always unattainable, as it was even when Murray asserted it in 2009/10 to the incredulity of his own senior management, but it is the benchmark this regime set.

    It's hardly unfair to judge them by it.
    Obviously, and it is this unrealistic ambition that rightly forms the main basis of CARD's complaint.

    We'll see if they've recalculated this season. Hopefully they will outline their financial objectives soon.
  • An inevitable move he was never playing League 1 football after the Euro's. Good player but for me was often missing when things got tough so to get a decent fee for him was probably the best we could do. Best of luck to the lad I hope it goes well for him but somehow I think the Premier league is a step too high.
  • wmcf123 said:

    Should fund our spending so far plus losses of relegation

    Hardly. The club is immediately down about £4m in central payments alone, never mind the 15/16 operating loss and all those to come as a consequence of relegation.

    One effect of the timing of the sale(s) is that we can expect to see a thumping overall loss for the financial year to June 30th, but the even larger operating loss in 16/17 will now be mitigated in the bottom line by the departure of 15/16 players.


    When are the 15/16 figures likely to be published? I presume the club is obliged to publish those figures or, at the very least, post them on Companies House and hope that nobody notices?

    With the falling revenues you would normally expect during a relegation season, plus paying off Polish Pete, plus additional policing and stewarding costs associated with the protests, the figures should be horrendous. Reckon Katrien is already busy working out how to dress them up so they look more favourable.
  • Another million straight up and the add ons would have been a good deal imo, but you always want more when selling a player you like. IF the money is put back in for another few decent level signings then we will see it as a good deal. If not, then....oh dear.

    Good player, went missing alot last season with the others, which i struggle to really blame them for.

    But he has some superb play in his locker and can potentially win a game.

    Can't rule him out in the prem, good champ players have been poor in the past and others can excel. Techincally he is good enough to do well and will certainly work hard under Dyche, a man with direction and a plan to his football.

    Good luck to him.

  • Good move for all parties I think. Decent fee for us, step up for him and Burnley will see it as a cheap punt. Shame to see him go but it was to be expected.
  • Sponsored links:


  • If the "add-ons" are based around Burnley staying in the Premiership next year, we can kiss them goodbye.
  • If the "add-ons" are based around Burnley staying in the Premiership next year, we can kiss them goodbye.

    Last time round, Burnley pocketed most of the PL money and used some of it for training ground improvements etc

    This time round, Dyche will be targeting a decent PL finish
  • If the "add-ons" are based around Burnley staying in the Premiership next year, we can kiss them goodbye.

    Why? Bournemouth and Watford stayed up last season, very comfortably as well. This will be Burnley's third spell in the premier league now, and I think the players they have and the manager will give them a good solid base on which to build upon.
  • edited July 2016
    MrLargo said:

    wmcf123 said:

    Should fund our spending so far plus losses of relegation

    Hardly. The club is immediately down about £4m in central payments alone, never mind the 15/16 operating loss and all those to come as a consequence of relegation.

    One effect of the timing of the sale(s) is that we can expect to see a thumping overall loss for the financial year to June 30th, but the even larger operating loss in 16/17 will now be mitigated in the bottom line by the departure of 15/16 players.


    When are the 15/16 figures likely to be published? I presume the club is obliged to publish those figures or, at the very least, post them on Companies House and hope that nobody notices?

    With the falling revenues you would normally expect during a relegation season, plus paying off Polish Pete, plus additional policing and stewarding costs associated with the protests, the figures should be horrendous. Reckon Katrien is already busy working out how to dress them up so they look more favourable.
    I assume that despite relegation the club still has to declare its FFP loss to the FL by Christmas. This isn't public but Joyes - assuming he's still there - will presumably publish a version of the numbers in October/November as in previous years, probably telling us how lucky we are to have an owner who has wasted so much money on getting relegated. They have to disclose the full accounts by the end of March.
  • edited July 2016
    Charlton sell on the cheap.............hardly news is it.

    figure should have been around £3.5m - £4.0m THEN any add-ons, which could be a non-starter with our CEO - probably negotiated England appearances !!
  • Figure should have been £50m
  • Where has the 2.5 m come from? its 2m
  • Norwich offered 3m + 1
  • sam3110 said:

    If the "add-ons" are based around Burnley staying in the Premiership next year, we can kiss them goodbye.

    Why? Bournemouth and Watford stayed up last season, very comfortably as well. This will be Burnley's third spell in the premier league now, and I think the players they have and the manager will give them a good solid base on which to build upon.
    Perfectly fair point although I will say Bournemouth have a rich Russian owner who is throwing money around like confetti and Watford seem to have found a way of using the loan/network system well.

    But just in the season Burnley were out of the Premier League, things have moved on hugely. Blimey, we've even got our feathered friends down the road spending £10m on a centre half and offering over £30m for a forward! To keep up, they will have to improve their squad markedly, both in terms of numbers and quality. Throw in they've already lost Barton - can't stand the guy but his experience would have been vital for them - and Keane looks like he is off, then the players they are signing now are only effectively filling holes in the squad instead of improving it.

    That all said, I hope you're right and I'm wrong.
  • Redhenry said:

    Norwich offered 3m + 1

    then why accept Burnley's bid? Even if JBG wanted to go there then tough he is under contract, make them pay.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Redhenry said:

    Norwich offered 3m + 1

    then why accept Burnley's bid? Even if JBG wanted to go there then tough he is under contract, make them pay.
    I agree with this. they often mention the Spurs chairman as a good negotiator, maybe Katrien could ask her Uber black cab driving Tottenham inamorato to introduce her to Daniel Levy.
  • Addickted said:

    seth plum said:

    Sorry but I can't think of a good fee this useless regime has got for any departing player.ol

    I think we did well getting nothing for Le Point.

    very good, very good indeed
  • No, but the bigger the fee in, the less grumpy Roland is as he's pottering around his greenhouse thinking about his biscuits and it might allow us to get four More players on a free that he'll find the wages of.
  • Burnley's bid could have been accepted because they are willing to pay more up front maybe?
  • Redhenry said:

    Where has the 2.5 m come from? its 2m

    SLP stated "The Clarets offer is thought to be £2.5million with another £1m in add-ons."
  • I mentioned it in the Rumours thread, but I would guess Burnley have activated a lower 'top tier' release clause in his contract.

    So if JBG prefers a move there, then Championship side Norwich could offer £20m and it wouldn't make a difference.
  • No, but the bigger the fee in, the less grumpy Roland is as he's pottering around his greenhouse thinking about his biscuits and it might allow us to get four More players on a free that he'll find the wages of.

    And herein lies the near futility of boycotting (other than for personal reasons which I can understand - each to their own) - we are complaining about the fee, wishing we could get more but on the other hand refusing to buy merchandise and tickets. I have just renewed along with 7 others - 5 more I go with have not renewed. 3 weren't that committed really, 2 were but have other pressures to a certain degree I suspect and this has given them the push / excuse to not renew. Will be interesting to see what happens post RD but I'd be surprised if all 5 come back - once out of the habit etc
  • In the age of Troy Deeney being worth 25 million I think he's going very cheap indeed. His style of play will suit the premiership more I think.

    At least Roland the Rat will have a hardon for this sort of deal.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!