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

So there never was a decent budget for this summer, was there?

AFKABartramAFKABartram
in General Charlton
Talk of the Lookman money being held back for the summer etc..

Robinson after getting Tex off the wage bill: "We need to do one or two more things before we can then start doing more business. Now I’ve got a bit more flexibility but I can’t be too eager."

So it was all rubbish really, wasn't it?
«13

Comments

  • ForeverAddicktedForeverAddickted
    Billy Clarke is the only fee we've played for a player isnt he?

    Both Tarieq Fosu and Mark Marshall rejected new deals if I'm correct?
  • roseandcrownroseandcrown
    ForeverAddickted said:

    Billy Clarke is the only fee we've played for a player isnt he?

    Both Tarieq Fosu and Mark Marshall rejected new deals if I'm correct?

    Fosu was compensation so imagine a small fee.
  • kings hill addickkings hill addick
    edited July 2017
    I don't remember anyone from the club publicly stating that the Lookman money would be invested this summer.

    I've read a few people on here demanding it, and speculating that it might happen, but I never thought that Robinson was going to have anything like that kind of money to spend.
  • shirty5shirty5
    Did the new contracts given to Pearce and Holmes eat into the manager's budget this summer?
  • HartleypeteHartleypete
    You see this is where the language barrier causes problems, Roland told Gobinson that he would be getting a decent size budgie this summer!
  • stonemusestonemuse
    AFKABartram said:

    Talk of the Lookman money being held back for the summer etc..

    Robinson after getting Tex off the wage bill: "We need to do one or two more things before we can then start doing more business. Now I’ve got a bit more flexibility but I can’t be too eager."

    So it was all rubbish really, wasn't it?

    Yup
  • RossRoss
    Is it the wage bill that is the problem, and not the budget for transfer fees?

    We needed them off the wage bill to comply with financial fair play if we brought new signings in?
  • Sponsored links:


  • ScohamScoham
    Ross said:

    Is it the wage bill that is the problem, and not the budget for transfer fees?

    We needed them off the wage bill to comply with financial fair play if we brought new signings in?

    Nope, not according to the club - http://www.castrust.org/2017/07/david-joyes-salary-cap-protocol-not-a-problem/

    At the Fans Forum meeting on 23rd June Chief Finance officer David Joyes made it clear that the salary cap management protocol (whereby player costs must not exceed 60% of turnover) will not be a problem this season for Charlton Athletic.
  • johnny73johnny73
    edited July 2017
    Ross said:

    Is it the wage bill that is the problem, and not the budget for transfer fees?

    We needed them off the wage bill to comply with financial fair play if we brought new signings in?

    FFP not a problem. I believe Meire confirmed this at the last fans forum.
  • JiMMy 85JiMMy 85
    Heard this recently, think it works here - Same shit burger, different bun.
  • HarryLimeHarryLime
    edited July 2017
    I think Gobbo said that the Lookman cash would be spent on Sparrows Lane. Something that would last for next 50 years.
    Possibly my dreams, left in the bottom of one of those trenches.
    https://www.londonnewsonline.co.uk/15161/charlton-manager-robinson-big-chunk-lookman-fox-transfer-money-will-go-building-best-training-ground-south-london/
  • BubbleBubble
    johnny73 said:

    Ross said:

    Is it the wage bill that is the problem, and not the budget for transfer fees?

    We needed them off the wage bill to comply with financial fair play if we brought new signings in?

    FFP not a problem. I believe Meire confirmed this at the last fans forum.
    It's not a problem when you don't spend any money
  • Airman BrownAirman Brown
    edited July 2017
    The Lookman money was needed to help offset the massive operating loss in 2015/16 - or if you prefer to cover the heavy operating loss in 2016/17. For a similar reason coming down the track in 2017/18 they will sell Konsa if they can, assuming they are still here.
  • Fanny FanackapanFanny Fanackapan
    Airman Brown said:

    The Lookman money was needed to help offset the massive operating loss in 2015/16 - or if you prefer to cover the heavy operating loss in 2016/17. For a similar reason coming down the track in 2017/18 they will sell Konsa if they can, assuming they are still here.

    " Airman gives Fanny some hope at last " shocker.....
  • Sponsored links:


  • killerandflashkillerandflash
    AFKABartram said:

    Talk of the Lookman money being held back for the summer etc..

    Robinson after getting Tex off the wage bill: "We need to do one or two more things before we can then start doing more business. Now I’ve got a bit more flexibility but I can’t be too eager."

    So it was all rubbish really, wasn't it?

    Did anyone seriously expect that the Lookman money or even a chunk of it was being held back for the summer? If it had been available in January, KR would have spent it, after all he effectively had to loan out Ajose to pay for the Mavididi loan
  • SouthWest_AddicksSouthWest_Addicks
    edited July 2017
    I think we've got 3 players who would walk into any team in this division; Pearce, Josh and Holmes. Not including Marshall in that because I have never actually seen him play.

    We've got plenty of wild cards such as, Kashi. A player who should be class above this decision but is coming back from being crocked.

    Watt and Novak should be amongst the better players in this division but don't appear to be doing the job for us.

    Plus we've got plenty of young players who need to show they are capable of competiting a 46 games season; Konsa, Aribo and JFC.

    We should be challenging for the top 6. However can't see us getting anywhere near the top 2.
  • charltonnickcharltonnick
    I'm sure we have one of the biggest wage bills in Division 1 , just a lot of it goes on over paid legacy players that we can't offload
  • HalixHalix
    edited July 2017
    Can't see how we can complain about a small player budget, whilst still advocating a season ticket boycott, we cant expect to have it both ways.
  • Dazzler21Dazzler21
    If we don't bring anyone in than I would have preferred to keep Tex and Ceballos.

    That is all.
  • LargeAddickLargeAddick
    Halix said:

    Can't see how we can complain about a small player budget, whilst still advocating a season ticket boycott, we cant expect to have it both ways.

    who has ever advocated a season ticket boycott?
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!