Again, I don't think Bonne is particularly good, and I'd rather we got someone different, but he's an interesting one at the moment given he's hardly played (120mins, 61 of those against us in the cup) but has recently been their striker on the bench so they might not want to let him go as it stands.
I like to stick to the facts. The spending has slowed. Whether it now stops, time will tell.
Scaremongering is shite...
It stopped in the summer... wrong again! Jeez
We didn't spend anything on transfer fees, what the original comment was about. Yes "frees" are free but we didn't spend a penny on transfer fees, did we?
God, I have no idea why you are all speculating on who we are likely to bring in.
The answer is nobody. Certainly wont be spending any money & seeing as contracts usually run out in the summer there wont be any freebies lurking around (which was our modus operandi in the summer)
2 loans is my guess. Bonne & a left back.
Speaking as fact again, when you really don't know, do you.
Check my last sentence. 5th word.
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
God, I have no idea why you are all speculating on who we are likely to bring in.
The answer is nobody. Certainly wont be spending any money & seeing as contracts usually run out in the summer there wont be any freebies lurking around (which was our modus operandi in the summer)
2 loans is my guess. Bonne & a left back.
Speaking as fact again, when you really don't know, do you.
Check my last sentence. 5th word.
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
Last sentence, 5th word of original post was "back". In this post it is especially..?
God, I have no idea why you are all speculating on who we are likely to bring in.
The answer is nobody. Certainly wont be spending any money & seeing as contracts usually run out in the summer there wont be any freebies lurking around (which was our modus operandi in the summer)
2 loans is my guess. Bonne & a left back.
Speaking as fact again, when you really don't know, do you.
Check my last sentence. 5th word.
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
Last sentence, 5th word of original post was "back". In this post it is especially..?
I think most of us realised he meant ‘guess’ as being the fifth word.
I like to stick to the facts. The spending has slowed. Whether it now stops, time will tell.
Scaremongering is shite...
It stopped in the summer... wrong again! Jeez
We didn't spend anything on transfer fees, what the original comment was about. Yes "frees" are free but we didn't spend a penny on transfer fees, did we?
So how is that wrong?
So no signing on fees or wages?
we lose millions a year, of course the spending hasn’t stopped.
Good to see the early optimism racing out of control as the rotting Charlton transfer window prepares to creak open a few millimetres once more, just enough to let in the biting cold of another January disappointment.
Good to see the early optimism racing out of control as the rotting Charlton transfer window prepares to creak open a few millimetres once more, just enough to let in the biting cold of another January disappointment.
Down feel so down, we’re due another Matt Smith on loan.
I like to stick to the facts. The spending has slowed. Whether it now stops, time will tell.
Scaremongering is shite...
It stopped in the summer... wrong again! Jeez
We didn't spend anything on transfer fees, what the original comment was about. Yes "frees" are free but we didn't spend a penny on transfer fees, did we?
So how is that wrong?
So no signing on fees or wages?
we lose millions a year, of course the spending hasn’t stopped.
I like to stick to the facts. The spending has slowed. Whether it now stops, time will tell.
Scaremongering is shite...
It stopped in the summer... wrong again! Jeez
We didn't spend anything on transfer fees, what the original comment was about. Yes "frees" are free but we didn't spend a penny on transfer fees, did we?
So how is that wrong?
So no signing on fees or wages?
we lose millions a year, of course the spending hasn’t stopped.
I like to stick to the facts. The spending has slowed. Whether it now stops, time will tell.
Scaremongering is shite...
It stopped in the summer... wrong again! Jeez
We didn't spend anything on transfer fees, what the original comment was about. Yes "frees" are free but we didn't spend a penny on transfer fees, did we?
So how is that wrong?
So no signing on fees or wages?
we lose millions a year, of course the spending hasn’t stopped.
Loan fee … agents fees
Transfer fees. None since January
True, but it was the first time he paid fees by way of compensation to bring in a manager and his assistant.
I judged him after the last transfer window and found him wanting, not because he didn't pay any transfer fees but because he left us short in key areas.
I like to stick to the facts. The spending has slowed. Whether it now stops, time will tell.
Scaremongering is shite...
It stopped in the summer... wrong again! Jeez
We didn't spend anything on transfer fees, what the original comment was about. Yes "frees" are free but we didn't spend a penny on transfer fees, did we?
So how is that wrong?
So no signing on fees or wages?
we lose millions a year, of course the spending hasn’t stopped.
Loan fee … agents fees
Transfer fees. None since January
True, but it was the first time he paid fees by way of compensation to bring in a manager and his assistant.
I judged him after the last transfer window and found him wanting, not because he didn't pay any transfer fees but because he left us short in key areas.
I agree that is the primary consideration, but as far a eg a striker is concerned IMVHO you are not going to get a "decent" one without paying the going rate or maybe slightly above to make sure you get him
God, I have no idea why you are all speculating on who we are likely to bring in.
The answer is nobody. Certainly wont be spending any money & seeing as contracts usually run out in the summer there wont be any freebies lurking around (which was our modus operandi in the summer)
2 loans is my guess. Bonne & a left back.
Speaking as fact again, when you really don't know, do you.
Check my last sentence. 5th word.
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
Last sentence, 5th word of original post was "back". In this post it is especially..?
I think most of us realised he meant ‘guess’ as being the fifth word.
Of course, but while we are apparently "speculating" he is guessing, not sure what the difference is in this context!
On another thread someone mentioned that QPR are looking at Leaburn. I suspect that if Bonne was offered in part exchange there would be a meltdown on here.
God, I have no idea why you are all speculating on who we are likely to bring in.
The answer is nobody. Certainly wont be spending any money & seeing as contracts usually run out in the summer there wont be any freebies lurking around (which was our modus operandi in the summer)
2 loans is my guess. Bonne & a left back.
Speaking as fact again, when you really don't know, do you.
Check my last sentence. 5th word.
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
You have it right Golfie, in fact I am amazed that people are still talking about Sandgaard as a player in the transfer market. He is looking for a way out and will not invest, he will eventually reach the point where he realises that he needs to give the ownership away, unfortunately we will have to put up with the club being underfunded till that point.
God, I have no idea why you are all speculating on who we are likely to bring in.
The answer is nobody. Certainly wont be spending any money & seeing as contracts usually run out in the summer there wont be any freebies lurking around (which was our modus operandi in the summer)
2 loans is my guess. Bonne & a left back.
Speaking as fact again, when you really don't know, do you.
Check my last sentence. 5th word.
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
You have it right Golfie, in fact I am amazed that people are still talking about Sandgaard as a player in the transfer market. He is looking for a way out and will not invest, he will eventually reach the point where he realises that he needs to give the ownership away, unfortunately we will have to put up with the club being underfunded till that point.
Agree. At least when RD was on the way out, he funded the part-wages of Conor Gallagher and Josh Cullen. TS only likely to fund any sort of loan by getting rid of quite a few. Mind you, I wouldn't have a problem with Kirk or McGrandles going. They just seem to be blocking younger talent to me.
Comments
So how is that wrong?
I'd love to be proved wrong & love for the club to spend money on a player in January. But history shows otherwise, especially when over the last few months everything Sandgarrd has said has been about cost cutting & breaking even.
Last sentence, 5th word of original post was "back". In this post it is especially..?
we lose millions a year, of course the spending hasn’t stopped.
I judged him after the last transfer window and found him wanting, not because he didn't pay any transfer fees but because he left us short in key areas.