As someone living in Kent I was pleased to hear Methven praise the importance of Valley Express.
With my boy travelling with me, it's such an easy way for us to get to games - no queueing for the train, no faffing around for a parking space, etc. If they could figure out a sensible pricepoint and marketing they could certainly make more of it (providing a widely-used service, retaining support) than they currently do. Airman may well have figures that back this up, or perhaps not, maybe I'm in a small minority that appreciate the service.
Jones said again that he didn’t want young loan players as he didn’t want to develop them for other clubs. Has he always been like this during his management career? Or is he just sticking the STM line, as the only way the club will reduce the losses in a big way is sell young stars.
I keep reading that we need to "spend money", "gamble", "go for broke", "break the bank".
Maybe we should get the European Player of the Year in on a contract we can't afford to honour?
I keep reading on this forum that our owners are billionaires, if? That is so then the kind of big spending we are talking of would be small change for them.
Fee signings are overrated -- a player doesn't immediately become better because we signed them for money. Many good players run down their contract so they can take the best offer. Some teams have gone up with barely anything spent on fees. Yeah, they might be struggling in the Champ, but whether you can survive there without investment is a different argument altogether.
And when you sign these players on a free, it's achieved by matching the going price for wages, being willing to pay agent fees, paying the right money to secure the right recruitment scouts who can identify these players, paying the free agent a lucrative signing on fee to match or fend off competition.
You still need to be competitive to sign free agents or have an advantage in some form like area. We secured Lyle Taylor and Alfie May over Sunderland and Derby respectively through location as an example.
Spending transfer fees can in some cases can bypass competition in the free agent market and potentially avoid bigger singing on fees.
Top free agents aren't cheap. This all falls back to spending cash, again.
Spending money is generally the key, we're trying to do things on the cheap. That is the problem.
Fourth biggest budget in the division doesn’t sound like we’re trying to do things on the cheap.
Being smart with that kind of money should see a top two challenge, top six minimum. Unfortunately we’ve underperformed for a good few years now.
Jones said again that he didn’t want young loan players as he didn’t want to develop them for other clubs. Has he always been like this during his management career? Or is he just sticking the STM line, as the only way the club will reduce the losses in a big way is sell young stars.
It's such a silly stance either way. If we got in a young, creative 10 would that reduce Luke Berry's sell on potential? He doesn't have any. But if that young, creative 10 helped get us into the playoffs not only would he generate revenue, he might help us get promoted which would more than offset the losses.
Right now, with the way things stand, finding the quality we need is most likely going to need to come from higher up the pyramid, and the most likely way to get that is through a loan.
We've got a large squad full of good if not great League One players with a couple of exceptions (Jones, Cov, Miles and TC on their days). We need a little extra quality, and a loan for a youngster or two might give us that spark. It SHOULD be a mutually beneficial relationship if things go right.
Fee signings are overrated -- a player doesn't immediately become better because we signed them for money. Many good players run down their contract so they can take the best offer. Some teams have gone up with barely anything spent on fees. Yeah, they might be struggling in the Champ, but whether you can survive there without investment is a different argument altogether.
And when you sign these players on a free, it's achieved by matching the going price for wages, being willing to pay agent fees, paying the right money to secure the right recruitment scouts who can identify these players, paying the free agent a lucrative signing on fee to match or fend off competition.
You still need to be competitive to sign free agents or have an advantage in some form like area. We secured Lyle Taylor and Alfie May over Sunderland and Derby respectively through location as an example.
Spending transfer fees can in some cases can bypass competition in the free agent market and potentially avoid bigger singing on fees.
Top free agents aren't cheap. This all falls back to spending cash, again.
Spending money is generally the key, we're trying to do things on the cheap. That is the problem.
Fourth biggest budget in the division doesn’t sound like we’re trying to do things on the cheap.
Being smart with that kind of money should see a top two challenge, top six minimum. Unfortunately we’ve underperformed for a good few years now.
Right, this is the thing, it's not about how much we spend, it's how we spend it. And for years and years, we've had a decent budget at this level, lost millions of pounds per year, and have fuck all to show for it. We barely have young, sellable assets apart from Miles (homegrown), TC in theory (homegrown), and Jones (good signing).
I haven't read through all of the posts here because there are a lot, but to me everything with this ownership comes back to we're losing 9m per year, how long are they going to want to finance that. I mean, I'd like to know why they're financing it now as I still don't really understand that.
I keep reading that we need to "spend money", "gamble", "go for broke", "break the bank".
Maybe we should get the European Player of the Year in on a contract we can't afford to honour?
I keep reading on this forum that our owners are billionaires, if? That is so then the kind of big spending we are talking of would be small change for them.
But that is genuinely not how this works. Billionaires don't become or stay billionaires by throwing money down the shitter just because some blokes on a message board insist on it.
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Where does that fourth highest come from? I've seen it a lot down the years but I make you right that it can't be true now.
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Apparently our net spend has been 800k, so says Charlie boy. We're not exactly pushing the boat out. 4th highest budget, 15,200 average gates. It's all talk and very dubious.
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Where does that fourth highest come from? I've seen it a lot down the years but I make you right that it can't be true now.
I’m assuming the club have claimed it. They get a list from the EFL that tells them where they rank. Obviously they might want to big up what they are spending so it could be untrue. I’d say it’s pretty certain we have a top 6 budget though
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Where does that fourth highest come from? I've seen it a lot down the years but I make you right that it can't be true now.
It's been heavily implied on numerous occasions. I think it may have also been confirmed at Bromley Addicks? Someone may be able to confirm that.
From a quick google I don’t think it has been confirmed. But Methven said this summer we are usually in the top 4 or 5 at this level and will have a highly competitive budget this season. I’d say it’s probably only Birmingham, Huddersfield, Bolton and Wrexham that have higher budgets than us, and they are probably the only 4 that bring in more money than us. If I was to guess I’d say we have the 5th highest
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Where does that fourth highest come from? I've seen it a lot down the years but I make you right that it can't be true now.
I’m assuming the club have claimed it. They get a list from the EFL that tells them where they rank. Obviously they might want to big up what they are spending so it could be untrue. I’d say it’s pretty certain we have a top 6 budget though
Yeah I think top 6 makes sense, probably 6th. @Braziliance outlines clubs probably outspending us. Certainly the relegated clubs.
The thing I distinctly picked up on which pissed me off was the strongly hinted scenario that we are going to be producing players for the benefit of other clubs. THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT TO BE HEARING!
No different to getting them in on loan then....😅😅😅.
Here for a season & then gone. Admittedly Academy players might have 2 seasons but by the looks of it not much more.
I am too young to have seen Simonsen but my dad and grandad always said how completely bizarre it was to see a player of his stature play for Charlton.
I am too young to have seen Simonsen but my dad and grandad always said how completely bizarre it was to see a player of his stature play for Charlton.
As someone living in Kent I was pleased to hear Methven praise the importance of Valley Express.
With my boy travelling with me, it's such an easy way for us to get to games - no queueing for the train, no faffing around for a parking space, etc. If they could figure out a sensible pricepoint and marketing they could certainly make more of it (providing a widely-used service, retaining support) than they currently do. Airman may well have figures that back this up, or perhaps not, maybe I'm in a small minority that appreciate the service.
I certainly appreciate it. Not sure if I’d bother regularly without it. As you say I can’t be arsed with multiple trains or navigating the parking issues etc. It’s a godsend to many. I’m sure it could be better used if they found the right price point and pushed it more. Saying that the routes they do run are well supported hence why they are still running and not been ditched as others have in the past.
The thing I distinctly picked up on which pissed me off was the strongly hinted scenario that we are going to be producing players for the benefit of other clubs. THIS IS NOT WHAT WE WANT TO BE HEARING!
No different to getting them in on loan then....😅😅😅.
Here for a season & then gone. Admittedly Academy players might have 2 seasons but by the looks of it not much more.
Except if the player's good enough to move on to another club we get a fee in return
4th highest budget in league 1 that has the likes of: Burton, Shrewsbury, Stevenage, Crawley, Lincoln, Cambridge, Exeter, Bristol Rovers, Mansfield, Leyton Orient, etc.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Where does that fourth highest come from? I've seen it a lot down the years but I make you right that it can't be true now.
It’s becoming increasingly clear to me that our number one missive is to develop young players to then sell them
Think that’s quite obvious, and that we want to buy players to develop and sell.
I don’t really see the problem with this, they have already shown they aren’t going to accept the first offer for our young players and are doing better than previous regimes at getting them on contracts so that we get the maximum value for them
If we develop our own players or buy and develop players that become good enough to make a profit on, then that means we are developing and signing good players and will be doing well
Fee signings are overrated -- a player doesn't immediately become better because we signed them for money. Many good players run down their contract so they can take the best offer. Some teams have gone up with barely anything spent on fees. Yeah, they might be struggling in the Champ, but whether you can survive there without investment is a different argument altogether.
And when you sign these players on a free, it's achieved by matching the going price for wages, being willing to pay agent fees, paying the right money to secure the right recruitment scouts who can identify these players, paying the free agent a lucrative signing on fee to match or fend off competition.
You still need to be competitive to sign free agents or have an advantage in some form like area. We secured Lyle Taylor and Alfie May over Sunderland and Derby respectively through location as an example.
Spending transfer fees can in some cases can bypass competition in the free agent market and potentially avoid bigger singing on fees.
Top free agents aren't cheap. This all falls back to spending cash, again.
Spending money is generally the key, we're trying to do things on the cheap. That is the problem.
Fourth biggest budget in the division doesn’t sound like we’re trying to do things on the cheap.
Being smart with that kind of money should see a top two challenge, top six minimum. Unfortunately we’ve underperformed for a good few years now.
I find this often quoted 4th biggest budget hard to believe. Let's see what the 23/24 accounts say which should be published soon.
It’s becoming increasingly clear to me that our number one missive is to develop young players to then sell them
Think that’s quite obvious, and that we want to buy players to develop and sell.
I don’t really see the problem with this, they have already shown they aren’t going to accept the first offer for our young players and are doing better than previous regimes at getting them on contracts so that we get the maximum value for them
If we develop our own players or buy and develop players that become good enough to make a profit on, then that means we are developing and signing good players and will be doing well
Will it get us promoted?
If we are able to sign and develop good players and develop our own good players then yes. Whether we are able to do that is the question.
I think the academy will always do its part, I think Jones is a good enough manager to develop the players, the big doubt is our recruitment
Some good ie the top line finances although we seemed to have skipped a year.
Net transfer spend of £800k to £1m
CM sometimes lets slip more than he intends.
IE bringing catering in house, change in shirt sponsors. Shame those issues weren't probed more but you can't blame in-house interviewers for not going full Jeremy Paxman
Think he confirmed what I said a few weeks back eg the big money guys are happy to put in what they said they would (£10m pa) but they aren't going to splash the cash over and above that.
CM was right say we can't talk about success until we get promoted. Were not on track for that but at least he acknowledged that.
Carter isn't a natural on TV and I keep thinking he's @AFKABartram but he is on top of his brief and appears to be constantly talking to managers.
On to the negative. The questioning was largely vague and soft, and especially from the reps. The fans questions from whattsapp were better and more to the point.
And Ali Maxwell: why? Must be a dozen CAFC fans who could do that.
Technically it was poor, sound was uneven and someone tell CM to look into the camers
I actually think all the fan engagement stuff is good but it's not very sexy for most fans and I have my own issues right now about how much it is real when push comes to shove.
Pleased for Jon and Lewis. I still thing the advisory board set up is totally wrong but that's for another debate.
I'm a big critic of CAST so this will be dismissed by some as having an axe to grind but tonight Heather didn't present CAST as an organisation likely to ask tough or probing questions or that would hold the board to account.
Overall, it was good that it happened but I think the club over managed it due to a lack of confidence/fear of difficult questions when in reality they would have been better to just take whatever came. Nothing should really come as a surprise to them and none of the four are that inarticulate or unable to think on their feet.
So, in a nutshell......
The owners are happy to keep ploughing in £10m a year just to stay in this division, with every few seasons a player sale might be enough to buy a couple more mediocre players that will help us finish 10th. Because they have no ambition to ever spend any money that might get us out of this poxy league.
RIght-o.
Not what I said.
I believe CM sold them the idea that he could reduce costs and increase income (see his ££ slide) and this, plus boosting the squad with academy talent which is our big USP, would produce the additional budget to produce a promotion winning team.
Not happened IMHO because of our poor recruitment (even Rodwell said how poorly we'd used the loan market) and the churn of managers.
I didn’t listen to it, but my reading of the comments made by the SMT is very simple, the plan is. That the owners agreed to give Charlton £10 million a year (losses where around £9 million per year when they took over) to fund the losses which they appear to be doing and are willing to do, therefore at present they are keeping to there part of the plan. This meant we had a million to invest in players and infrastructure/ infrastructure.
The problem is that the SMT stated they could reduce the losses to a more sustainable £3 million or less per year which meant there would be around £7 million per year for investment in players and infrastructure, this they have failed to do successfully as from the figures shown by the SMT would appear that the reduction was being generous £1/2 million or less, so the losses reduced from around £9 million to £8.5 millions. Which means now we have £1.5 millions to invest in infrastructure/ players.
So as I see it the owners are doing their bit, but the SMT have totally failed, I know this is very simplistic but, the owners must be looking at the figures and surly thinking, the SMT are failing and need replacing. They will not be thinking about spending more money than they agreed to (for ground purchase, but if pushed them may consider extending lease), infrastructure and new players, let’s be honest would you?
So my expectations is that there will be a new SMT in place by this time next year, they will be charged to reduce costs hopefully to a more realistic figure (my guess £5 million or less) therefore Charlton would have around £5 million a year for infrastructure and players. The big worry is how do you reduce the losses to £5 million?
Probably a load of rubbish, but that’s my take from what I read on here.
Agree and have said much the like when they turned up. Methven offering unrealistic outcomes but they kind of fell for it. My question would be, could any SMT reduce the losses to the levels you mention? I reckon it would be a pretty tall order for the best of them let alone this bunch of chancers. So the next question has to be, will the investors even stick around to find out. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I still think in the not too distant future, Methven will be left holding the baby.
Some good ie the top line finances although we seemed to have skipped a year.
Net transfer spend of £800k to £1m
CM sometimes lets slip more than he intends.
IE bringing catering in house, change in shirt sponsors. Shame those issues weren't probed more but you can't blame in-house interviewers for not going full Jeremy Paxman
Think he confirmed what I said a few weeks back eg the big money guys are happy to put in what they said they would (£10m pa) but they aren't going to splash the cash over and above that.
CM was right say we can't talk about success until we get promoted. Were not on track for that but at least he acknowledged that.
Carter isn't a natural on TV and I keep thinking he's @AFKABartram but he is on top of his brief and appears to be constantly talking to managers.
On to the negative. The questioning was largely vague and soft, and especially from the reps. The fans questions from whattsapp were better and more to the point.
And Ali Maxwell: why? Must be a dozen CAFC fans who could do that.
Technically it was poor, sound was uneven and someone tell CM to look into the camers
I actually think all the fan engagement stuff is good but it's not very sexy for most fans and I have my own issues right now about how much it is real when push comes to shove.
Pleased for Jon and Lewis. I still thing the advisory board set up is totally wrong but that's for another debate.
I'm a big critic of CAST so this will be dismissed by some as having an axe to grind but tonight Heather didn't present CAST as an organisation likely to ask tough or probing questions or that would hold the board to account.
Overall, it was good that it happened but I think the club over managed it due to a lack of confidence/fear of difficult questions when in reality they would have been better to just take whatever came. Nothing should really come as a surprise to them and none of the four are that inarticulate or unable to think on their feet.
So, in a nutshell......
The owners are happy to keep ploughing in £10m a year just to stay in this division, with every few seasons a player sale might be enough to buy a couple more mediocre players that will help us finish 10th. Because they have no ambition to ever spend any money that might get us out of this poxy league.
RIght-o.
Not what I said.
I believe CM sold them the idea that he could reduce costs and increase income (see his ££ slide) and this, plus boosting the squad with academy talent which is our big USP, would produce the additional budget to produce a promotion winning team.
Not happened IMHO because of our poor recruitment (even Rodwell said how poorly we'd used the loan market) and the churn of managers.
I didn’t listen to it, but my reading of the comments made by the SMT is very simple, the plan is. That the owners agreed to give Charlton £10 million a year (losses where around £9 million per year when they took over) to fund the losses which they appear to be doing and are willing to do, therefore at present they are keeping to there part of the plan. This meant we had a million to invest in players and infrastructure/ infrastructure.
The problem is that the SMT stated they could reduce the losses to a more sustainable £3 million or less per year which meant there would be around £7 million per year for investment in players and infrastructure, this they have failed to do successfully as from the figures shown by the SMT would appear that the reduction was being generous £1/2 million or less, so the losses reduced from around £9 million to £8.5 millions. Which means now we have £1.5 millions to invest in infrastructure/ players.
So as I see it the owners are doing their bit, but the SMT have totally failed, I know this is very simplistic but, the owners must be looking at the figures and surly thinking, the SMT are failing and need replacing. They will not be thinking about spending more money than they agreed to (for ground purchase, but if pushed them may consider extending lease), infrastructure and new players, let’s be honest would you?
So my expectations is that there will be a new SMT in place by this time next year, they will be charged to reduce costs hopefully to a more realistic figure (my guess £5 million or less) therefore Charlton would have around £5 million a year for infrastructure and players. The big worry is how do you reduce the losses to £5 million?
Probably a load of rubbish, but that’s my take from what I read on here.
Agree and have said much the like when they turned up. Methven offering unrealistic outcomes but they kind of fell for it. My question would be, could any SMT reduce the losses to the levels you mention? I reckon it would be a pretty tall order for the best of them let alone this bunch of chancers. So the next question has to be, will the investors even stick around to find out. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I still think in the not too distant future, Methven will be left holding the baby.
Comments
With my boy travelling with me, it's such an easy way for us to get to games - no queueing for the train, no faffing around for a parking space, etc. If they could figure out a sensible pricepoint and marketing they could certainly make more of it (providing a widely-used service, retaining support) than they currently do. Airman may well have figures that back this up, or perhaps not, maybe I'm in a small minority that appreciate the service.
Maybe we should get the European Player of the Year in on a contract we can't afford to honour?
Being smart with that kind of money should see a top two challenge, top six minimum. Unfortunately we’ve underperformed for a good few years now.
Right now, with the way things stand, finding the quality we need is most likely going to need to come from higher up the pyramid, and the most likely way to get that is through a loan.
We've got a large squad full of good if not great League One players with a couple of exceptions (Jones, Cov, Miles and TC on their days). We need a little extra quality, and a loan for a youngster or two might give us that spark. It SHOULD be a mutually beneficial relationship if things go right.
I haven't read through all of the posts here because there are a lot, but to me everything with this ownership comes back to we're losing 9m per year, how long are they going to want to finance that. I mean, I'd like to know why they're financing it now as I still don't really understand that.
I expect us to dwarf these clubs in terms of squad quality and spend, I don't see that as ambition.
It's a bit different if you're saying the 4th highest budget in the championship, that would be showing some bollocks. Not league1. Pitiful league full of clubs with tiny grounds and little history.
I'm also not too sure if we are the 4th highest. I'd be curious to see our figures matched up against: Birgmingham, Wrexham, Wycombe, Peterborough, Bolton, Rotherham, Barnsley, and Huddersfield. We are behind Birmingham, that's a given, I imagine we might be behind Huddersfield, Wrexham and Bolton as well. I'd be curious to see us up against the others. Either way, I doubt we are spending a significant amount more than the likes of Rotherham and Barsnley who are our direct rivals for a play-off slot.
The real figures as well, not just guesses.
Here for a season & then gone. Admittedly Academy players might have 2 seasons but by the looks of it not much more.