Jump to content

Takeover / New Investment - What Rumours Have You Heard?


Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, super_blue said:

No dought players have been told they are getting pay cuts and that’s why there is unrest and people looking for moves away. Some will have relegation clauses that allow them to leave for sure but some won’t. Some will have delusions of grandeur and will still be here come pre season regardless of wanting to take a pay cut or not. 

speaking with Stotts uncle £200 a week payrise  part of is new contract others being offered similar 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
1 hour ago, peanuts said:

speaking with Stotts uncle £200 a week payrise  part of is new contract others being offered similar 

 

An near £1000 a month pay rise for multiple players after a relegation doesn't exactly back up rumours of Lemmy having no money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, peanuts said:

speaking with Stotts uncle £200 a week payrise  part of is new contract others being offered similar 

Weird, my uncle doesn’t know how much I earn and I’d say we’re as close as family get (unless from Rochdale, Burnley, Bolton etc)  

 

I know the life of a footballers different but just cant imagine it coming into a family discussion on how much your new contracts increased wages etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, palmer1 said:

 

An near £1000 a month pay rise for multiple players after a relegation doesn't exactly back up rumours of Lemmy having no money.

Stott replacing Wilson more or less, presumably on less money? Sensible rather than splashing the cash.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, MAC0AFC said:

Weird, my uncle doesn’t know how much I earn and I’d say we’re as close as family get (unless from Rochdale, Burnley, Bolton etc)  

 

I know the life of a footballers different but just cant imagine it coming into a family discussion on how much your new contracts increased wages etc.

Unless he was bragging about it, excited young lad having his wages doubled etc? Think it was said on here at the time that Tarky pretty much did the same thing when he got his improved deal. Must admit though it’s not the kind of information I’d share with family either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, yarddog73 said:

Doubled his wages then :chubb:

Joking apart, for a bit of perspective he’s earning a similar basic wage to a newly qualified teacher or health professional. Not bad for a 20yr old.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, palmer1 said:

 

An near £1000 a month pay rise for multiple players after a relegation doesn't exactly back up rumours of Lemmy having no money.

 

....nor does it prove he’s got money, as LL points out....

 

8 hours ago, leeslover said:

Stott replacing Wilson more or less, presumably on less money? Sensible rather than splashing the cash.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

....nor does it prove he’s got money, as LL points out....

 

 

 

Yes but the original post states more than stott offered similar. We spreading out wages and not bringing anybody else in? £200per week also, lot of money. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, palmer1 said:

 

Yes but the original post states more than stott offered similar. We spreading out wages and not bringing anybody else in? 

 

Same same. Even if he gave 6 youth/fringe players a £10k per year payrise, that could be afforded from the club’s organic income, following the release of first team/loan players.

 

The litmus test for his ‘investment’ intentions will be on infrastructure and/or playing personnel with pedigree.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

Same same. Even if he gave 6 youth/fringe players a £10k per year payrise, that could be afforded from the club’s organic income, following the release of first team/loan players.

 

The litmus test for his ‘investment’ intentions will be on infrastructure and/or playing personnel with pedigree.

 

Absolutely I merely pointed out that giving a kid who who was on loan to the evostick league a £1000 per month raise doesn't point to being skint. Those 1st team players will still need to be replaced and not by fringe players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, palmer1 said:

 

Absolutely I merely pointed out that giving a kid who who was on loan to the evostick league a £1000 per month raise doesn't point to being skint. Those 1st team players will still need to be replaced and not by fringe players. 

Hamer will have got a pay rise as well, I'd take it to mean Stott is expected to play a decent number of games this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

Classic strawman.

 

How that then?  I agreed that the litmus test of investment is still to come. 

 

What's the organic income/how much is it and does it only go to these 6 fringe players getting a 10k rise. Do you know its 6? 

 

I didn't post anything about investment. I thought that rumoured pay rises for players who aren't guaranteed to play is a good sign. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, leeslover said:

Hamer will have got a pay rise as well, I'd take it to mean Stott is expected to play a decent number of games this season.

 The same was said of Edmunson last season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If true, this may point to another significant change in direction.

You'd imagine that Corney would be aware the payments he can get away with paying, but also that AL would not be niaive about the going rates for players.

Corney signed in excess of 20 players per season, so well over 300 players. You'd think at cheaply as he possibly could (I've always said he didn't not sign players for managers)/

It never worked.

 

Could we see the emergece of a new strategyt of signing players that have proven/are rated and paying them better?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

.....because you were using a modest payrise for a few young lads, as evidence that Lemmy isn't skint. It simply doesn't do that. In fact, it proves nothing. It's entirely neutral.

 

 

Did I? I thought I just pointed out something that contradicts the doom mongers. 

 

Skint people don't hand out 10k plus pay rises to several fringe players at clubs that havent been able to afford wages month to month. Just an observation, not evidence. 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, palmer1 said:

 

Did I? I thought I just pointed out something that contradicts the doom mongers. 

 

Skint people don't hand out 10k plus pay rises to several fringe players at clubs that havent been able to afford wages month to month. Just an observation, not evidence. 

 

 

I'll give this one last go and then I'll give up.....

 

It doesn't contradict the doom mongers. It's does precisely nothing. It neither proves, nor disproves any hypothesis. Hence it's a straw man argument.

 

The club have released some players and reduced the cost base, at the same giving some players [modest] payrises and increasing the cost base. One might assume the outgoing players wages amounted to more than the payrises awarded, hence Lemmy is net better off as things stand.

 

His relative skintness or otherwise cannot be proven/observed here. We await further evidence - in the form of infrastructure and/or pedigree/marquee signings - to be able to make that judgement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

29 minutes ago, lookersstandandy said:

 

I'll give this one last go and then I'll give up.....

 

It doesn't contradict the doom mongers. It's does precisely nothing. It neither proves, nor disproves any hypothesis. Hence it's a straw man argument.

 

The club have released some players and reduced the cost base, at the same giving some players [modest] payrises and increasing the cost base. One might assume the outgoing players wages amounted to more than the payrises awarded, hence Lemmy is net better off as things stand.

 

His relative skintness or otherwise cannot be proven/observed here. We await further evidence - in the form of infrastructure and/or pedigree/marquee signings - to be able to make that judgement. 

 

 

Oh my opinion doesn't prove anything...No shit!

 

Modest pay rise? for a club that was reportedly paying first team players less than £250 as week (a few years ago) id say it was more than modest unless your opinion proves otherwise.

 

Id give up if I was you......please, as I expect us to sign 1st team players this month despite the pay rises but again I have no evidence. I assume...

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given that Hamer was on a youth scholarship and Stott on his first pro deal neither would've been earning much before.

 

But I tend to stick with the "too early to tell" brigade. Plus, I think we need to find a way to lose some of the higher-paid non-performers before we can really bring quality in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...