| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received 05:58 - Jan 28 with 1869 views | Geefunk |
Its totally irrelevant to the fans and has been ever since Evans has been in charge. It is his business decision and his annual loss he tries to plug every year.
We know that what comes in from a transfer fee has no correlation at all to what we spend so why do people get so animated ?
Its modern football, we have a rich owner when you need an ultra ultra rich owner. Get used to it........there is nothing you can do about it anyway |  | | |  |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 06:47 - Jan 28 with 1806 views | Herbivore |
Good point, I've never really been able to fathom why football fans take an interest in the goings on at their club. It's a bit weird. |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 07:06 - Jan 28 with 1775 views | Ftnfwest |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 06:47 - Jan 28 by Herbivore |
Good point, I've never really been able to fathom why football fans take an interest in the goings on at their club. It's a bit weird. |
Although in fairness they’re far from alone, making loads of money out of a deal or otherwise equates to a major honour for Nodge fans generally |  | | |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:01 - Jan 28 with 1631 views | JimmyJazz |
I agree, go back to the earlier years under ME when we splashed 2 million plus on both Norris and Leadbitter and then just happily let their contracts run down.
Money kind of seemed fairly irrelevant
Add on fees obtained last summer vs no add on fees. Not much difference at the end of the day as far as we are concerned. |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:34 - Jan 28 with 1582 views | ElephantintheRoom |
It's kind of interesting in it sort of equates to the club's stature and the ability or desirability of Town players. Not many 'big' clubs come in for Town players..... even clearly quite good players like Darren Bent or Matt Holland ended up with giants like Charlton.... Wickham to mighty Sunderland etc... for some reason going back decades we cannot generate any players that generate good money - or any interest from clubs with money.
Bart is a case in point... hero-worshipped by Town fans, player of the year ad-infinitum - yet wanted after quite a big sales push by Town standards by ...erm.... nearly relegated Milwall. MIngs - allegedly on Arsenal's radar went to Bournemouth.
Granted fees are now largely hogwash... and dwarfed by wages and agent's fees... but it would be nice for Town to find a Maddison some time this century | |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:40 - Jan 28 with 1578 views | itfcjoe |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:34 - Jan 28 by ElephantintheRoom |
It's kind of interesting in it sort of equates to the club's stature and the ability or desirability of Town players. Not many 'big' clubs come in for Town players..... even clearly quite good players like Darren Bent or Matt Holland ended up with giants like Charlton.... Wickham to mighty Sunderland etc... for some reason going back decades we cannot generate any players that generate good money - or any interest from clubs with money.
Bart is a case in point... hero-worshipped by Town fans, player of the year ad-infinitum - yet wanted after quite a big sales push by Town standards by ...erm.... nearly relegated Milwall. MIngs - allegedly on Arsenal's radar went to Bournemouth.
Granted fees are now largely hogwash... and dwarfed by wages and agent's fees... but it would be nice for Town to find a Maddison some time this century |
Dyer, Wright and Bramble got moves to big clubs, but feels a life time ago - plus Darren Ambrose when the club was on it's knees.
I can just about accept losing Bart to Millwall now we are in L1 and we wanted rid of him, the deals fro Webster and Waghorn were far harder to take and really showed how far our stature had fallen even in the Championship |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:49 - Jan 28 with 1549 views | unstableblue |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:40 - Jan 28 by itfcjoe |
Dyer, Wright and Bramble got moves to big clubs, but feels a life time ago - plus Darren Ambrose when the club was on it's knees.
I can just about accept losing Bart to Millwall now we are in L1 and we wanted rid of him, the deals fro Webster and Waghorn were far harder to take and really showed how far our stature had fallen even in the Championship |
Agree on Webster and Waghorn. The Waghorn deal just seemed complete incompetence, but I believe this was on the part of the manager not Marcus - I believe Hurst felt we could do without Waghorn* by magically transforming League One strikers into leading Championship strikers.
Webster really grates, and I am hoping (and seem to have convinced myself) that Marcus has learnt a huge lesson from that transfer and the delta between Bristol Citys fee and Brightons - hold on to players for a bit longer, get back in Championship and realise 3, 4, 5 times the value on any necessary transfer - The Wolf and Downes are going to worth 4 times their value after a season in the Championship.
Waghorn on 252 minutes per goal this season, Norwood on 171. |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:53 - Jan 28 with 1540 views | itfcjoe |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:49 - Jan 28 by unstableblue |
Agree on Webster and Waghorn. The Waghorn deal just seemed complete incompetence, but I believe this was on the part of the manager not Marcus - I believe Hurst felt we could do without Waghorn* by magically transforming League One strikers into leading Championship strikers.
Webster really grates, and I am hoping (and seem to have convinced myself) that Marcus has learnt a huge lesson from that transfer and the delta between Bristol Citys fee and Brightons - hold on to players for a bit longer, get back in Championship and realise 3, 4, 5 times the value on any necessary transfer - The Wolf and Downes are going to worth 4 times their value after a season in the Championship.
Waghorn on 252 minutes per goal this season, Norwood on 171. |
When Webster was linked away in January under Mick, Sir Philip of Ham confirmed what I had heard that there was no way that Mick (and Marcus) would sanction a deal for Webster because they knew he was the sort of player that would go on to be worth a fortune.
They were right, but Marcus seemed to forget Mick's advice come the summer.
Lets hope he really has learned the lesson now re Downes and the Woolf | |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:59 - Jan 28 with 1519 views | Ftnfwest |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:49 - Jan 28 by unstableblue |
Agree on Webster and Waghorn. The Waghorn deal just seemed complete incompetence, but I believe this was on the part of the manager not Marcus - I believe Hurst felt we could do without Waghorn* by magically transforming League One strikers into leading Championship strikers.
Webster really grates, and I am hoping (and seem to have convinced myself) that Marcus has learnt a huge lesson from that transfer and the delta between Bristol Citys fee and Brightons - hold on to players for a bit longer, get back in Championship and realise 3, 4, 5 times the value on any necessary transfer - The Wolf and Downes are going to worth 4 times their value after a season in the Championship.
Waghorn on 252 minutes per goal this season, Norwood on 171. |
Agree in terms of the manager on Waggy, but the latter wanted away (and wanted the money, why not i guess) so it was all a bit immaterial in the end. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 10:36 - Jan 28 with 1429 views | GeoffSentence |
Is this because we get a stream of information from the manager and the club along the lines of "there's no money" or "we have to sell before we can buy", which, to the average Geoff, means that bringing money in through transfers is important. |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:15 - Jan 28 with 1395 views | r2d2 |
He is an ultra rich owner. He has more money than most on here realise. The guy is a billionaire. Not a millionaire. Most of his profits arnt detectable, because they are all outside of the european union. He is worth an absolute fortune,and use Town as a front for his shady businesses. |  | | |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:20 - Jan 28 with 1378 views | No9 |
It isn't just Mr E.
Town have never had a very good record as sellers.
An indication as to how bad it can be is given in the second edition of Tom Bowers book, "Broken Dreams", where he reveals the complete mess surrounding the transfer of Richard Wright to the gooners & how little cash found its way into Towns coffers. | | | |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:21 - Jan 28 with 1370 views | chicoazul |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 09:53 - Jan 28 by itfcjoe |
When Webster was linked away in January under Mick, Sir Philip of Ham confirmed what I had heard that there was no way that Mick (and Marcus) would sanction a deal for Webster because they knew he was the sort of player that would go on to be worth a fortune.
They were right, but Marcus seemed to forget Mick's advice come the summer.
Lets hope he really has learned the lesson now re Downes and the Woolf |
Feel like this is a good example of why Evans is a great Owner to work for as he just lets the Manager get on with it and if the Manager says no to a deal, that's the end of the story. |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:23 - Jan 28 with 1359 views | Oldsmoker |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:15 - Jan 28 by r2d2 |
He is an ultra rich owner. He has more money than most on here realise. The guy is a billionaire. Not a millionaire. Most of his profits arnt detectable, because they are all outside of the european union. He is worth an absolute fortune,and use Town as a front for his shady businesses. |
Where's your evidence?
You've got none.
(because most of his dealings are off the radar). |  |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:26 - Jan 28 with 1352 views | chicoazul |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:15 - Jan 28 by r2d2 |
He is an ultra rich owner. He has more money than most on here realise. The guy is a billionaire. Not a millionaire. Most of his profits arnt detectable, because they are all outside of the european union. He is worth an absolute fortune,and use Town as a front for his shady businesses. |
You must be an international financial detective man of mystery or something and not a Sudbury-based taxi driver as we all assumed. | |
| |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 13:32 - Jan 28 with 1251 views | GeoffSentence |
| Why do people always bang on about the transfer fees received on 11:15 - Jan 28 by r2d2 |
He is an ultra rich owner. He has more money than most on here realise. The guy is a billionaire. Not a millionaire. Most of his profits arnt detectable, because they are all outside of the european union. He is worth an absolute fortune,and use Town as a front for his shady businesses. |
Sorry buddy,you've got that wrong, he's not a billionaire. His fortune is only £800M.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/news/sunday-times-rich-list-reveals-east-anglia-s-wealthi | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
