Signed: Jason Shackell

[North_Stand_Ram]

Kind of negated your own point there...

Burnley have sold players at a value of over £11 million, roughly £11.5 million (once sell on clauses are taken into account, Trippier money to Man City, and assuming we get the £6 million for Ings that Liverpool offered to avoid tribunal).

So as things stand we've made a transfer profit of over £6 million.  So we can spend a further £6 million and still be roughly £10 million shy of the amount Derby have spent on transfer fees.  That's before you consider wages and I'd assume that Bent, Weimann, Ince and Shackell will be on more individually than Lowton, Vossen and Long given that we couldn't match the wages you offered Shackell, and of those you've signed he would have been on the smallest contract at his previous club (ignoring Carson and Baird)

So not really sure what you're getting at.

*Lowton was reported to be £1 million and Long is appearance based up to a cost of £1.5 million.

regardless of who you've sold, it's still big expenditure, so for us to be "buying the league", as are Boro, it's a bit contradictory 

[StringerBell]

 

If you sell then we could end up with similar transfer spending, though I'd guess your wage bill would be higher.  

 

From that do you mean if we don't achieve promotion and look to sell a few players a couple of years down the line you could be buying? If so, yep, football can be cyclical like that.

Our long-term game plan was exactly that as the FFP started clamping down on big spending, average players like, say, Paul Green wouldn't be able to go and command big wages at clubs like Leeds. The players would have to have a reality check about how much they expected to earn. Embargoes would be placed on the teams that didn't comply and we'd be the ones in the position to pick up the top players like Billy Sharp. And though that sentence might raise your eyebrows the reason I say Paul Green and Billy Sharp is because this demonstrates how long we've been at it - people were saying this when Billy Sharp was at Donny and was a much more coveted player. Paul Green left us 3 years ago I think. We've been in this for the long haul.

We've been sensible for years and that's given us the sustainability to pick up those more sought after players while others are desperately trying to avoid embargoes. But most of the other clubs voted to relax FFP so I genuinely think there's a large element of saying **** you to the clubs who didn't stick to the FFP guidelines and voted to relax the rules to avoid the consequences while we did stick to the rules and should be bearing the fruits of that. When the rules were relaxed a lot of comments on here were  along the lines of "Mel (our new chairman) get your wallet out". I think he, and possibly some of our other investors must have thought similar.

I know it's not a my club vs your club thing and it's not you that's been having a pop at us, I'm just getting a bit cheesed off with some plonkers on various forums calling us the new QPR etc. were spending, granted. But we've earned that right. And your honeymonster of a manager might have wanted to add the caveat that we're a well run club while he's going on about how much we're spending as well.

 

 

 

[cheron85]

We've spent a lot of money (by our standards) on the stadium and a new training ground 

See I think THIS is something a lot of other teams' fans forget when looking at our spending this season... We generate a LOT more revenue than most of the teams in this league because of our fanbase/match support and previously a lot of our spending has been on improving the infrastructure of the club... we've spent time paying off debts, paying off (most) of the cost of a massive/newish stadium and spent money putting a category A rated training academy and training facilities in place...

These aren't small cost things to do... the money we're spending now is in part because we're NOT having to spend money on those other things anymore...

I also think (not aimed at you @ClaretMatt) that the accusation of 'buying the league' is a bit odd when LOADS of teams have spent £10m in a season in the championship over the last 5-10 years... some much more than one season only... and it's entirely bitterness that they don't have any money to spend themselves...

We made it to 3rd in the league 2 years ago having spent peanuts to build the squad... the core of which is still our heart... And we've essentially spent money on 3 players this summer... If we'd bought a whole squad then fine... but this is just 'brucey bonus' time...

[ClaretMatt]

regardless of who you've sold, it's still big expenditure, so for us to be "buying the league", as are Boro, it's a bit contradictory 

Not really, you're ignoring relevant facts to make the story fit your narrative.  

You could say, "We're not buying the league, look at Man City's spending"

"But Man City aren't in the same division?"

"Regardless of the division it's still big spending so it's a bit contradictory"

In transfer fees Derby have spent roughly +£10 million, Burnley have spent roughly -£6 million.  If you ignore incoming transfer income when looking at this why not ignore goals conceded and convince yourself you've never lost a game?

From that do you mean if we don't achieve promotion and look to sell a few players a couple of years down the line you could be buying? If so, yep, football can be cyclical like that.

No, sorry I wasn't clear.  I just meant that your net spend could end up similar to ours this season if you do sell a player or two (depending on the player).  

As much as there are some Derby players I'd like to see at Burnley, I doubt any would be in our price range in the next few years, even if you were inclined to sell!

Our honeymonster manager did say “There’s no angle to my words. Derby are allowed to do whatever they want to do, so are Middlesbrough, all of these clubs." but I think that got left out of a lot of articles taken from the interview.

See I think THIS is something a lot of other teams' fans forget when looking at our spending this season... We generate a LOT more revenue than most of the teams in this league because of our fanbase/match support and previously a lot of our spending has been on improving the infrastructure of the club... we've spent time paying off debts, paying off (most) of the cost of a massive/newish stadium and spent money putting a category A rated training academy and training facilities in place...

These aren't small cost things to do... the money we're spending now is in part because we're NOT having to spend money on those other things anymore...

I also think (not aimed at you @ClaretMatt) that the accusation of 'buying the league' is a bit odd when LOADS of teams have spent £10m in a season in the championship over the last 5-10 years... some much more than one season only... and it's entirely bitterness that they don't have any money to spend themselves...

There is that and in the grand scheme of Champioship big spenders you're not the worst offenders.  However I'd be willing to bet that if I were to trawl through years old posts on this forum* there would be numerous posts bemoaning teams "throwing money around" or "trying to buy the league" for spending similar amounts to what you have this season.

*I'm not going to, I'm bored but I'm not that bored 

Also when you say LOADS I think it's worth pointing out that teams that have spent such amounts are definitely in the minority.

I think at the end of the day you've got to expect these kind of comments when you're spending the amounts you are without the money coming from obvious areas such as player sales or parachute payments.  Also bare in mind that whilst you were operating within FFP regulations you've still been posting losses of circa £7 million a year, there hasn't been such a shift in your match day or commercial income to render that hole closed so people are going to wonder how you can afford to pay the fees and wages you have.

For what it's worth your owners almost certainly know what they're doing and anything I, you or other fans reckon we're only operating on "back of the fag packet" figures so it's all hypothetical.

EDIT:

Also, I should add that I'm not accusing you of trying to buy the league and I'm not being bitter either.  Obviously I am envious of your spending especially given our recent transfer window fiascos but not bitter.  Spend what you want to spend but don't be surprised when people point it out.

[cheron85]

Also bare in mind that whilst you were operating within FFP regulations you've still been posting losses of circa £7 million a year, there hasn't been such a shift in your match day or commercial income to render that hole closed so people are going to wonder how you can afford to pay the fees and wages you have.

We have a couple of resident accountants who will be able to give you a better steer on this but the £7m 'losses' we make are on paper losses NOT actual losses... There's a difference between operating a profit/loss on a balance sheet and having more/less money to spend...

The only difference this season vs previous is we've spent BIG money on 3 players... Previously our signings have been on a budget...

I think what most people out in the rest of championship fandom have ignored is that the core of our squad was put together for next to nothing and spent 18 months in the top 3 (ish)... This spending is just icing on the cake rather than the cake itself...

 

[Ambitious]

I used to get annoyed by other club's spending, but when you take a step back and analyse what's going on, it's all a load of ****. 

Who are Burnley to bemoan our spending, who are we to bemoan Chelsea's spending and who are Rotherham to bemoan Burnley's spending? 

Spending is directly proportional to ambition - a club show ambition when money starts being increased. Burnley pay their players more than Roterham players get paid, Rotherham players get paid more than Chesterfield players get paid and so on. 

Unless you are a club running at a profit then you can't really bemoan anyone's spending. 

[RadioactiveWaste]

I'm pretty sure Newcastle fans bemoan other clubs spending and they  make a profit for him offa sports direct.

[Kernow]

I think what most people out in the rest of championship fandom have ignored is that the core of our squad was put together for next to nothing and spent 18 months in the top 3 (ish)... This spending is just icing on the cake rather than the cake itself...

Exactly this. People completely bypass the point that our squad is primarily still Clough's. This isn't a Clough v McClaren v Clement debate, I'm just pointing out that these players were signed by Clough. For years we suffered mediocrity, the odd "big money signing" like Shackell - 900k, Keogh - 1.1mil, Sammon - 1.2mil. Players like Hughes, Hendrick, Buxton, Grant, Martin, Russell, Bryson, Eustace etc have had huge impacts on our fortunes over the past two years. A two year period which has seen us flirting with the top two, and constant members of the top six for all but a few months of this period. The names just listed cost us next to nothing. Russell (750k), Bryson (400k), Bucko a nominal fee and the rest free/academy. We have got our house in order, and now with the fortunate help of a wealthy businessman and supporter, we have the resources to add quality. In football today quality increasingly means expenditure. We've had to endure years of ***** through loans who couldn't even get in sides lower than us in the league. People will have their opinions over what we're spending and a lot will resent us for it, but other than the last two years, we have had 6 or 7 years of boring, mediocre nothingness in the bottom half of the Championship and we have every right to "buy" our way out, if you wish to call it that.

[StringerBell]

I used to get annoyed by other club's spending, but when you take a step back and analyse what's going on, it's all a load of ****. 

Who are Burnley to bemoan our spending, who are we to bemoan Chelsea's spending and who are Rotherham to bemoan Burnley's spending? 

Spending is directly proportional to ambition - a club show ambition when money starts being increased. Burnley pay their players more than Roterham players get paid, Rotherham players get paid more than Chesterfield players get paid and so on. 

Unless you are a club running at a profit then you can't really bemoan anyone's spending. 

I don't agree with that Ambitious. Teams who spend astronomical amounts like Chelsea and Manu when they're in so much debt are allowed to continue to get away and have been for ages and it totally messes the market up. I'm not sure which team in this country are in the black (Arsenal??), and we're operating at a loss to keep up with the Jones' so to speak. If we don't operate at a loss we'll go the same way as Blackpool. This doesn't entitle me to think the Premier League, Champions League and Abramovich have been terrible for the game?

[Ramkesian]

See I think THIS is something a lot of other teams' fans forget when looking at our spending this season... We generate a LOT more revenue than most of the teams in this league because of our fanbase/match support and previously a lot of our spending has been on improving the infrastructure of the club... we've spent time paying off debts, paying off (most) of the cost of a massive/newish stadium and spent money putting a category A rated training academy and training facilities in place...

These aren't small cost things to do... the money we're spending now is in part because we're NOT having to spend money on those other things anymore...

I also think (not aimed at you @ClaretMatt) that the accusation of 'buying the league' is a bit odd when LOADS of teams have spent £10m in a season in the championship over the last 5-10 years... some much more than one season only... and it's entirely bitterness that they don't have any money to spend themselves...

We made it to 3rd in the league 2 years ago having spent peanuts to build the squad... the core of which is still our heart... And we've essentially spent money on 3 players this summer... If we'd bought a whole squad then fine... but this is just 'brucey bonus' time...

We also need to acknowledge the work done by Sam Rush, Derby now have many sponsors/partners, this adds income into the football club that helps offset FFP restrictions.

 

[StringerBell]

Exactly this. People completely bypass the point that our squad is primarily still Clough's. This isn't a Clough v McClaren v Clement debate, I'm just pointing out that these players were signed by Clough. For years we suffered mediocrity, the odd "big money signing" like Shackell - 900k, Keogh - 1.1mil, Sammon - 1.2mil. Players like Hughes, Hendrick, Buxton, Grant, Martin, Russell, Bryson, Eustace etc have had huge impacts on our fortunes over the past two years. A two year period which has seen us flirting with the top two, and constant members of the top six for all but a few months of this period. The names just listed cost us next to nothing. Russell (750k), Bryson (400k), Bucko a nominal fee and the rest free/academy. We have got our house in order, and now with the fortunate help of a wealthy businessman and supporter, we have the resources to add quality. In football today quality increasingly means expenditure. We've had to endure years of ***** through loans who couldn't even get in sides lower than us in the league. People will have their opinions over what we're spending and a lot will resent us for it, but other than the last two years, we have had 6 or 7 years of boring, mediocre nothingness in the bottom half of the Championship and we have every right to "buy" our way out, if you wish to call it that.

and don't forget that Keogh/Sammon was financed by the sale of Shackell

[Kernow]

and don't forget that Keogh/Sammon was financed by the sale of Shackell

Exactly. Not too long ago I saw Steve Davies was available on a free after being released from Blackpool and thought to myself "he could do a job here as a squad player."

Then I took a step back and thought what am I thinking? Times when Steve Davies or Theo Robinson was our main attacking threat was not that long ago. We've had some real **** times and if you look at some of the players we've had playing regularly from 2008-2012 makes you wonder how on earth we even managed to maintain our second tier status.

I couldn't give a **** if people say we're buying the league or dislike us for it, I'd much rather that than having to sit and watch Robbie Savage and Chris Porter play for our club.

We're Derbuy County, we'll buy who we want!

[ClaretMatt]

We have a couple of resident accountants who will be able to give you a better steer on this but the £7m 'losses' we make are on paper losses NOT actual losses... There's a difference between operating a profit/loss on a balance sheet and having more/less money to spend...

The only difference this season vs previous is we've spent BIG money on 3 players... Previously our signings have been on a budget...

I think what most people out in the rest of championship fandom have ignored is that the core of our squad was put together for next to nothing and spent 18 months in the top 3 (ish)... This spending is just icing on the cake rather than the cake itself...

 

I'm not sure I understand how a £7 million loss that your owners are "comfortable supporting" according to Sam Rush, can be described as not an actual loss but I'd be happy to be educated on it.  Conversely without promotion we would have posted a £300k profit for that same season (as it was promotion bonuses and promotion transfer clauses saw us lose over £7 million too but Prem money more than fixed that). 

To be honest if I was in your shoes I wouldn't really care what others were saying.  You're spending more money than your club is making, why bother trying to justify it?  You get more praise from the neutrals and the media for going about it within your means or "the right way" as they tend to put it.  But at the end of the day do you follow Derby for the media and neutrals praise?  Or because they're your team and you want to see them win?  If you're happy with how you're operating what does it matter?

 

[StringerBell]

Our honeymonster manager did say “There’s no angle to my words. Derby are allowed to do whatever they want to do, so are Middlesbrough, all of these clubs." but I think that got left out of a lot of articles taken from the interview.

 

No I saw that. It depends on your interpretation of it, but to me that's another way of saying "I've got the integrity not to knock teams who overspend" not "Derby are in a position to make a go of it because they're a well run club".

Theres no angle to his words? Well what should or could there be an angle to? That implies there could be an angle if he wasn't such an upstanding, principled man. Why is he even mentioning an angle? From a certain point of view he appears to having a pop at us. 

[StringerBell]

Where's Ramblur when you need him?

[sage]

I'm not sure I understand how a £7 million loss that your owners are "comfortable supporting" according to Sam Rush, can be described as not an actual loss but I'd be happy to be educated on it.  Conversely without promotion we would have posted a £300k profit for that same season (as it was promotion bonuses and promotion transfer clauses saw us lose over £7 million too but Prem money more than fixed that). 

To be honest if I was in your shoes I wouldn't really care what others were saying.  You're spending more money than your club is making, why bother trying to justify it?  You get more praise from the neutrals and the media for going about it within your means or "the right way" as they tend to put it.  But at the end of the day do you follow Derby for the media and neutrals praise?  Or because they're your team and you want to see them win?  If you're happy with how you're operating what does it matter?

 

The £7m loss is not what you would describe as a trading loss ie expenditure outstripping income by £7m. That loss is much lower.

This includes book losses such as amortisation.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amortization

I hope I have that right or Ramblur will hunt me down and have me shredded.

[StringerBell]

Exactly. Not too long ago I saw Steve Davies was available on a free after being released from Blackpool and thought to myself "he could do a job here as a squad player."

Then I took a step back and thought what am I thinking? Times when Steve Davies or Theo Robinson was our main attacking threat was not that long ago. We've had some real **** times and if you look at some of the players we've had playing regularly from 2008-2012 makes you wonder how on earth we even managed to maintain our second tier status.

I couldn't give a **** if people say we're buying the league or dislike us for it, I'd much rather that than having to sit and watch Robbie Savage and Chris Porter play for our club.

We're Derbuy County, we'll buy who we want!

I know what you mean although I actually rated Davies and I had the same thought - would still like a cheapish hold up player to cover for Martin.

I wish I could have your stance, it actually matters to me that we're seen as a decent club for whatever reason. I love my German football and their youth development, 50 + 1 rule and clubs who actually operate in the black show us the way to go about it. But yeah, I don't want to go back to the Clough years. I think this is a rare time when we're a club spending big but we're still doing it the 'right way' or so I gather. And I wish that was acknowledged from the outside personally. It's not very often that's happened in recent years so we should make the most of it and be championed for it.

[cosmic]

Has he signed yet...?

[ClaretMatt]

Exactly this. People completely bypass the point that our squad is primarily still Clough's. This isn't a Clough v McClaren v Clement debate, I'm just pointing out that these players were signed by Clough. For years we suffered mediocrity, the odd "big money signing" like Shackell - 900k, Keogh - 1.1mil, Sammon - 1.2mil. Players like Hughes, Hendrick, Buxton, Grant, Martin, Russell, Bryson, Eustace etc have had huge impacts on our fortunes over the past two years. A two year period which has seen us flirting with the top two, and constant members of the top six for all but a few months of this period. The names just listed cost us next to nothing. Russell (750k), Bryson (400k), Bucko a nominal fee and the rest free/academy. We have got our house in order, and now with the fortunate help of a wealthy businessman and supporter, we have the resources to add quality. In football today quality increasingly means expenditure. We've had to endure years of ***** through loans who couldn't even get in sides lower than us in the league. People will have their opinions over what we're spending and a lot will resent us for it, but other than the last two years, we have had 6 or 7 years of boring, mediocre nothingness in the bottom half of the Championship and we have every right to "buy" our way out, if you wish to call it that.

It's interesting to look at these figures.  You never really notice other teams spending apart from the big deals.  I always thought your team cost more than ours that season, mostly because Grant left us because you offered more money but our squad was probably assembled for a higher cost looking at those figures.  Anyone willing to do a first XI comparison?

Our first XI that season was...

Heaton – Free

Trippier - £400k

Mee - £200k

Shackell - £1.1m

Duff - £35k

Arfield – Free

Jones – Free

Marney - £750k

Kightly – Loan

Ings - £750k

Vokes - £350k

So roughly £3.6 million.  What was yours?

 

Compare to ours now...

Heaton - Free

Lowton - £1m

Ward - £400k

Mee - £200k

Keane - £3m

Boyd - £3m

Jones - Free

Ulvestad/Taylor - Free

Arfield - Free

Vokes - £350k

Vossen - £2.5m

So around £10.45m.  What's yours this season?

Hopefully there's probably going to be a couple more signings before so that figure is likely to go up.

 

[ClaretMatt]

No I saw that. It depends on your interpretation of it, but to me that's another way of saying "I've got the integrity not to knock teams who overspend" not "Derby are in a position to make a go of it because they're a well run club".

Theres no angle to his words? Well what should or could there be an angle to? That implies there could be an angle if he wasn't such an upstanding, principled man. Why is he even mentioning an angle? From a certain point of view he appears to having a pop at us. 

His angle was trying to justify the sale of our captain to promotion rivals.  There's been a lot of negativity about our transfer dealings in the past couple of windows from the standard, armchair, football manager finance fans.