Is our budget any bigger than last year?

[kevinhectoring]

6 hours ago, valakari said:

So the administrators paid themselves massive amounts and still didn't do their job properly...how can they get away with that???!!

I’m not usually one to rush to q’s defence but if a counterparty (Posnan) simply won’t agree something what are they supposed to do? Especially if FIFA if supporting that counterparty’s position

[sage]

On 18/07/2023 at 00:20, sage said:

There was talk of a relaxation of the business plan and small fees being paid out, but having raised maybe £2m to £2.5m in sales and 11 people leaving Inc end of loans, we don't seem to be upping the ante at all.

I'm not suggesting MM style frittering but I was hoping for a couple of real upgrades. 

Any more thoughts on this, particularly from people who slated the thread for impatience?

[Caerphilly Ram]

7 hours ago, sage said:

Any more thoughts on this, particularly from people who slated the thread for impatience?

I think it’s hard for any of us to say definitively without more information. So we can speculate that it’s less, because we have only signed free agents and not spent fees. Or we can speculate that it’s more and that we’ve paid increased wages to the 8 permanent additions as well as handing out new contracts to Rooney, Brown and 4 players added to the u21 squad. Or we can speculate that it’s the same because we don’t know for sure what Didzy, Curtis, Chester and Stearman were on wage wise plus the loan players so maybe their wages are balanced out by the new players, 8 new additions, 4 u21 players and allegedly more to come in potentially balancing out the 11 that left in a budgetary sense.

We don’t know in reality, which I know you’re also aware of, only those in charge of the club know for sure. 

If it’s an opinion you’re after I’ll say I’m disappointed we haven’t spent fees on a couple of players out of left field. I was hoping Mark Thomas joining the club would herald a new dawn of us unearthing gems, that’s why I was so enthused by the Lee Bonis link/rumour. I took what the local press reported earlier in the summer as a sign we were going to spend a bit, the reality has been different to my initial expectations but I stand by a point I’ve put across to other posters in that I’m not upset with who we have signed, and there’s still time to add more. 

[Premier ram]

Wish some Derby fans on this forum would get a grip and stop the constant speculation and I know for a fact comments , ie transfers that we have supposedly failed to get over the line, budgets that may be higher or lower than previous seasons , attendances that will drop if we don’t get promoted this season because really nobody knows what’s happened or is going to happen , so why don’t we all ride the DCFC rollercoaster, support the team and let’s see where this manager and players can take us.     COYR

[sage]

16 hours ago, Premier ram said:

Wish some Derby fans on this forum would get a grip and stop the constant speculation and I know for a fact comments , ie transfers that we have supposedly failed to get over the line, budgets that may be higher or lower than previous seasons , attendances that will drop if we don’t get promoted this season because really nobody knows what’s happened or is going to happen , so why don’t we all ride the DCFC rollercoaster, support the team and let’s see where this manager and players can take us.     COYR

Errr because it affects who we sign and sell and how we perform and play. I agree with that view the minute I enter the ground, but in between it's what forums are for.   

[inter politics]

I doubt it means anything in relation to DCFC but I find it mildly curious that a guy who worked for Clowes for so long isn't there anymore and the identity of the new MD at his property company. As I said, doubt it means anything or is even a negative thing.

[sage]

1 hour ago, inter politics said:

I doubt it means anything in relation to DCFC but I find it mildly curious that a guy who worked for Clowes for so long isn't there anymore and the identity of the new MD at his property company. As I said, doubt it means anything or is even a negative thing.

Que?

[sage]

Apparently we have a budget left for 2 players on 4k a week. Any loan or transfer fees would dig into that 8k a week budget.

Something unexpected has happened IMO.

Either a) additional unexpected bills such as Jozwiak, b) a downturn or need for funds in DC's business or c) DC/SP aren't impressed with recruitment and don't want to give PW any more.

I think a) but b) or c) are possible.

[RoyMac5]

1 minute ago, sage said:

Apparently we have a budget left for 2 players on 4k a week. Any loan or transfer fees would dig into that 8k a week budget.

Something unexpected has happened IMO.

Either a) additional unexpected bills such as Jozwiak, b) a downturn or need for funds in DC's business or c) DC/SP aren't impressed with recruitment and don't want to give PW any more.

I think a) but b) or c) are possible.

We paid too much (wages/agents fees) for the 8 players we have signed? Warne can't add up? He thought he'd be given more if he asked for more?

Edited August 17, 2023 by RoyMac5

[sage]

2 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

We paid too much (wages/agents fees) for the 8 players we have signed? Warne can't add up? He thought he'd be given more if he asked for more?

That is the other option. Surely you would have a budget on a spreadsheet, with a few versions including actual and projected. It's not massively complicated.  

If it is the case, it's quite damning.

Edited August 17, 2023 by sage

[RoyMac5]

Just now, sage said:

That is the other option. Surely you would have a budget on a spreadsheet, with a few versions including actual and projected. It's not massively complicated.  

I'm not of the opinion the budget set by Clowes has changed at all, what might have changed is Warne's ability to sign the players he wants at the cost he'd hoped for.

[May Contain Nuts]

52 minutes ago, sage said:

That is the other option. Surely you would have a budget on a spreadsheet, with a few versions including actual and projected. It's not massively complicated.  

If it is the case, it's quite damning.

 

It shouldn't be complicated, but hypothetically if a manager was to absolutely insist on a certain player being brought in and was completely unwilling to consider alternate options, and that player knew how much the manager wanted them and so played the situation for higher wages, then what should the recruitment team do?

There has to be some compromise, but what if there isn't?

They can tell the manager it's not possible before going ahead and signing either a) nobody or b) a cheaper option the manager doesn't really want, or they can push the boat out a little to bring the player in. Both options lead to negative consequences down the line, with those consequences cumulative if the situation applies to more than one potential signing.

Another option is that the chairman steps in and has a frank discussion with the manager about what we can and can't afford, and obviously you hope that they work out a healthy, positive, mutually beneficially middle-ground but things can quickly become fraught if they don't see eye to eye and this often ends up with someone being relieved of their duties.

If there's a financial stand-off between potentially eating up the budget for multiple future transfer windows by needing to pay out compensation to an ex, and giving the manager you'd publicly backed enough leeway in the budget to bring in the players he considers essential signings to enact his plan for promotion (while taking the consequences on the chin, even if one might be selling off one of your other assets) then again, what do you do?

You end up in a position where there's no way out but through.

Again with the disclaimer... this is an entirely hypothetical situation and while potentially a few small fragments of the hypothesis may (or may not) have been realised, I'm not for one second suggesting this scenario has actually played out at Derby County!

Edited August 17, 2023 by Kokosnuss