wilsdenrover

Well we do need a right winger.

Legally almost certainly not (we’re the former club):

You need to give him a bit longer to catch up on this thread. 😁

Because they’re competent?

Our transfer window will be open then so doesn’t sound wrong to me. The only other option would have been January ‘26 but presumably they want him for the start of their next season (February) too.

An international loan must end during a transfer window of the parent club so October can’t possibly be right.

I like the way we make it sound like we’re doing him a favour.

https://www.tiktok.com/@lmbfpodcast/video/7514994349210488086

Given some staff last barely five minutes, a revolving door would do.

We needed the right winger prior to the Travis situation so these two things should be independent of each other. That being said, I’m sure you’re right.

As the season progresses I anticipate the whiskey to coffee ratio being adjusted.

Not mentioning the most recent 10% of our existence then? - I wonder why 🤔

Are the halves reversed on the back?

‘The precursor to change is pain’ Pretentious twat.

The last money Venkys sent over was to cover contractual and statutory obligations for March - June. I think our transfer dealings are now with the intent of ‘keeping the lights on’. I’d be amazed if we spend even a tiny fraction of any more fees we bring in.

Tight bastards.

Sometimes we transition multiple times within a season too.

buzzword or excuse?

The last year wages were below 100% of turnover was the last year we were in the Premier League. Perhaps we should try to return there 🤔

Ah, my back of a fag packet calculation has those 12 players (using the middle of those pay bands) taking up around two thirds of our turnover. - before bonuses. That leaves one third for the remaining (based on 23/24 accounts) 219 members of staff. Doable??

Can it be explained to me how someone can use wages being above turnover as an excuse whilst also (within the last week) saying we should be offering our key players £16k a week to stay. Thank you in advance.

You’re right regarding the lack of an age restriction so my apologies in this regard. It still won’t apply with Travis and Liverpool as annexe 5 includes the following neither of which are met in this case: If people ever get bored of our musings I’m more than happy to take it to DMs 😁

A quick google suggests Travis left Liverpool at 17. If so they’d be due 2% of the fee. Edited to add @KentExile: On reflection I think this is a FIFA regulation so only applies to international transfers (and only if those take place before the end of the year the player turns 23). I’m off out now but I’ll double check later on… second edit (wife now impatiently standing by the door 😁😁): The EFL solidarity rule is a 5% levy on all transfers - this isn’t distributed to former clubs it goes into a pension pot for players (with any excess going into a youth fund).

She was shit anyway