In a funny way he has looked after us! Helped us stay up (not single handed!) and a "7 figure sum" even if some of it is conditional is significant. From my calculations on CAFC losses and FFP I recall that the Academy costs c. £1M a year to run - a "7 figure sum". That same academy is churning out four players a year who are good enough for our first team - each and every year. That will save us a lot on journeymen second tier footballers who appear to command £3-500k pa!
His path can be shown as a way forward for any trainee who thinks or even knows that he is a cut above his cohort. Our club is a club and not about any one individual, player, staff member, director or fan.
If every season we can finish higher in the table, bring through more kids and end up with a squad worth more than it was 12 months previous then we will progress. Until we reach the point where the next "Poyet" says "I think I'll have a crack at the play-offs with CAFC". Dreaming? Perhaps? Just saying I liked the statement on the o/s because we are moving forwards while others are spending a lot more on aging squads and going nowhere fast.
But I've been looking at other clubs and with the players coming in so far we are in a better position than some. Perhaps not too long until we are looking down on 14th and we have plenty of spare capacity to spend more thanks to deals around Poyet and one of the best academies in the Championship.
Who knows, perhaps West Ham might help out by loaning the odd player - as long as it's not Mike Small again!
Maybe last year, but 4 players, worth 3-500k every year? Really. Name the last 10 academy products we sold for over 300k and I bet it takes longer than 2.5 years worth of players.
In fact, if the academy costs £1M pa to run I personally think it could get questionable as to whether it is sensible to continue it going forwards. Championship clubs have less and less money going forwards if the fabled FFP you talk about so often starts to bite so we have to be producing players PL and parachute monied teams want for them to be worth more than £0.
If like Palmer, Huddart and others before them the cream of our future PL academy players leave for £300K how do we make the academy turn a profit?
Last season was the best season for bringing through academy players I've seen, but we still didn't bring through "four players a year who are good enough for our first team". We did see five debuts but Lennon and Pigott have in no way proven themselves at Championship level, and I personally wouldn't say Fox has yet either.
I don't think FFP includes money spent on the academy, though now that we're working towards category 1 I expect it'll cost more than £1m a year.
Clearly Peeters will be giving players a chance, but we'll be doing incredibly well if every season we see 5 debuts and 2/3 become regulars in the team.
The cost of running an academy may not be included in FFP but if teams have less ability to spend money they don't have it will surely drive transfer fees for all Championship and lower players down to £0 or thereabouts.
Therefore the academy products we bring through will
a) have to appeal to PL or parachute monied Champs clubs AND b) be prepared to chose to sign with us rather than with the likes of a PL club when they turn 17.
If the academy brings through 3x Kasey Palmers in one year it would get £1M back which would barely cover its costs.
If it brings through 3x Scott Wagstaffs we get no money because transfer fees just are not there any more.
I have a genuine concern that sooner or later football league clubs will more and more come to this realisation and decide it is not worth it.
Very surprised we have wrapped up the compensation deal so quickly, makes me wonder if Wet Spam didn't offer us a pretty good deal straight away so that they did not have to risk a tribunal.
Let's face facts, with the PL money being what it is they could easily chuck 3 million quid our way for Poyet without blinking.
Very surprised we have wrapped up the compensation deal so quickly, makes me wonder if Wet Spam didn't offer us a pretty good deal straight away so that they did not have to risk a tribunal.
Let's face facts, with the PL money being what it is they could easily chuck 3 million quid our way for Poyet without blinking.
But the safer route for both parties is to make the contingent payments generous. That way there is no risk to the "buying" club if the player flops and the "selling" club gets the possibility of a bigger payday if he does well. But more important the clubs are in control, not the tribunal.
Very surprised we have wrapped up the compensation deal so quickly, makes me wonder if Wet Spam didn't offer us a pretty good deal straight away so that they did not have to risk a tribunal.
Let's face facts, with the PL money being what it is they could easily chuck 3 million quid our way for Poyet without blinking.
But the safer route for both parties is to make the contingent payments generous. That way there is no risk to the "buying" club if the player flops and the "selling" club gets the possibility of a bigger payday if he does well. But more important the clubs are in control, not the tribunal.
Fair enough, you would know more about it than I would but I suppose the question is how much do receive upfront - which we can use to strengthen the squad - compared to how much we receive in 'target' payments over the next three years?
Quite frankly, getting 30% of his sell-on fee in 2017 is not much use to us now!
If he'd chosen to stay with us i'd have thought he had no bollocks or faith in his own ability , why mince around for a season or two at our club when he could potentially get among the big boys quickly
aim low and you wont be disappointed
or
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.
in 20 years time when he's given up playing that extra million or so he didn't donate to Charlton/Roland/Standard/Upjest etc will be paying for his kids school fees/third divorce/gambling problem/drug habit/drink problem/hospital for poor children or whatever he chooses to do with his dosh
Future England player is getting a bit OTT. He's played 20 games in the championship, at a poor team last year.
Sure he has moved to "the England 1966" team but there is no guarantee he will play. I expect him to get 10-15 games, if West Ham are successful they will replace him with someone better, if they go down he will stick with them for a bit before leaving. I expect his career to look very much like Richard Chaplow's. At best he will end up like Steve Sidwell.
I've read a lot of guff on here about how good (or not) he maybe, but this takes the biscuit !! I expect he'll stay at W Ham for a few years & if he leaves it will be to a top 5 club and I'm sure his career will mirror that of Shelvey, Bowyer or Parker and will shine rather than a journey man Chaplow or Sidwell.
A 20 year old former CAFC woman's player (RIP Katie Shepherd) has passed away and a lot of people are bitching and moaning about Poyet....let's celebrate life and move on....boo him if he ever plays at the valley against us that is your prerogative or be proud he was once of ours but lets move on life is too short.....
Appreciate your sentiment, but those things shouldnt be comparibles, otherwise we would never talk about football.
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
As for Poyet, explained previously why none of this surprises me. Hope the bulk of the deal isn't built into a future sell on percentage as I suspect this won't be the last time he will be out of contract if the next few years go well. Which I think they will.
Yep - if this year goes really well for Poyet and Chelsea, Man u and City come calling next summer i can see him doing a Parker and throwing his toys out of his pram to get his next BIG move.
The 'new challenge' thing is quite galling. It's not like he slogged through a whole difficult season like Cousins did. He played 20 odd games and now he's looking for something new? Nonsense. Bigger wage, bigger club, bigger opportunities. I'd actually rather he just said that we're a bit shit and he wants to win some games, at least he'd be honest
Future England player is getting a bit OTT. He's played 20 games in the championship, at a poor team last year.
Sure he has moved to "the England 1966" team but there is no guarantee he will play. I expect him to get 10-15 games, if West Ham are successful they will replace him with someone better, if they go down he will stick with them for a bit before leaving. I expect his career to look very much like Richard Chaplow's. At best he will end up like Steve Sidwell.
I've read a lot of guff on here about how good (or not) he maybe, but this takes the biscuit !! I expect he'll stay at W Ham for a few years & if he leaves it will be to a top 5 club and I'm sure his career will mirror that of Shelvey, Bowyer or Parker and will shine rather than a journey man Chaplow or Sidwell.
Guff? Wow, thanks for having such respect for my opinion! You must have years more coaching experience than me to totally disregard what I was saying like that. Let's compare Sidwell, Bowyer and Parker to see how different a journeyman is to a player you consider will shine?
Player 1
362 apps 55 goals
Player 2
489 apps 68 goals
Player 3
383 apps 27 goals
Now each of these includes their appearances below premiership level as I'm at work and don't have the time to break it down further. But just to help you out a bit here are their numbers at bonafide top 4 teams
Player 1
15 (0)
Player 2
146 (31) - this one does ruin a bit of the fun I guess
Player 3
15 (1)
Now I think it is unfair to drag poor Jonjo into this as he still has years ahead of him and I rate him more highly than Diego but as you were discussing "journeymen" I just wanted to check your definition? He's spent at most 3 years at each club, never made more than 50 league appearances at any club and has moved from Liverpool, to a loan at Blackpool, to Swansea and now possibly to Palace. His stat line reads 131 apps and 21 goals.
Now my comparison to Richard Chaplow. He's spent most of his career in the Championship (312 apps 29 goals). Diego has appeared in 20 championship games. He hasn't proven he can step up to the premiership and while he was good as a DM he is not the second coming of Claude Makelele which is the level he needs to get to if he wants to be a DM at a top club. His attacking game is deficient and without that (and the changes in the game that we are seeing) he will not step up to a top club.
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
It will go both ways though. Rumour is that we wouldn't have had the funds for Vetokele if SL hadn't just sold their star striker to Marseille.
Since when has there been a budget for buying players that is set by how much you receive in player sales?
You can't have it both ways otherwise you can only buy if you sell and don't expect the owners to stump up any new cash. It's called revenue and it helps finance the whole club, and allow priorities to be managed like having a pitch to play on.
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
It will go both ways though. Rumour is that we wouldn't have had the funds for Vetokele if SL hadn't just sold their star striker to Marseille.
I wonder if new signings are contracted to the network, rather than one specific club.
I'll chip in with my thoughts, albeit briefly and a bit late to the party.
I understand what he did and don't think loyalty comes in to it. He did well during his contracted period but should never have had been allowed to be running so close to the edge of his contract.
He knew there was interest elsewhere, probably saw it as a more stable option and, yes, more financially rewarding. It's very disappointing but we pick ourselves up and look forward to next season, and the return of Cousins, Harriott and other youth players.
By saying "He owed the club it, so the club would be rewarded for bringing him through"; that's essentially a business transaction and loyalty doesn't come in to business. We're talking about his career here. If you want to use a business approach then it all comes back to the business not protecting their assets correctly.
What is inexcusable in my opinion, is the way he carried on on Twitter when all this was going on. Whilst we fans did indeed hang on to his every word in a really pathetic way, I do think he took advantage of this and posted certain things just for a reaction.
That's the action of a child, especially when compared to the maturity of Cousins, and it's those actions which soften the blow of losing him to be honest.
Aside from the last note, I can't really join in when I see him being slagged off - I don't think it's really fair on the lad.
It's disappointing but we move forward and so does he, good luck to both parties but I'm a charlton fan - and thats my main concern. He's not a concern of mine anymore.
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
It will go both ways though. Rumour is that we wouldn't have had the funds for Vetokele if SL hadn't just sold their star striker to Marseille.
I wonder if new signings are contracted to the network, rather than one specific club.
Don't think it's possible under the rules of the game - there was much fuss made over Neymar and earlier than that Tevez/Mascherano at West Ham due to arguments about who exactly they were contracted to, and would be paid for transfers. It could be there is an implicit understanding that you might then be moved around the network but you can only be registered with one club at any given time, is my understanding.
Haven't got time to read through all of this thread. But have just heard from a very reliable source that the fee for Poyet was £650k upfront rising to 1.2mil after certain clauses are met and that a friendly match will be arranged between the two sides with Charlton keeping the gate receipts.
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
It will go both ways though. Rumour is that we wouldn't have had the funds for Vetokele if SL hadn't just sold their star striker to Marseille.
I wonder if new signings are contracted to the network, rather than one specific club.
Don't think it's possible under the rules of the game - there was much fuss made over Neymar and earlier than that Tevez/Mascherano at West Ham due to arguments about who exactly they were contracted to, and would be paid for transfers. It could be there is an implicit understanding that you might then be moved around the network but you can only be registered with one club at any given time, is my understanding.
Using Spurs as an example. I understand (was told a number of years ago) that the club breaks even on a day to day basis but the transfer fees in and out go to Levy. Could this be the way RD sees it? He / the network has a common pool of transfer funds and the individual club needs to stake a case as to why they should be able to take money out of the pool, whereas all money is understood to go into it?
Obviously just speculation, but may make sense if any of the other comments are true?
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
It will go both ways though. Rumour is that we wouldn't have had the funds for Vetokele if SL hadn't just sold their star striker to Marseille.
I wonder if new signings are contracted to the network, rather than one specific club.
Don't think it's possible under the rules of the game - there was much fuss made over Neymar and earlier than that Tevez/Mascherano at West Ham due to arguments about who exactly they were contracted to, and would be paid for transfers. It could be there is an implicit understanding that you might then be moved around the network but you can only be registered with one club at any given time, is my understanding.
Using Spurs as an example. I understand (was told a number of years ago) that the club breaks even on a day to day basis but the transfer fees in and out go to Levy. Could this be the way RD sees it? He / the network has a common pool of transfer funds and the individual club needs to stake a case as to why they should be able to take money out of the pool, whereas all money is understood to go into it?
Obviously just speculation, but may make sense if any of the other comments are true?
That makes a certain amount of sense, and does seem to fit in with RD's modus operandi - he will spend on players, not clubs. If (for example) Polish Pete doesn't fit in one club/league, just pass him to another, you still paid for him, might as well get the money's worth. It's NOT making one club a 'reserve outfit' - if you have assets that aren't playing/showing worth, put them somewhere else where they will.
Also speculation I admit but seems to fit most of the facts I know of.
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
It will go both ways though. Rumour is that we wouldn't have had the funds for Vetokele if SL hadn't just sold their star striker to Marseille.
I wonder if new signings are contracted to the network, rather than one specific club.
Really doubt that but it doesn't matter as players can be sold for nothing between clubs which is pretty much the same thing.
Haven't got time to read through all of this thread. But have just heard from a very reliable source that the fee for Poyet was £650k upfront rising to 1.2mil after certain clauses are met and that a friendly match will be arranged between the two sides with Charlton keeping the gate receipts.
I don't question your information, but there is a problem with such friendly matches as we have covered before. The police are entitled to recover their costs in full and this in turn begs questions about whether the match is profitable, given low turnouts for friendlies. It's doubtful an adult price of more than £10 is sustainable, which means the average net ticket value to CAFC is only about £6. If you assume an attendance of £10k - which is optimistic - the gross revenue is £60k plus say £10k in ancillary income. In other words the club would do well to make £20-£30k from such a game, after costs.
I know there are people within the club who think you could charge £20 and would get 20,000, but that is unlikely for West Ham in the real world.
Comments
In fact, if the academy costs £1M pa to run I personally think it could get questionable as to whether it is sensible to continue it going forwards. Championship clubs have less and less money going forwards if the fabled FFP you talk about so often starts to bite so we have to be producing players PL and parachute monied teams want for them to be worth more than £0.
If like Palmer, Huddart and others before them the cream of our future PL academy players leave for £300K how do we make the academy turn a profit?
@mystic_kev@seriously_red I've told you a million times not to exaggerate..I don't think FFP includes money spent on the academy, though now that we're working towards category 1 I expect it'll cost more than £1m a year.
Clearly Peeters will be giving players a chance, but we'll be doing incredibly well if every season we see 5 debuts and 2/3 become regulars in the team.
Therefore the academy products we bring through will
a) have to appeal to PL or parachute monied Champs clubs AND
b) be prepared to chose to sign with us rather than with the likes of a PL club when they turn 17.
If the academy brings through 3x Kasey Palmers in one year it would get £1M back which would barely cover its costs.
If it brings through 3x Scott Wagstaffs we get no money because transfer fees just are not there any more.
I have a genuine concern that sooner or later football league clubs will more and more come to this realisation and decide it is not worth it.
Let's face facts, with the PL money being what it is they could easily chuck 3 million quid our way for Poyet without blinking.
Quite frankly, getting 30% of his sell-on fee in 2017 is not much use to us now!
aim low and you wont be disappointed
or
Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars.
in 20 years time when he's given up playing that extra million or so he didn't donate to Charlton/Roland/Standard/Upjest etc will be paying for his kids school fees/third divorce/gambling problem/drug habit/drink problem/hospital for poor children or whatever he chooses to do with his dosh
good luck to him
he who dares Rodders
My whole question of this network malarky is I've no real certainty that any funds we raise go back into the club, into the pool that could benefit other clubs, or into Starprix accounts. In that respect, it wouldn't really make much diff if we got 1m or 3m. It really does need to be used now like the Jenkinson money was.
As for Poyet, explained previously why none of this surprises me. Hope the bulk of the deal isn't built into a future sell on percentage as I suspect this won't be the last time he will be out of contract if the next few years go well. Which I think they will.
If he misses, he dies in the slow vacuum of the reserves. Missing the moon is a big deal for Astronauts
You can't have it both ways otherwise you can only buy if you sell and don't expect the owners to stump up any new cash. It's called revenue and it helps finance the whole club, and allow priorities to be managed like having a pitch to play on.
I understand what he did and don't think loyalty comes in to it. He did well during his contracted period but should never have had been allowed to be running so close to the edge of his contract.
He knew there was interest elsewhere, probably saw it as a more stable option and, yes, more financially rewarding. It's very disappointing but we pick ourselves up and look forward to next season, and the return of Cousins, Harriott and other youth players.
By saying "He owed the club it, so the club would be rewarded for bringing him through"; that's essentially a business transaction and loyalty doesn't come in to business. We're talking about his career here. If you want to use a business approach then it all comes back to the business not protecting their assets correctly.
What is inexcusable in my opinion, is the way he carried on on Twitter when all this was going on. Whilst we fans did indeed hang on to his every word in a really pathetic way, I do think he took advantage of this and posted certain things just for a reaction.
That's the action of a child, especially when compared to the maturity of Cousins, and it's those actions which soften the blow of losing him to be honest.
Aside from the last note, I can't really join in when I see him being slagged off - I don't think it's really fair on the lad.
It's disappointing but we move forward and so does he, good luck to both parties but I'm a charlton fan - and thats my main concern. He's not a concern of mine anymore.
Obviously just speculation, but may make sense if any of the other comments are true?
Also speculation I admit but seems to fit most of the facts I know of.
I know there are people within the club who think you could charge £20 and would get 20,000, but that is unlikely for West Ham in the real world.