Did he comment on why transfer fees are ‘undisclosed’ yet happy to share how much money we lose?
that’s simple, the amount we lose is a matter of public record eventually anyway and transfers fees are negotiations between two parties so an agreement is made not to publish them
Henry, if you are aiming that "repeat offenders" comment at me, I don't really post on here, and I don't really have any politics. I'm just picking up on what Prague (not CM) has clearly stated above, as I find it very concerning if that is the "agenda". I'll leave it at that, as you say don't wanna spoil the thread.
The comment that @PragueAddick heard … ie "they have an agenda, they don't want people like you and I as fans" … is, I believe, an overreach by the person he spoke to.
They are hoping to break into another sector of the local populace, not to replace ‘us’ with ‘them’ - that would be commercial suicide.
I don't know mate to be honest, I tried renting a car a few days back for a drive to Dundee. I noticed the rental company serving a woman in front of me, I took that as a clear sign they don't want my custom as they were serving someone who is different to me. Anyway tried a few other places and the same was happening, wherever i went people who were different to me were getting served as well. Decided instead of giving them the satisfaction i would walk from Bexleyheath to Dundee instead.
I've just passed Nuneaton, its hard to be honest, made harder by the fact when i got to Thurrock i saw a teenager wearing Nike trainers and once again was shocked to see Nike sold trainers to someone who wasn't me. Anyway I've been barefoot since Grays and refuse to buy plasters for my blisters as they had a picture of a family on the front and I'm by myself.
Henry, if you are aiming that "repeat offenders" comment at me, I don't really post on here, and I don't really have any politics. I'm just picking up on what Prague (not CM) has clearly stated above, as I find it very concerning if that is the "agenda". I'll leave it at that, as you say don't wanna spoil the thread.
The item that doesn't seem to have been mentioned is the emphasis that CM placed on owning the assets ie The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Did he not say at the end that if he could change one thing it would be owning those assets. It was also about the only area where he was very reluctant to mention numbers. Income, losses, etc he shared. When he was asked about the price of the Valley and SL he clamed up. That suggests to me that they don't want to queer any current or future negotiations with RD. Or it could be he still has to convince the money men that owning the assets is a good investment.
Also he didn't, if I heard it right, say where "not a family club" but that we're "not not a family club but there are about 60 clubs who claim to be family clubs". Please correct me on either item if I misheard it.
Was also interesting that one of the successes he mentioned about Sunderland (some of which were nothing to do with his time there!) was that they owned the assets and the hosts looked aghast when he clarified that we didn’t own ours. I suspect this might be a case of him having a classic English view of the importance of owning your stadium and the American owners not quite getting it. I could be totally wide of the mark there though.
And yes, you’re correct about family club thing. He did say others were more family orientated but also pointed out that the phrase family club doesn’t really mean anything, how do you measure the family-ness of a football club?
By the number of fans who:
1. Started going having been persuaded by a family member And/Or 2. Go with a family member
Braziliance mentionned that his friends who don’t understand why he supports Charlton were immigrants. We can assume that they don’t have family in the UK, or at least not through a generation or two.
When I was at school the fans of big clubs didn’t have a Dad or brother taking them to games. Other fans at school ( Charlton, Gillingham, Fulham) went with a family member.
That's worrying Prague, took my white son to his first game last weekend. If the club don't want white people as fans, I think I'll take him Maidstone United next time, thanks for the heads up
Fucking hell, with a jump to conclusions like that you should have been in the Olympics
No, my comment wasn't aimed at you. Regular posters will know who I was talking about.
But I agree with others that aiming for a wider audience doesn't and certainly shouldn't mean sidelining your existing fan base and I don't think that is what CM was suggesting in any case.
That's worrying Prague, took my white son to his first game last weekend. If the club don't want white people as fans, I think I'll take him Maidstone United next time, thanks for the heads up
Fucking hell, with a jump to conclusions like that you should have been in the Olympics
Not sure he would be happy to compete in the Olympics, British people clearly aren't welcome as they let other nations compete aswell.
Amazes me that some people make points on what someone else has posted, which is in some cases incorrect, and accept it as gospel. Why not just listen to the interview yourselves?
If the idea is to encourage more local yoof to attend with "street football", does that mean we're going to have to install metal detectors or amnesty bins for the knives?
Yeah, because all the local kids are black and carry knives don't they?
The item that doesn't seem to have been mentioned is the emphasis that CM placed on owning the assets ie The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Did he not say at the end that if he could change one thing it would be owning those assets. It was also about the only area where he was very reluctant to mention numbers. Income, losses, etc he shared. When he was asked about the price of the Valley and SL he clamed up. That suggests to me that they don't want to queer any current or future negotiations with RD. Or it could be he still has to convince the money men that owning the assets is a good investment.
Also he didn't, if I heard it right, say where "not a family club" but that we're "not not a family club but there are about 60 clubs who claim to be family clubs". Please correct me on either item if I misheard it.
Was also interesting that one of the successes he mentioned about Sunderland (some of which were nothing to do with his time there!) was that they owned the assets and the hosts looked aghast when he clarified that we didn’t own ours. I suspect this might be a case of him having a classic English view of the importance of owning your stadium and the American owners not quite getting it. I could be totally wide of the mark there though.
And yes, you’re correct about family club thing. He did say others were more family orientated but also pointed out that the phrase family club doesn’t really mean anything, how do you measure the family-ness of a football club?
By the number of fans who:
1. Started going having been persuaded by a family member And/Or 2. Go with a family member
Braziliance mentionned that his friends who don’t understand why he supports Charlton were immigrants. We can assume that they don’t have family in the UK, or at least not through a generation or two.
When I was at school the fans of big clubs didn’t have a Dad or brother taking them to games. Other fans at school ( Charlton, Gillingham, Fulham) went with a family member.
CM's point was that he had - apparently - got data on those numbers you refer to, certainly for Sunderland and Charlton, and said that the numbers are much strong in Sunderland's case, and that would seem to me to stack up. Sunderland is the proud sole town team, the community has a stronger shared history generally. As a London club we will never be like that.
But I am fairly convinced he is not about to throw away all the good things we've done to make families welcome.
I say "fairly" because I'm still remembering CM Mk.1 on Netflix, informing his bewildered staff that from now on Sunderland will take the field to some banger Ibiza track.
Same mate I -perhaps unwisely - quoted above said that Charlie can still get carried away sometimes, but that Rodwell is often a restraining force on him.
That's worrying Prague, took my white son to his first game last weekend. If the club don't want white people as fans, I think I'll take him Maidstone United next time, thanks for the heads up
Fucking hell, with a jump to conclusions like that you should have been in the Olympics
Not sure he would be happy to compete in the Olympics, British people clearly aren't welcome as they let other nations compete aswell.
A lot of white people seem to be jumping on the victim bandwagon at the moment. I went to the pub yesterday for a drink and had to put up with some old bloke going on one to his mate on the phone about it. One drink was enough for me and I had to bite my tongue throughout that. The thing is, if one person thinks that, and Prague disagreed, why assume he is right with no other information at your disposal? Unless you want to play the victim.
There is a logical fact that if you want to maximise the support, you may look at the local area and see how it reflects support on a whole range of demographics and that may provide clues as to where you might want to apply some focus to appeal to people who you might be missing out on. I'm sure Charlie, and I mean sure not guess, wants as many supporters as possible and he highlighted the great potential the local area has for us in terms of the numbers of people who live nearby.
I think it’s way too early to say the way the club is being run is a complete success. We’ve just come off the worst season for 90 odd years. They hired Appleton, the ex-Oxford Utd manager, which worryingly CM is still trying to distance himself from. CM doesn’t have a great record in football, he has the unenviable record of presiding over the worst league finishes for every club he’s been involved in. Luckily we now have a decent manager, I hate to think where we’d be if NJ had said no, like so many other highly rated managers did at the time.
He may spin that we are actually a ‘street club’ and that’s how you unlock 40% extra revenue, that is probably what he’s telling the owners. That sort of spin doesn’t sound like a sound, long term plan. As usual it’s going to be a gamble on promotion or things will unravel quickly. Finger crossed!
Now expecting Charlie’s mates on here to pile on.
So if anyone disagrees with you they're "Charlie's mates". It may be they just have a different point of view to you.
Not at all, all opinions welcome, just that there’s a vocal contingent that seem to defend Charlie’s actions, good or bad.
There is also a vocal contingent that just seem to attack the SMT actions and invariably blame Methven for things that he allegedly has nothing to do with. A load of viewpoints based on his education.
Another load of viewpoints seemingly based on a "villain edit" on a TV show and the hearsay of a certain set of fans who take umbridge to things that happened previously involving them. The purchase of Will Grigg for £4m was the other twonk. The handing over of the TV payments to Ellis Short (the thing about buying the club with the clubs money) mirrors what we know Roland Rat and The Guitar Man did/tried to do with player sales fee and sell-on clauses.
If anything, you'd like to think Methven learnt from the Sunderland T'il I Die experience, that's why there are 'experienced and professional football people' in prominent positions now within the club.
We are at the start of a very promising season with arguably the best manager in the league, the strongest squad we've had in years and an extremely positive start to the season. Yet some people want to try to pick at a conversation with some random business people on a podcast (where he actually sounds like he knows what he is talking about, the same as on the other podcast he's on with Adrian Goldberg).
And before anyone says, I'm not Methven or a family member/friend/acquaintance or anything. Live, love, laugh and be happy!
Did he comment on why transfer fees are ‘undisclosed’ yet happy to share how much money we lose?
No don’t think so, but we’ve been doing it consistently since the Slater/Jimenez years and the majority of other clubs do the same.
Agreed. But I don’t really know why as I’ve understood it’s an open secret within football circles and it’s only the fans who have to fill in the blanks.
Just curious as to me it is a barometer of true cash investment.
Did he comment on why transfer fees are ‘undisclosed’ yet happy to share how much money we lose?
No don’t think so, but we’ve been doing it consistently since the Slater/Jimenez years and the majority of other clubs do the same.
Agreed. But I don’t really know why as I’ve understood it’s an open secret within football circles and it’s only the fans who have to fill in the blanks.
Just curious as to me it is a barometer of true cash investment.
Well, the actual deal has to be lodged with the EFL.
Aside from that I suspect the complexities make most deals almost unfathomable in terms of cash paid. And any headline fee would be likely to be as accurate as a political party's election manifesto. There's so many clauses, matches played, promotion achieved, goals scored, international appearances, phased payments over the period of a contract and sell-on clauses.
Then should you also include release clauses, buy-out clauses, image rights clauses, signing-on bonuses, loyalty bonuses, etc, that feature as part of a player's contract?
Just as an example, Martial from AS Monaco to Man Utd back in 2015:
A headline fee of €50mn, to be paid in two installments of €20mn up front and €30mn the following year. Plus €10mn if he scored 25 goals during the period of his contract; €10mn if he played 25 games for France; and €10mn if he was nominated for the Ballon d'Or plus other clauses in the event of his onward sale for a fee between €60mn and €100mn meaning Monaco got 50% of the difference.
Edited to add: Martial still hasn't got a club, if we're interested.
I do apologise. I didn't realise that calling someone a patronising cnut undermined the investment in the team. In future I'll be very complimentary and issue plaudits which should sustain us beyond Christmas and boost our push for promotion.
It doesn't have to be one or the other though does it. You tell someone you think they're being patronising without calling them a c***
Did he comment on why transfer fees are ‘undisclosed’ yet happy to share how much money we lose?
No don’t think so, but we’ve been doing it consistently since the Slater/Jimenez years and the majority of other clubs do the same.
Agreed. But I don’t really know why as I’ve understood it’s an open secret within football circles and it’s only the fans who have to fill in the blanks.
Just curious as to me it is a barometer of true cash investment.
Well, the actual deal has to be lodged with the EFL.
Aside from that I suspect the complexities make most deals almost unfathomable in terms of cash paid. And any headline fee would be likely to be as accurate as a political party's election manifesto. There's so many clauses, matches played, promotion achieved, goals scored, international appearances, phased payments over the period of a contract and sell-on clauses.
Then should you also include release clauses, buy-out clauses, image rights clauses, signing-on bonuses, loyalty bonuses, etc, that feature as part of a player's contract?
Just as an example, Martial from AS Monaco to Man Utd back in 2015:
A headline fee of €50mn, to be paid in two installments of €20mn up front and €30mn the following year. Plus €10mn if he scored 25 goals during the period of his contract; €10mn if he played 25 games for France; and €10mn if he was nominated for the Ballon d'Or plus other clauses in the event of his onward sale for a fee between €60mn and €100mn meaning Monaco got 50% of the difference.
Edited to add: Martial still hasn't got a club, if we're interested.
Difference between undisclosed and a ‘caveated’ figure in my view.
Still think it shows true investment if more details are shared.
I think it’s way too early to say the way the club is being run is a complete success. We’ve just come off the worst season for 90 odd years. They hired Appleton, the ex-Oxford Utd manager, which worryingly CM is still trying to distance himself from. CM doesn’t have a great record in football, he has the unenviable record of presiding over the worst league finishes for every club he’s been involved in. Luckily we now have a decent manager, I hate to think where we’d be if NJ had said no, like so many other highly rated managers did at the time.
He may spin that we are actually a ‘street club’ and that’s how you unlock 40% extra revenue, that is probably what he’s telling the owners. That sort of spin doesn’t sound like a sound, long term plan. As usual it’s going to be a gamble on promotion or things will unravel quickly. Finger crossed!
Now expecting Charlie’s mates on here to pile on.
So if anyone disagrees with you they're "Charlie's mates". It may be they just have a different point of view to you.
Not at all, all opinions welcome, just that there’s a vocal contingent that seem to defend Charlie’s actions, good or bad.
There is also a vocal contingent that just seem to attack the SMT actions and invariably blame Methven for things that he allegedly has nothing to do with. A load of viewpoints based on his education.
Another load of viewpoints seemingly based on a "villain edit" on a TV show and the hearsay of a certain set of fans who take umbridge to things that happened previously involving them. The purchase of Will Grigg for £4m was the other twonk. The handing over of the TV payments to Ellis Short (the thing about buying the club with the clubs money) mirrors what we know Roland Rat and The Guitar Man did/tried to do with player sales fee and sell-on clauses.
If anything, you'd like to think Methven learnt from the Sunderland T'il I Die experience, that's why there are 'experienced and professional football people' in prominent positions now within the club.
We are at the start of a very promising season with arguably the best manager in the league, the strongest squad we've had in years and an extremely positive start to the season. Yet some people want to try to pick at a conversation with some random business people on a podcast (where he actually sounds like he knows what he is talking about, the same as on the other podcast he's on with Adrian Goldberg).
And before anyone says, I'm not Methven or a family member/friend/acquaintance or anything. Live, love, laugh and be happy!
I would say the vocal contingent not praising CM at every point is based on the worst league finish in 90 odd years and the disaster of hiring of Appleton as manager. I really hope they do well but I'd say CM and Andy Scott still have a lot to prove as we're just three games into the season.
Did he comment on why transfer fees are ‘undisclosed’ yet happy to share how much money we lose?
No don’t think so, but we’ve been doing it consistently since the Slater/Jimenez years and the majority of other clubs do the same.
Agreed. But I don’t really know why as I’ve understood it’s an open secret within football circles and it’s only the fans who have to fill in the blanks.
Just curious as to me it is a barometer of true cash investment.
Well, the actual deal has to be lodged with the EFL.
Aside from that I suspect the complexities make most deals almost unfathomable in terms of cash paid. And any headline fee would be likely to be as accurate as a political party's election manifesto. There's so many clauses, matches played, promotion achieved, goals scored, international appearances, phased payments over the period of a contract and sell-on clauses.
Then should you also include release clauses, buy-out clauses, image rights clauses, signing-on bonuses, loyalty bonuses, etc, that feature as part of a player's contract?
Just as an example, Martial from AS Monaco to Man Utd back in 2015:
A headline fee of €50mn, to be paid in two installments of €20mn up front and €30mn the following year. Plus €10mn if he scored 25 goals during the period of his contract; €10mn if he played 25 games for France; and €10mn if he was nominated for the Ballon d'Or plus other clauses in the event of his onward sale for a fee between €60mn and €100mn meaning Monaco got 50% of the difference.
Edited to add: Martial still hasn't got a club, if we're interested.
Difference between undisclosed and a ‘caveated’ figure in my view.
Still think it shows true investment if more details are shared.
Not really.
Investment isn't just player fees.
Wages, infrastructure, non-playing staff
Eventually the investment ie losses are shown in the accounts anyway.
And as has been said if it has been agreed between the two clubs that it is not to be revealed it would be damaging to do so.
The item that doesn't seem to have been mentioned is the emphasis that CM placed on owning the assets ie The Valley and Sparrows Lane.
Did he not say at the end that if he could change one thing it would be owning those assets. It was also about the only area where he was very reluctant to mention numbers. Income, losses, etc he shared. When he was asked about the price of the Valley and SL he clamed up. That suggests to me that they don't want to queer any current or future negotiations with RD. Or it could be he still has to convince the money men that owning the assets is a good investment.
Also he didn't, if I heard it right, say where "not a family club" but that we're "not not a family club but there are about 60 clubs who claim to be family clubs". Please correct me on either item if I misheard it.
Was also interesting that one of the successes he mentioned about Sunderland (some of which were nothing to do with his time there!) was that they owned the assets and the hosts looked aghast when he clarified that we didn’t own ours. I suspect this might be a case of him having a classic English view of the importance of owning your stadium and the American owners not quite getting it. I could be totally wide of the mark there though.
And yes, you’re correct about family club thing. He did say others were more family orientated but also pointed out that the phrase family club doesn’t really mean anything, how do you measure the family-ness of a football club?
By the number of fans who:
1. Started going having been persuaded by a family member And/Or 2. Go with a family member
Braziliance mentionned that his friends who don’t understand why he supports Charlton were immigrants. We can assume that they don’t have family in the UK, or at least not through a generation or two.
When I was at school the fans of big clubs didn’t have a Dad or brother taking them to games. Other fans at school ( Charlton, Gillingham, Fulham) went with a family member.
My friends I was referring to aren't all immigrants. Only one is, but moved to the UK at a very young age, the rest are first generation citizens, they all support either Arsenal or ManU, although it's only one ManU, the rest Arsenal.
Truth be told though, I'm also only a third generation citizen, all my Nan and Grandads (both sides) are pure Irish, it's only my Mum and Dad, and their siblings that were born here.
I also don't have one family member older than me that supports Charlton, I only support Charlton as primarily it sounds close to my first name (Charlie) and second, it was my first game, and I said whoever wins I'll support. We beat Arsenal 1 nil and the rest is history, otherwise I may have been an Arsenal fan.
I have convinced 3 of my cousins to support Charlton, but I imagine they only did as they probably look up to me a bit, deffo the case in at least 2 of them.
If you don't have an older relative showing you the way, or support Charlton for a bit of a random reason like me, I can see why anyone would choose to support elsewhere.
You'll find a lot of lads with no connection to their cities or towns will opt to root for a prem team just because they're good at football. This is just the truth, and why I'm always really excited when I speak to someone at a Charlton game who doesn't have a London accent, as I want to know why they've picked Charlton.
The club has A LOT to do, in convincing young boys and girls in to becoming the next generation of Charlton fans. It's genuinely seen as uncool to support us among a lot of youth, and like I said before, there's a ton of pressure to fit in. When everyone at school watches the Premier league etc, it's only natural for kids to pick a team who get a lot of coverage.
So the club can say as much as they like that they should tap in, and there isn't enough diversity etc, but it's all noise. Charlton Athletic just have to be good at football first, then the door opens for foreign or unfamiliar fans. Case and point my 5 mates from school who would definitely buy season tickets if we were in the top flight and all say they follow Charlton as a second team as it is.
Even at the game recently, the Germans and Scottish I spoke with. The Germans were impressed with our family reputation, and the Scots wanted to see a London game, and as we had won 2 in a row, they were expecting to see a decent game. It's that simple imo.
It is true that the biggest driver is the product. Basically a succesful team. Airman and the club did a great job boosting the support in the past but it couldn't have been done with the sort of performances we have delivered over the past decade. There has to be a wave to ride.
I'll try to keep this short. Last season I brought a friend to a game. She was born in Vietnam but came to the UK when she was 7 - she's now 46. She lives in Woolwich but had never been to a game before. It was a mid-week game as she works on Saturdays. Her enthusiasm for what I thought was a pile of crap was quite remarkable - she really should have been in the upper tier of the Covered End. She would clearly enjoy attending more games with her family. But her husband too works Saturdays. I suspect she would find the cost of match tickets prohibitive as well.
So, my question, would we get more local, new supporters if we followed the example of the NFL and played most games on Sundays?
I'll try to keep this short. Last season I brought a friend to a game. She was born in Vietnam but came to the UK when she was 7 - she's now 46. She lives in Woolwich but had never been to a game before. It was a mid-week game as she works on Saturdays. Her enthusiasm for what I thought was a pile of crap was quite remarkable - she really should have been in the upper tier of the Covered End. She would clearly enjoy attending more games with her family. But her husband too works Saturdays. I suspect she would find the cost of match tickets prohibitive as well.
So, my question, would we get more local, new supporters if we followed the example of the NFL and played most games on Sundays?
Won’t happen as Women’s games are played on Sundays.
Plus football is about Saturday 3pm for most, of course that causes a problem for those with retail/hospitality jobs but it has always been that way.
I'll try to keep this short. Last season I brought a friend to a game. She was born in Vietnam but came to the UK when she was 7 - she's now 46. She lives in Woolwich but had never been to a game before. It was a mid-week game as she works on Saturdays. Her enthusiasm for what I thought was a pile of crap was quite remarkable - she really should have been in the upper tier of the Covered End. She would clearly enjoy attending more games with her family. But her husband too works Saturdays. I suspect she would find the cost of match tickets prohibitive as well.
So, my question, would we get more local, new supporters if we followed the example of the NFL and played most games on Sundays?
The only thing that would improve home attendances is results & promotion. Sunday attendances would be lower, smaller away followings, Sunday service on public transport, also most rail engineering works take place on Sundays & the majority of people have to attend work, school etc on Monday, also when would the women's team play their fixtures. Also most Premier League live tv games take place on Sunday afternoon.
Comments
I've just passed Nuneaton, its hard to be honest, made harder by the fact when i got to Thurrock i saw a teenager wearing Nike trainers and once again was shocked to see Nike sold trainers to someone who wasn't me. Anyway I've been barefoot since Grays and refuse to buy plasters for my blisters as they had a picture of a family on the front and I'm by myself.
1. Started going having been persuaded by a family member
And/Or
2. Go with a family member
Braziliance mentionned that his friends who don’t understand why he supports Charlton were immigrants. We can assume that they don’t have family in the UK, or at least not through a generation or two.
When I was at school the fans of big clubs didn’t have a Dad or brother taking them to games. Other fans at school ( Charlton, Gillingham, Fulham) went with a family member.
No, my comment wasn't aimed at you. Regular posters will know who I was talking about.
But I agree with others that aiming for a wider audience doesn't and certainly shouldn't mean sidelining your existing fan base and I don't think that is what CM was suggesting in any case.
But I am fairly convinced he is not about to throw away all the good things we've done to make families welcome.
I say "fairly" because I'm still remembering CM Mk.1 on Netflix, informing his bewildered staff that from now on Sunderland will take the field to some banger Ibiza track.
Same mate I -perhaps unwisely - quoted above said that Charlie can still get carried away sometimes, but that Rodwell is often a restraining force on him.
There is a logical fact that if you want to maximise the support, you may look at the local area and see how it reflects support on a whole range of demographics and that may provide clues as to where you might want to apply some focus to appeal to people who you might be missing out on. I'm sure Charlie, and I mean sure not guess, wants as many supporters as possible and he highlighted the great potential the local area has for us in terms of the numbers of people who live nearby.
Another load of viewpoints seemingly based on a "villain edit" on a TV show and the hearsay of a certain set of fans who take umbridge to things that happened previously involving them. The purchase of Will Grigg for £4m was the other twonk. The handing over of the TV payments to Ellis Short (the thing about buying the club with the clubs money) mirrors what we know Roland Rat and The Guitar Man did/tried to do with player sales fee and sell-on clauses.
If anything, you'd like to think Methven learnt from the Sunderland T'il I Die experience, that's why there are 'experienced and professional football people' in prominent positions now within the club.
We are at the start of a very promising season with arguably the best manager in the league, the strongest squad we've had in years and an extremely positive start to the season. Yet some people want to try to pick at a conversation with some random business people on a podcast (where he actually sounds like he knows what he is talking about, the same as on the other podcast he's on with Adrian Goldberg).
And before anyone says, I'm not Methven or a family member/friend/acquaintance or anything. Live, love, laugh and be happy!
Aside from that I suspect the complexities make most deals almost unfathomable in terms of cash paid. And any headline fee would be likely to be as accurate as a political party's election manifesto. There's so many clauses, matches played, promotion achieved, goals scored, international appearances, phased payments over the period of a contract and sell-on clauses.
Then should you also include release clauses, buy-out clauses, image rights clauses, signing-on bonuses, loyalty bonuses, etc, that feature as part of a player's contract?
Just as an example, Martial from AS Monaco to Man Utd back in 2015:
A headline fee of €50mn, to be paid in two installments of €20mn up front and €30mn the following year. Plus €10mn if he scored 25 goals during the period of his contract; €10mn if he played 25 games for France; and €10mn if he was nominated for the Ballon d'Or plus other clauses in the event of his onward sale for a fee between €60mn and €100mn meaning Monaco got 50% of the difference.
Edited to add: Martial still hasn't got a club, if we're interested.
Investment isn't just player fees.
Wages, infrastructure, non-playing staff
Eventually the investment ie losses are shown in the accounts anyway.
And as has been said if it has been agreed between the two clubs that it is not to be revealed it would be damaging to do so.
Truth be told though, I'm also only a third generation citizen, all my Nan and Grandads (both sides) are pure Irish, it's only my Mum and Dad, and their siblings that were born here.
I also don't have one family member older than me that supports Charlton, I only support Charlton as primarily it sounds close to my first name (Charlie) and second, it was my first game, and I said whoever wins I'll support. We beat Arsenal 1 nil and the rest is history, otherwise I may have been an Arsenal fan.
I have convinced 3 of my cousins to support Charlton, but I imagine they only did as they probably look up to me a bit, deffo the case in at least 2 of them.
If you don't have an older relative showing you the way, or support Charlton for a bit of a random reason like me, I can see why anyone would choose to support elsewhere.
You'll find a lot of lads with no connection to their cities or towns will opt to root for a prem team just because they're good at football. This is just the truth, and why I'm always really excited when I speak to someone at a Charlton game who doesn't have a London accent, as I want to know why they've picked Charlton.
The club has A LOT to do, in convincing young boys and girls in to becoming the next generation of Charlton fans. It's genuinely seen as uncool to support us among a lot of youth, and like I said before, there's a ton of pressure to fit in. When everyone at school watches the Premier league etc, it's only natural for kids to pick a team who get a lot of coverage.
So the club can say as much as they like that they should tap in, and there isn't enough diversity etc, but it's all noise. Charlton Athletic just have to be good at football first, then the door opens for foreign or unfamiliar fans. Case and point my 5 mates from school who would definitely buy season tickets if we were in the top flight and all say they follow Charlton as a second team as it is.
Even at the game recently, the Germans and Scottish I spoke with. The Germans were impressed with our family reputation, and the Scots wanted to see a London game, and as we had won 2 in a row, they were expecting to see a decent game. It's that simple imo.
So, my question, would we get more local, new supporters if we followed the example of the NFL and played most games on Sundays?
Plus football is about Saturday 3pm for most, of course that causes a problem for those with retail/hospitality jobs but it has always been that way.
Sunday attendances would be lower, smaller away followings, Sunday service on public transport, also most rail engineering works take place on Sundays & the majority of people have to attend work, school etc on Monday, also when would the women's team play their fixtures.
Also most Premier League live tv games take place on Sunday afternoon.