Torres and Hulk

* Here's

Merry! Thanks too

I've read the posts you made, but they all seem to think that the near 200 million you have spent on players in the last 18 months won't affect you. And the link i posted was actually rather informative, and certainly addressed issues that you guys, accidentally I presume, overlooked.

merry

labelled a $pud...oh the shame..




worse things happen at s......oh no actually they don't

If you bothered to read the article that you posted the link to, you would've come across this:
"So, adding up all those ups and downs brings us (spookily) to break-even. The key point here is that all of these actions have already happened with the sole exception of the naming rights, so it is little wonder that Chelsea’s officials demonstrated such confidence when announcing their latest loss. Of course, there may be other factors affecting the club’s financials, but remember that the acceptable deviations will give them plenty of room to manoeuvre."

As for the increased expenditure, we won the CL and FA cup this year, so we benefit from the prize money/tv money, and the countless number of plastic fans, we'll be playing in more tournaments, we've signed a deal with Sauber.
I don't know where you've got the £200m from, as the Torres and Luiz deals were included in the article you kindly posted the link to.

"the near 200 million you have spent on players in the last 18 months won't affect you"

if you actually understood anything about the rules you are harping on about instead of just google knowledge you wouldn't be continuing to defend your position.

for example you (and the article you have now based all your knowledge on) probably don't know that transfer fees are usually amortised across the length of a players contract.

to help you understand this, as you clearly struggle, i will use a very simple example:

we hypothetically buy Hulk for £40m on a 5 year contract. this shows up on our financial statement as £8m per year (which is 40/5 if you havent done your maths GCSE yet).

and if you actually read the article you posted, (which i admit i just skimmed too) the theme seems to be how Roman and his team will use all the legal tricks in the book to enable the statements to look favourable and allow us to meet the rules. and if so, so what? all big corporations do the same and if you look at their management accounts the story will be completely different.

bottom line is, once again, we will meet the reg's. you can't seem to accept that or any logical reasoning we have provided.

Surely spending 50m on torres is a lesson on why u shouldnt blow 40 odd million on hulk.

U could buy 2 or 3 top class players for that sort of money instead of taking a masdive gamble on 1 player.

Im not going to pretend i watch a lot of portugese football. I dont. All i see of hulk is his champions league games. To me he looks very inconsistent. Incosistency is surely not something u pay 40m for!

To me most of u are probably basing ur opinions on you tube clips and the fact he has a cool sounding name. For me, if he was that good he wouldnt be still playing in portugal at the age of 25.

All clubs fans are the same though. We have fans proclaiming gaston ramirez is the best thing since sliced bread. All i can think is where are all these fans watching bologna games!

you make some good points mellor but just to retort: i'd like you to give examples of the "2 or 3 top class players" that we could get for £40m - especially with the Chelsea tax on top?

as to you saying he wouldn't be still playing in portgual at 25 - that's just a silly comment.

a) 25 is still young for a typical football player's development curve - it is generally thought that players peak between 27-30.

b) many players also bloom late. Didier Drogba only signed his first professional contract at 21 and was playing in france until 26.

c) Hulk has been subject to bids from clubs from "bigger leagues" for the last 3 seasons so it's not for the want of trying.

but i agree many fans do base their knowledge on youtube, bandwagon jumping and most awfully Football Manager. this annoys me as do the fans who say "should we buy x, y or z? why not all 3! and get rid of all the players i dont like!" completely unrealistic.

You's have been linked with jovetic, a very classy player who would cost half the price of hulk. The young lad munain at bilbao is another top class talent that could be picked up for about 20m. There are players out there, much cheaper than what porto are asking for hulk.

The other clubs that have shown intersst in him cant of been that interested or they would have signed him. Your not telling me that madrid, man city, milan, bayern etc dont have the cash to go out and buy a player if they really want him.

Anyway im not knocking the lad. Hes a good player and if you get him im sure he'll have a decent impact on your team, but for me 35-40m is far too much for him.

Your squad needs a good bit of work to catch up with the manchester clubs, thats my opinion anyway. 40m on 2 or 3 players would be more beneficial than just bringing in hulk.

fair enough i actually agree that 40m would be too much... not seen much of jovetic or munain but even if we did sign both we would then get panned for spend so much for a player on the bench.

IMO, and contrary to popular belief, even in Ambramovich era we've not been a club that stock piles players (a la Man C). And apart from the first season spending to fast track us up to the level on Man U/ Arsenal, we have actually only bought 3 or 4 1st team squad players a season, more often than not replacing some outgoing players. this is normal.

as to him not moving, porto have been holding fast especially with his release clause. and, something that i agree with- just flashing the cash doesnt always work and if porto wanted to keep him and he didn't mind continuing his development at a club he feels he owes loyalty to for plucking him out of japanese obscurity , why should he leave?