The Ryan Fraser Clause

[TheRock]

The Scottish transfer window is open for weeks after the English one so we could still spend the hypothetical money, even if he did move on deadline day.

 

What does Bournemouth 'holding firm' mean? They've been getting offers and turning them down?

[strachanmcgheegoal]

What does Bournemouth 'holding firm' mean? They've been getting offers and turning them down?

On this site? Probably that he’s signing for the hun and has been spotted on twitter getting the Sash tattooed on his left arse cheek.

[Torry Tosser]

The Scottish transfer window is open for weeks after the English one so we could still spend the hypothetical money, even if he did move on deadline day.

 

What does Bournemouth 'holding firm' mean? They've been getting offers and turning them down?

Most probably had offers that are way off his valuation.

If its left till last day they want get what their expecting I shouldn't think...I can see him staying there.

[NEM]

Most probably had offers that are way off his valuation.

If its left till last day they want get what their expecting I shouldn't think...I can see him staying there.

 

 

More likely to be over inflated last minute panic bids going in, especially if a few clubs interested. 

[Torry Tosser]

More likely to be over inflated last minute panic bids going in, especially if a few clubs interested.

Arsenal and co want make panic buys,so it will be the other way I should think and them excepting what's on offer last day.

Hope it doesn't go tits up for us.

[redone]

Arsenal and co want make panic buys,so it will be the other way I should think and them excepting what's on offer last day.

Hope it doesn't go tits up for us.

Don’t see how it can go tits up for us**

 

If he isn’t sold then it’s not costing us anything , but if he is sold and we get 20% , then that’s just a bonus windfall.

 

 

 

**As long as we don’t spend over the odds before Fraser’s sold in the hope that we’ll get funds from the sell-on clause

[Chewie37]

Don’t see how it can go tits up for us**

If he isn’t sold then it’s not costing us anything , but if he is sold and we get 20% , then that’s just a bonus windfall.

**As long as we don’t spend over the odds before Fraser’s sold in the hope that we’ll get funds from the sell-on clause

Just realised that for once we are getting all our business done quickly.......wonder if that’s so all our signings are complete before any windfall so that DM doesn’t actually get to spend any of it.......

[Reliablesource]

Just realised that for once we are getting all our business done quickly.......wonder if that’s so all our signings are complete before any windfall so that DM doesn’t actually get to spend any of it.......

If the club receive any money from a Ryan Fraser transfer it will have absolutely no bearing on this summer's transfer budget.

[Sonoftherock]

If the club receive any money from a Ryan Fraser transfer it will have absolutely no bearing on this summer's transfer budget.

 

With a new stadium to pay for, it will have absolutely no bearing on the next few transfer windows either!

[Ten Caat]

With a new stadium to pay for, it will have absolutely no bearing on the next few transfer windows either!

 

+1 for a refreshingly healthy dose of realism

[Tord31]

If the club receive any money from a Ryan Fraser transfer it will have absolutely no bearing on this summer's transfer budget.

if we sell mckenna or fraser moves then it might allow a one off modest transfer fee to be approved

 

rightly so it wont change the wages per week

[fine-n-dandy]

Despite Cormack saying the stadium will have absolutely no bearing on the playing fund, yeah?

That doesn't mean receiving money from transfers will go towards the playing budget.

That money could still all be swallowed up by the new stadium & he would still not be telling lies

[V for Vendetta]

Got to agree I think funds from Fraser or McKenna or others sold would in large part go into the stadium funding - and rightly so, why would we lumber the club with more debt just to spunk that cash on players transfers?

 

The sensible thing is to put most of it into the long term projects at the club and use a small portion (10% or something like that) to boost the playing budget - which would probably be spread over a few years not spent on fees.

 

Money coming in from a couple of transfers would actually be really timely in terms of encouraging outside investment for the Stadium project - shows the club on a good financial footing and a sound investment.

[slippers]

Got to agree I think funds from Fraser or McKenna or others sold would in large part go into the stadium funding - and rightly so, why would we lumber the club with more debt just to spunk that cash on players transfers?

 

The sensible thing is to put most of it into the long term projects at the club and use a small portion (10% or something like that) to boost the playing budget - which would probably be spread over a few years not spent on fees.

 

Money coming in from a couple of transfers would actually be really timely in terms of encouraging outside investment for the Stadium project - shows the club on a good financial footing and a sound investment.

I agree with you. But spending a bit of money on 2 or 3 quality players and securing Europa league group stages could make a massive financial impact for us, not to mention attracting players, if we get 2 or 3 years in group stages. It’s a risk but it’s not as if we would be spending money we don’t have if Fraser and McKenna were sold. If it didn’t work out it would just mean a larger mortgage for the stadium.

 

The biggest problem is that qualification is no sure thing. You need the luck of the draw more than anything. If we drew AC Milan in 3rd or 4th round it’s very unlikely any signings we could secure would see us past them.

[sooth_stander]

McInnes will currently be building a transfer strategy based on 3 different supermarkets :-

 

1. No sale for McKenna and Fraser stays put. He's then shopping at Lidl for Main, Taylor etc etc

2. Sells McKenna but Fraser stays put. He's then shopping at Sainsburys, and can possibly manage a £400K bid for Chris Cadden.

3. Sells McKenna and Fraser signs for The Arse. He's then shopping at the Aberdeen version of Harrods, and would surely get £1m to sign a  puckle of half decent players, plus boasting his overall wages budget, with Euro qualification to the group stages hugely achievable then. And one of the new Kingsford stands is paid for.

 

Kenphitamean?

[Ten Caat]

Despite Cormack saying the stadium will have absolutely no bearing on the playing fund, yeah?

 

And a -1 for you for getting it wrong....as has been said it's not money already budgeted for. I'm sure DM would get a small fraction of any incoming funds from it.....10% doesn't seem unreasonable...but the facts are we are building a £50 million stadium when we had originally anticipated a £40million one so any "bonus cash" coming in will in the main go towards reducing the mortgage on that.

 

And also because you are Millermong. I might set up a -1 direct debit on you

[Sonoftherock]

You're arguing the wrong thing

 

The playing budget will not reduce at all due to the stadium

 

If anything it will go up a bit

 

Is that what you are disputing?

 

The reality is, that wont happen.  Has there ever been a club who's playing budget hasn't been impacted by a project of this scale?  Looks at clubs like Arsenal and Spurs? 

 

The board are not stupid enough to release statements saying that we're going to have to tighten our belts, amidst several years of austerity, while we transition to the new stadium.... but it is blatantly obviously, unless you're living in a magical world of fairy tales, pixies and star dust. 

 

The project is going to cost at least GBP 50M - for an organisation of AFC's size, with our turnover, you'd have to be a drooling spastic not to appreciate the significant impact this will have.  

[Henry]

The reality is, that wont happen.  Has there ever been a club who's playing budget hasn't been impacted by a project of this scale?  

 

[fatjim]

The reality is, that wont happen.  Has there ever been a club who's playing budget hasn't been impacted by a project of this scale?  Looks at clubs like Arsenal and Spurs? 

 

The board are not stupid enough to release statements saying that we're going to have to tighten our belts, amidst several years of austerity, while we transition to the new stadium.... but it is blatantly obviously, unless you're living in a magical world of fairy tales, pixies and star dust. 

 

The project is going to cost at least GBP 50M - for an organisation of AFC's size, with our turnover, you'd have to be a drooling spastic not to appreciate the significant impact this will have.  

 

 

Drooling spastic describes Frankie perfectly.

[V for Vendetta]

I agree with you. But spending a bit of money on 2 or 3 quality players and securing Europa league group stages could make a massive financial impact for us, not to mention attracting players, if we get 2 or 3 years in group stages. It’s a risk but it’s not as if we would be spending money we don’t have if Fraser and McKenna were sold. If it didn’t work out it would just mean a larger mortgage for the stadium.

 

The biggest problem is that qualification is no sure thing. You need the luck of the draw more than anything. If we drew AC Milan in 3rd or 4th round it’s very unlikely any signings we could secure would see us past them.

If we weren't working on the stadium I'd say absolutely go for this and really get 3 or 4 quality additions and get to the groups.

 

But we have to hedge our bets a bit, the stadium will be a much more steady long term source of income for the club so it's more important.

 

If all goes well the stadium becomes the foundation to then make that leap in Europe.

[V for Vendetta]

McInnes will currently be building a transfer strategy based on 3 different supermarkets :-

 

1. No sale for McKenna and Fraser stays put. He's then shopping at Lidl for Main, Taylor etc etc

2. Sells McKenna but Fraser stays put. He's then shopping at Sainsburys, and can possibly manage a £400K bid for Chris Cadden.

3. Sells McKenna and Fraser signs for The Arse. He's then shopping at the Aberdeen version of Harrods, and would surely get £1m to sign a puckle of half decent players, plus boasting his overall wages budget, with Euro qualification to the group stages hugely achievable then. And one of the new Kingsford stands is paid for.

 

Kenphitamean?

I think you underestimate the cost of option 3.

 

1 mil on 2 players probably adds a very big chunk more in wages. Can't see us doing that.

 

More likely we'd spend a million by increasing the wage budget by 200k for 5 years

[V for Vendetta]

And a -1 for you for getting it wrong....as has been said it's not money already budgeted for. I'm sure DM would get a small fraction of any incoming funds from it.....10% doesn't seem unreasonable...but the facts are we are building a £50 million stadium when we had originally anticipated a £40million one so any "bonus cash" coming in will in the main go towards reducing the mortgage on that.

 

And also because you are Millermong. I might set up a -1 direct debit on you

Poor

[Ten Caat]

Poor

 

Not in it for popularity

[V for Vendetta]

Not in it for popularity

Just as well really.

[fine-n-dandy]

The DD stand fkd our playing budget for well over a decade & only a very generous donation from a wealthy couple & an agreement with the bank finally fixed that headache.

 

A new stadium is going to have a very similar effect, to think otherwise is the stuff of fairytale.

 

Soon be back to just about managing to make the interest payments whilst steadily watching the debt increase year on year.

 

Or

 

 

Rich daft Yankees are going to keep us safe

[V for Vendetta]

The DD stand fkd our playing budget for well over a decade & only a very generous donation from a wealthy couple & an agreement with the bank finally fixed that headache.

 

A new stadium is going to have a very similar effect, to think otherwise is the stuff of fairytale.

 

Soon be back to just about managing to make the interest payments whilst steadily watching the debt increase year on year.

 

Or

 

 

Rich daft Yankees are going to keep us safe

It's possible I suppose but there's more prospect of this having a positive effect on club income. Something the DD was never going to do.

[fine-n-dandy]

It's possible I suppose but there's more prospect of this having a positive effect on club income. Something the DD was never going to do.

True but hard to see us making so much more revenue from it that we will manage interest payments & reduce the debt by a large amount year on year.

It will be a massive struggle & will certainly have a large effect on playing budgets

[V for Vendetta]

True but hard to see us making so much more revenue from it that we will manage interest payments & reduce the debt by a large amount year on year.

It will be a massive struggle & will certainly have a large effect on playing budgets

If we have a huge loan/mortgage on it then yes.

 

I may be delusional but I think we might actually do it without too big a mortgage for the club. I'm positive on that.

 

Biggest challenge is getting the stadium and transport right for fans and making sure the backing is there from us to make it work.

[Tord31]

If we have a huge loan/mortgage on it then yes.

 

I may be delusional but I think we might actually do it without too big a mortgage for the club. I'm positive on that.

 

Biggest challenge is getting the stadium and transport right for fans and making sure the backing is there from us to make it work.

I'm thinking the opposite (about mortgage). Not sure about the phrase that the clubs directors have underwritten phase 1. Why not just say funded or paid. Sounds like a possibility that will be mortgaged at a later date and directors repaid?

[Dr_Manhattan]

I'd imagine it's underwritten by Cormack and Co secured against our biggest asset, Pittodrie, which is getting sold anyway.

 

No point getting a mortgage until you know how much you need.