Tony Barrett article

[calvoboy]

Already proving his worth to the Times with this little snippet

...while Benitez was handed a budget in the region of £15 million plus whatever he recouped from sales to spend this summer, there was also an understanding that the cost of any significant contract extensions would also come from this pot. Benitez duly awarded new deals and accompanying pay rises to Fernando Torres, Steven Gerrard, Dirk Kuyt, Yossi Benayoun and Daniel Agger, reducing his spending power in the transfer market.

Explains why Rafa has been quiet on the lack of funds available. It's been under his control all along and he decided to prioritise securing key players on long term deals at the expense of a signing or two.

But, assuming this is true then surely we should still have enough in the bank for one more decent signing? Even allowing for the additional costs of the new contracts, we should have enough left from the £15m plus sales budget based on our spending so far?

Full article here: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/spo...cle6797191.ece

[Shaggy]

Cheers for posting, very interesting...if not a little depressing.

[dave edwards]

Agreed Shaggy, makes me sad on a friday night glad I have had a beer, wont sink in til tomorrow

[Shanks]

I think it's really difficult to understand exactly how much we do have available and I think the breakdown of the Aquilani deal is a really good example.

It's not just a case of e.g. David Silva cost 25mill so we give Valencia 25mill.

There appears to be so many intricate details involved with regards to rolling payments, bonuses and players wages that you can understand how these dealings can become a nightmare for managers.

That said, I don't think G&T really understand the importance of how Silva or Villa could be the final piece that could win us the Prem this season.

Torres was supposed to be the final piece in our jigsaw.

[DannyMan2006]

Explains why Rafa has been quiet on the lack of funds available. It's been under his control all along and he decided to prioritise securing key players on long term deals at the expense of a signing or two.

But, assuming this is true then surely we should still have enough in the bank for one more decent signing? Even allowing for the additional costs of the new contracts, we should have enough left from the £15m plus sales budget based on our spending so far?

That very point has been debated on here all summer and comes as no suprise. His initial spend however was very much unknown. What we still don't know is how much of that £15m the contract extensions took up.

And we still have to take into account the money left from the Alonso/Aquilani swap and sale of Leto/Arbeloa. Throw in Dossena and Voronin if it comes off and we could be looking at a tidy sum for the two players I think we need.

EDIT: Forget that, we signed Glen Johnson!!!!!!!!!!

Still, taking into account we sold Keane for £13m (and got bonuses when Spurs stayed up) you could say that they have contributed no money what so ever since last years summer transfer market closed.

What happened to the Champions League money etc.......

[DannyMan2006]

To balance it out a little, a section from an article in the Independent:

But where, beyond that, are the players who will turn Liverpool into an unstoppable force and more specifically, bulk out the painfully thin front line? The list of goalscoring prospects Benitez trotted out this week was an unconvincing one: Andriy Voronin, back from a successful loan at Hertha Berlin but an individual Benitez expected to have dispensed with by now, David Ngog and Ryan Babel. None has proved himself in the Premier League.

Two weeks remain to change things. The £21.7m taken from Tom Hicks and George Gillett's Cayman Islands holding company and injected into the club, as revealed by the club's July accounts, taken with a £4.5m "profit" from sales over acquisitions in the past year suggests recent hints of impoverishment from Benitez may be a smoke screen designed to ease negotiations for Valencia's David Silva.

But, eight months after Robbie Keane headed back down the M6, Liverpool need another striker if they are not to suffer the same unsustainable reliance on Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres which carried them through last season. Benitez's latest argument against going back into the transfer market was ominous tortology. "To sign a big, big name you have to change everything. If you bring in a big name then you have to move your players." The question mark over Gerrard's fitness for Tottenham tomorrow brings that familiar comment on Liverpool back to life: a title-winning first XI but little else.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/carraghers-title-aim-may-be-wide-of-mark-1772390.html

------------------------

Sounds like Rafa is talking against signing a big name striker there. As in he would have to move Gerrard if he signed a first choice striker like Augero/Villa.

[Shaggy]

ominous tortology

[Reece]

Confused already and it's not even midday

[Guest]

He meant tautology I think.

[Shaggy]

Confused already and it's not even midday

He meant tautology I think.

I figured that but what a strange spelling. In a broadsheet too

[Redspin]

Personally I find it hard to believe that Barrett has the ear of either Benitez or the Chief Exec at Anfield, who would be in the know, to the extent that they would disclose the club's full transfer budget and the terms and conditions of how it should be allocated. Just doesn't make any sense. But a journalist has to produce copy and as long as it's semi-plausible he can get away with it. It's the sort of supposition anyone on here could have made by pulling figures out of the air while having absolutely no idea of the actual position, so I don't know why people seemingly accept it as gospel

[DannyMan2006]

Personally I find it hard to believe that Barrett has the ear of either Benitez or the Chief Exec at Anfield, who would be in the know, to the extent that they would disclose the club's full transfer budget and the terms and conditions of how it should be allocated. Just doesn't make any sense. But a journalist has to produce copy and as long as it's semi-plausible he can get away with it. It's the sort of supposition anyone on here could have made by pulling figures out of the air while having absolutely no idea of the actual position, so I don't know why people seemingly accept it as gospel

Living up to your name there Redspin. Bit naive mind.

If all us fans thought we were loaded we would be pretty pissed with the transefr business so far, because we look like not progressing so far.

It's in Rafas best interests to reveal such details and play down expectations.

[dom9]

I think it's really difficult to understand exactly how much we do have available and I think the breakdown of the Aquilani deal is a really good example.

It's not just a case of e.g. David Silva cost 25mill so we give Valencia 25mill.

There appears to be so many intricate details involved with regards to rolling payments, bonuses and players wages that you can understand how these dealings can become a nightmare for managers.

That said, I don't think G&T really understand the importance of how Silva or Villa could be the final piece that could win us the Prem this season.

Torres was supposed to be the final piece in our jigsaw.

Re, the bit in bold.

There is a budget.
All people have a budget.
All businesses have a budget.

The budget was set at a level determined by those running the club, and is based on income and outgoings.

How would you exepect them to increase it? By magic? I'm sure the owners would love more high profile players, but if the money isn't there to get them, what can anybody do, apart from to continue to increase revenue streams, which they are doing?

At this point, you'd probably want some fantasy arab fairy-godfather to turn up and wave his magic wad. That is something I certainly wouldn't myself.

[Shanks]

Re, the bit in bold.

There is a budget.
All people have a budget.
All businesses have a budget.

The budget was set at a level determined by those running the club, and is based on income and outgoings.

How would you exepect them to increase it? By magic? I'm sure the owners would love more high profile players, but if the money isn't there to get them, what can anybody do, apart from to continue to increase revenue streams, which they are doing?

At this point, you'd probably want some fantasy arab fairy-godfather to turn up and wave his magic wad. That is something I certainly wouldn't myself.

Nothing wrong with going over the budget to bring in either of them to without going way over the odds.

I believe that there is money available to secure the players that Rafa wants to bring in and I'm sure he has asked the same question knowing the budget constraints.

I don't think an arab fairy godfather would help in any situation to be honest.


I wouldn't mind DIC though, as I don't believe we'd have been in this situation had they been here from the start.

[DannyMan2006]

Re, the bit in bold.

There is a budget.
All people have a budget.
All businesses have a budget.

The budget was set at a level determined by those running the club, and is based on income and outgoings.

How would you exepect them to increase it? By magic? I'm sure the owners would love more high profile players, but if the money isn't there to get them, what can anybody do, apart from to continue to increase revenue streams, which they are doing?

At this point, you'd probably want some fantasy arab fairy-godfather to turn up and wave his magic wad. That is something I certainly wouldn't myself.

Maybe instead we should ask those cunts where all the money has gone?

Had we been building a stadium I could understand. But since they have took over and put all that debt on that club we have NOTHING to show for it. I would say we spent over the odss once since they've been in charge, but that should have been levelled off with sales and CL money - two finals made for instance.