When are we going to hear news on the Salah, Virg and Trent contracts..

[justme]

We bid £111m for Caicedo during the window last Summer.

Later in the same window, we spent money on Gravenberch and Endo - fees of £38m and £16m - so if we go with a massively, massively oversimplified version of events, £57m of it would have been left, as we committed £54m on two new midfielders.

Not that it works like that, as each deal is structured differently.

Worth adding too that within around 10 days of each other, we were working on the groundwork for Mamardashvili, a £30m net fee (£75m for Gordon, recoup £45m for Gomez) on Gordon and the £51m buy-out for Zubimendi.

10s of millions saved in wages, sale of Carvalho and others and a goal keeper to show for all that??

[Insidious]

10s of millions saved in wages, sale of Carvalho and others and a goal keeper to show for all that??

He's asked where the Caicedo money went justme.

I've put forward where some of it seemingly went, based upon the same amount of knowledge ("fuck all") as anyone else on the forum has. Simple as that.

As to your own thoughts (Carvalho, goalie, wages) who is to say?

I'd definitely suggest that some of the bigger wages saved will be set aside for contracts and their renewal. A repeated figure affiliated with Trent is a bump up to £300k per week - if that happens we are talking about most of the saved wages on a player like Matip being spoken for - and that's before we get to agent fees, Salah's contract, Van Dijk's contract, the wages we would have pencilled in for any incomings (we attempted Zubimendi and Gordon) etc

I think the best thing is to take pieces of business in isolation as much as possible.

[justme]

Yes i know. what he said..but im assuming Ian also wondering the money left over from the cash for Caicedo and this seasons money we have saved . where that is?... all we are doing is selling players and got a goalie so far..

[justincredible]

That Caicedo fiasco was a total smoke & mirrors job. As if this lot were going to splash £115 on him. Totally laughable to even think so...

[ianlfc]

Yes i know. what he said..but im assuming Ian also wondering the money left over from the cash for Caicedo and this seasons money we have saved . where that is?... all we are doing is selling players and got a goalie so far..

Correct. It's a high risk strategy bidding big on players who don't want to sign for us. It leaves money in the bank and with all the sponsors ,shirt sales, wages saved and players sold you would hope we could bid for most players.
Either that or as Tees said, it's being spend on big John's other investments.
Spend it or lose it !!

[Insidious]

That Caicedo fiasco was a total smoke & mirrors job. As if this lot were going to splash £115 on him. Totally laughable to even think so...

I actually think there is a very distinct (and unfortunate) case for it having bit of a dick-swinging situation.

I think John and Todd have a bit of history and it's to do with Linda......cue shouts of "Jerry, Jerry, Jerry!" and so on.

[Insidious]

Yes i know. what he said..but im assuming Ian also wondering the money left over from the cash for Caicedo and this seasons money we have saved . where that is?... all we are doing is selling players and got a goalie so far..

From the outside looking in, we appear to be targeting players who can genuinely improve us and fit our style.

Zubimendi for example didn't happen, so fans understandably clamour for an alternative. We don't seem to go for "just anyone" as it can prevent the acquisition of a main target - we held back on an alternative centre-back when we had to wait for Van Dijk, we used Milner as a left-back until we saw one that we wanted in Robertson, etc.

Players that genuinely improve the squad seems to be the plan and I totally understand it.

What I don't get (and this is where I perhaps align myself more with the general vibe on here) is when we have a top target and it doesn't work out, we can't occasionally compromise a BIT and get someone "decent" in, rather than targeting nobody. When we clearly had a centre-back issue, we could have been a bit more ambitious than Kabak on loan, for example.

I do also feel moving parts are at play here. We are a quite risk-averse set-up, so Slot was never going to get a huge net spend right away, nor was Hughes in his new role going to have the loosest of purse-strings - staff will be tasked with meriting further trust as we go, I'd imagine.

Even Klopp's first window or two I think we had a minus net spend, versus more recently where I think the total net spend of our last 4 summers was £228m, which averages out at +£57m per Summer (it wasn't spent evenly like that of course) overall.

9 or 10 days left, let's see where we go. Honestly not stressing on contracts until we reach January personally, but that's just me.

I think we'll continue to make a couple of fringe sales (right thing to do if the offers are good) and then see if we can pry someone away in the closing days of the window.

[BOBPAISLEYFAN]

From season 2014/15 to season 2023/4 inclusive, 10 seasons, we have spent £1.215B, recouped £ 740M…

Net spend per season, £ 47.5M

Net spend per window, £ 23.75M

Fuck me thats mad… it would be interesting to see what the squad was worth in season 2014/15 compared to season 2023/24.

If FSG believe that Slot can achieve similar miracles as Klopp on such a limited budget, they are genuinely deluded, hopefully they will wake up soon, and give Slot the necessary funds to try and seamlessly continue Klopps brilliant legacy, if they dont we could potentially find ourselves sleepwalking into mid table mediocrity…

[Insidious]

From season 2014/15 to season 2023/4 inclusive, 10 seasons, we have spent £1.215B, recouped £ 740M…

Net spend per season, £ 47.5M

Net spend per window, £ 23.75M

Fuck me thats mad

Just a quick couple of things on net spend. I will firstly say that I would have liked us to have spent a bit more at key moments during Jürgen's tenure, lest anyone think otherwise.

Net spend is a decent metric, but it doesn't paint a full picture. We have for example been reasonably good at selling - Ibe, Brewster, Solanke sales as examples. Had we been poorer at selling, our net spend would be bigger, which on paper makes us look more willing to spend. This goes for any side that sells well (Ajax, Porto, Dortmund, Brighton) and it can slightly skew the picture. Equally, sides that are shite at selling look like they spend more, because their net spend is that much greater.

Next is wages. Boring as it is (compared to transfers) we have kept players well. Now, I suspect this may be an age/generation thing, but I am informed by having watched Liverpool in the 90s and 00s up until now. I never witnessed us as a Colossus in the 70s+80s that hoovered up trophies. Prior to Klopp, Rafa's tenure was the pinnacle. I am not used to us having top players and giving out competitive wages to keep them here, or stars staying for long. Two of our best foreign players in my time as a fan were Torres and Suarez and I didn't get to see them stay at the club for more than 3 and a half seasons, because other clubs had more to offer. Compare that to how long we have kept some lads who are some of the World's best in their positions (Van Dijk, Alisson, Salah in particular) and it's a joy to see players stay here. Perhaps I am just too easily pleased on that front (probably am, probably fair criticism of me as a fan) but the boring "paying the bills" aspect is something I don't take for granted as we got to keep a quality side together, versus how quickly our best sides got dismantled previously via departures.

Net spend also doesn't factor in agent fees. Do you know how much we spent on these in the 23/24 season? It was £31.5m - that's a big chunk of change - you could buy a good player for that, or three good academy projects.

Would have liked more expenditure, same as yourself - just trying to add further brush-strokes to the picture.

[justme]

Correct. It's a high risk strategy bidding big on players who don't want to sign for us. It leaves money in the bank and with all the sponsors ,shirt sales, wages saved and players sold you would hope we could bid for most players.
Either that or as Tees said, it's being spend on big John's other investments.
Spend it or lose it !!

Crazy ain't it?? sick of how our club is being run.. I think its something like 40 million a season we have spent on players for the last 10 years.. No season have we over spent...
Chelsea have made a pigs ear of things. But since Boehly has taken over at Chelsea they have spent 1.3 BILLION.. just in 2 years.. and we are looking around to do bargain deals. Its only the facts we allowed the keeper we signed from Valencia to remain there for this season . we signed him. cause we wouldnt budge on the 35 million euros. we offered 30 i think