FAO Dane Murphy, Paul Conway.

Interesting interpretation - only because I don't agree that's how it was advertised. Here's the press release from the time (it also incidentally includes the now infamous "most successful" claim):

https://www.barnsleyfc.co.uk/news/2019/august/schmidt-2023/

Admittedly, we're probably both interpreting it as the way we originally understood it, but I read this like it was being presented as Moore's replacement with how they talked about he'd been a long term target etc....

 

Patience grasshopper!

Although I have done a lot of explaining for the owners, I do not want to set myself up in that position permanently. I started out by hoping that I could calm down the reaction to the bad start by calling for patience. I do not have all the answers by any means, and perhaps I should let the owners explain that one away.

 

I accept your financial calculations and reasoning but would argue that, the maths could be applied after the sales of our players last jan and this summer, totalling somewhere in the region of £10 million in sales (yes i know in bits), therefore we would still have a surplus, despite the outlay of £7.5 million.
The panick decisions appear to be all the owners, as in .....taking the first offer for Pinnock.
Thats what concerns me most, we have succesful business people in charge but they appear rash in their ability to reason with our predicament.
I am not someone who wishes the suits out or anything silly, i just wish they would tweak the plan slightly to include loans, to help us in this league.
I appreciate they are in charge but we are stakeholders in this club and should be encouraged to voice our concerns and ideas. I welcome intelligent conversation and any foresight in to how to improve barnsley fc as i am sure they should.

 

Don’t forget though it is highly unlikely they have received anywhere near that £10 million yet as usually they are paid in instalments often over the period of a contract(so someone sold for £3 million on a 3 year contract would equate to £1 million a year).
Added to that it is highly likely the clubs we signed replacements for are unable to accept ‘on tick’ terms.
It’s the reality of where we are sitting in between the big boys and small clubs.

 

The players who have left would have had a better chance of adjusting to the division among team mates who know each other inside out. They are having to adapt to new colleagues and tactics. We are having to drill new players who also have to acclimatise. You aren't taking that into account. It's inconceivable that we wouldn't be better off with the departees.

 

When we got promoted, I was hoping the momentum and team spirit would be worth quite a few points at the start of the season like last time. That hope disappeared when the team was ripped apart before a ball was kicked. It shouldn't have happened and it didn't need to. You couldn't buy job ready replacements with any of the fees we got.

 

One of the things that has frustrated me this transfer window is that we have sold our best assets at below market value and brought in unproven players at a premium price. Now I'm no business man... Also, as far as I know, Bahre is the only player Stendel has identified himself. And he was probably lurking on the spreadsheet somewhere anyway. Honestly, the spreadsheet is the most laughable thing. How many other clubs do you see firing up Excel docs?

 

I know thats why i put "in bits" but the deal is reciprocal, therefore we would pay in bits too.
Unless it was a loan, in which case deals can be done on things like wages.
Also how can we not sign players on the basis of instalments but everyone else can?
I appreciate we tend to sell our main assets comparatively cheap but surely that doesnt exclude us from the installments rule .

 

The other thing to consider is the length of deal. We signed a lot of players on 4 year deals this summer. That spreads cost more than in the past when we signed players on 2 or 3 year deals. If the players we sell are on shorter term deals, we generate that income faster than we pay out and have positive inflow into our cashflow statement.

It's not something I'd considered before, but that may have as much reason for longer contracts than actually wanting players to develop here and contribute more.

 

I can’t comment on the individual deals as I have no clue, but what I do know is it is almost unheard of League 2 and most League 1 clubs to accept terms over years as they financially can’t afford to wait.
As I said we sit in the middle where our buyers insist on terms but our sellers don’t, which can create a cash flow scenario.

 

What actually happens is bigger clubs know the financial difficulties those in league 2 and some in league 1 have and use it to bully through a cheaper transfer fee which is more front loaded with payments up front.

That benefits the buying club too. but if you look at our signings, not that many have come from lower English leagues. Chaplin and Sibbick are the only signed that way. I cant see Leeds and Derby (accounting for 4 signings) giving too much assistance dropping their fees seeing as they are much bigger than we are and have more clout.

 

Those are fair points, but as I understand it, the players wanted to leave, and the club did not want a disunited dressing room.

I take the view that the decision to sell was not wrong, but that the error occurred when those players were not replaced adequately. Nevertheless, what happened is done and gone and nothing can be done until January to put right that situation. I am also of the opinion that January will be to late, but that does not change anything either.

My problem with many of the posts since Saturday is that there has been a concerted attempt to vilify the owners on the basis that what has happened was part of some plan. If only Paul Conway had kept his mouth shut, there may have been some chance of containing the damage, but he made a cardinal error. He tried to BS his way out of a situation, and that never works. The BS has brought the ceiling in on top of him, but nevertheless, the points that I have been making throughout this thread are valid ones, and the fans should recognise that their view of how the club should be run will always ignore the vital stuff like profitability and cash flow.