Disagree. Full £7million which was holding the Stones deal up. Dunno about Mawson, but rumours all upfront with sell on.
I wouldn't be surprised if we don't get the influx of players one or two expect.. Like the lad from Chessy, four champ clubs bidding and they want a million for him. We aint going to pay owt like that.
I think it's likely that both the Stones fee and the Mawson fee will be netted over the course of their contracts Better anyway for us that way. We know the money is there
Money from transfer fees usually arrives in stages. Both the stones money and any from Mawson are likely to be over 2/3/4 years. They don't just rock up with a brown paper envelope.
It's still guaranteed cash we know we are getting, we just sign players and pay with the same terms we are receiving the cash
regardless of how much we are earning from these transfers (and sell on clauses), id like to ask yet again how many times do we really sensibly use this money to buy a good replacement ? for example carl tiler went for £1.5 mill and we replaced him with ?? (who exactly ?) and ashley ward went for £4.5 mill and we replaced him with mike sheron for £1.5 mill. having a good positive bank account and staying away from debt and administration is understadable, but what are our aims for this season. i might be over reacting here but im sick of seeing this happen yet again regarding mawson.
Problem is the more you spend in a transfer fee, the more you will probably have to pay in wages. Then you're looking at breaking the wage structure. Then you pile on long-term spending especially if other players have clauses that ask to match top earner at the club. It's a fools errand, unless you get promotion.