Jaggernaut Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 It's a good idea in theory, but if we get an offer close to the 75k/100k mentioned above he will be away. We're in no position to turn down that sort of money for a player we got from the juniors for nothing, given our financial situation. We're in no position to turn down that sort of money for any of our players. He could get a career threatening injury tomorrow, or go off form completely (something not out of the question with Erskine). Let's be realistic. You might well be (probably are) right, but at least let's hope for a sell-on clause or something like that in addition to any up-front sum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 I can see many a situation arising where we sell a younger player to an SPL or a major English league club and he's immediately loaned back for a season. I wouldn't particularly want to see that with Erskine as he's potential and enough of a contract left to get serious money but it makes financial sense wherever poor cash flow is evident. The buying club are jumping in to get a player that's not quite reached their playing level and the selling club are buying a bit of financial stability against the risk of just potential. The more financially stable a club like us is then the more we can hold on to our prospects and chance realising serious money. To get to that stage of stability first we've got to sell players ahead of that level. I don't want to see that with Erskine but I fully understand why we might have to sell him at a lower fee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vladimir Putin Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 (edited) That's where you need to take a risk, I agree £100k would be gard to turn down, but a good season & he could easily attract a League 1/Championship side who could easily eclipse that offer. It's easy saying £100k can replace him, yes it can, but it's unlikely to be with someone like him. An entertainer & a player who the fans like to see play. If he was to go, I'd like to see Willie McLaren come in, should be a fairly cheap option but has ability & will score some goals. Again, I would love to see us hold on to him and then sell him to a Championship club for 400k - but it's not going to happen. £100k from Hearts, if they offered it, is the wages of 5 of our full-time players for a year, probably more. Look at our crowds from last season - there is absolutely no way we could turn it down. It's unfortunate, but we're just not in a position to take risks on the financial side, and the amount of fans Erskine alone would add on to our gates is nowhere near £100k worth. This is like whenever someone on here lambasts the Board for not 'pushing the boat out' - there is no boat. Edited May 19, 2011 by Vladimir Putin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.D Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Looking back to the sale of Harkins, do we consider Erskine as being in the same saleable situation? Our own supporters were looking at Harkins as a Cult player just like Erskine is now. Harkin's deal certainly reduced our debt and Erskine's would bring it down c to give us a sounder financial situation. Let's leave that decision to our Directors. I think we as a support have greater confidence in our new men at the top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Yes we can sell our best players (in fact we've always done more or less that), and so reduce our debt further. But if that means even more years in the wilderness of Division 1, or even flirting with relegation again, then unless we get really lucky and somehow cobble together another team that can seriously challenge for promotion then our crowds are going to reduce even further, meaning less income, meaning lower-quality players etc etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 John Lambie Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 I would like to see this squad have a shot at the title, if it fails then the players can move on next summer. I feel Jackie has a real chance, but if he loses Erskine, Doolan, Fox, we have no chance of replacing them & with the replacement bedding in in time for a title push. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACAB Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 If we hold on to Erskine, no matter how much we improved, we will never receive the same amount for him as would be paid to Hearts if he showed the same improvement there (it's only a rumour he is going). We play in the second tier of a diddy league so no club would make a bid to match the fans expectations of his value. More scouts (from better quality teams) would visit Tynecastle possibly leading to a bid that would dwarf any made to us so we need a decent sell-on clause if we do punt him to Hearts. The fella's an exciting talent though and I don't want him to leave but I think it would be morally corrupt of us to stand in the way of him furthering his career. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 In an ideal world I'd want McNamara to get all of any transfer fee we receive to invest back into the squad. However I'm fed up with the Club being in debt. Season after season sees more and more cut backs. Financial mismanagement, in the past continues to hinder the Club's progress, even after the Propco deal. The dark cloud of debt has been hanging over Firhill for coming on a decade now and I for one can't wait until it's gone. Agreed, but remaining in this division would mean it takes a lot longer to pay off the debt...as season or 2 in the SPL would allow us to clear the debt. £75k in a mere dent in our debt, but if that £75k allowed us to get 3 players in (a striker a left back and a left mid) then I believe the squad would have more chance of fighting for promotion than if we simply kept Erskine. I don't want the guy to go, but if he did and if the £75k is an accurate figure then Id rather see that money go to trying to win this league rather than making a tiny dent in the debt. All of that tho is dependant on the budgets in place being correct and we really will break even (although we haven't had much success in setting budgets over the last 5 years). Im sure I heard Hamilton are gona be £800k worse off next season, just shows the jump in finances between the SPL and 1st Div. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cjptfc Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 I get the impression that some people are talking like Erskine is 18. He isn't, he's 24. Fair enough he can still improve but I don't see him developing into some kind of superstar, I really don't. Who are you kidding if you think our club would turn down a £75,000 profit on a player who is 24 and can be champagne or shite. For me, there are no signs that in two years he will be worth £500,000 so I'd agree if the club sold him. As someone said above, if we can get two players in and maybe win the league (which is not impossible) then we could wipe our debt out in the SPL anyway. If true, take the money jags. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Looking back to the sale of Harkins, do we consider Erskine as being in the same saleable situation? Our own supporters were looking at Harkins as a Cult player just like Erskine is now. Harkin's deal certainly reduced our debt and Erskine's would bring it down c to give us a sounder financial situation. Let's leave that decision to our Directors. I think we as a support have greater confidence in our new men at the top. Only sort of. It wiped out the immediate deficit in the budget constantly getting bigger with HMRC. Getting him off the wage bill aside, it's hard to see how it made any dent in our actual debt levels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Only sort of. It wiped out the immediate deficit in the budget constantly getting bigger with HMRC. Getting him off the wage bill aside, it's hard to see how it made any dent in our actual debt levels. I think you're splitting hairs. If we hadn't sold Harkins we'd have owed HMRC so the debt would have been that amount higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ruchillnomore Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Hold on this is Chris Erskine we are talking about here. As somebody else has said he is 24 and should be peforming on a more consistent basis regardless. There is not a hope in hell that we would get 400k or anywhere near it. If as stated we do get an offer for 75-100k then we should bite the hand off whoever is offering and look to bring in players who may give you a more consistent performance over the full season. Yes Chris Erskine is a flair player but only at times and there have not really been enough of them. To win the this league you need consistency and if that means 2 more players who can produce the goods and possibly 5-10 goals each then that would contribute more to a possible league winning side though I do think we are still some way off from that with the quality that other teams will possess Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindau Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 According to tonights ET McNamara seems to be pinning his hopes for next season firmly in the boots of Erskine and Doolan! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 Hmm ... Adams back at County. Vacancy at QoS, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted May 19, 2011 Report Share Posted May 19, 2011 I think you're splitting hairs. Of course I am. That's how I roll Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie Of The Month Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 Hearts are now interested in Ryan Flynn of Falkirk according to the Scotsman (I would link to it but I stupidly shut down the tab just before logging in here). With a year left on his contract and the well publicised need for cash at Falkirk they might get him on the cheap which would probably rule out a move for Erskine. I noice on P&B that Falkirk are selling 10 year season tickets, that's the sign of a club needing cash fast. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 (edited) Hmm ... Adams back at County. Vacancy at QoS, too. Bunter or Chisholm back to Queens? Edited May 20, 2011 by kni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindau Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 I would be seriously disappointed if McCall chucked us for QOTS.....FFS according to reports they are in a worse state than us!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 I would be seriously disappointed if McCall chucked us for QOTS.....FFS according to reports they are in a worse state than us!! But some of our colleagues on here have suggested that Bunter was invited to resign. It's only a rumour but it would explain the bizarre timing of his departure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Earl of Hathaway Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 But some of our colleagues on here have suggested that Bunter was invited to resign. It's only a rumour but it would explain the bizarre timing of his departure. I'd love to know how that works - being 'invited' to resign. Is it a kind of Father Ted thing? 'How do you fancy resigning?' "Wasn't really thinking of it' 'Ah go on, go on, GO ON!' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 I'd love to know how that works - being 'invited' to resign. Is it a kind of Father Ted thing? 'How do you fancy resigning?' "Wasn't really thinking of it' 'Ah go on, go on, GO ON!' It's quite simple. The employee is guilty of misconduct, incompetence or breach of contract. Rather than sack him, the employer invites him to resign. The employer saves the severance payment. The employee "saves face" and protects future employment prospects. Often such arrangements are included in a "compromise agreement", a legal document that often prevents both parties from making further public statements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggybunnet Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 But some of our colleagues on here have suggested that Bunter was invited to resign. It's only a rumour but it would explain the bizarre timing of his departure. and then invite him to hosp for the last game of the season??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joejag Posted May 20, 2011 Report Share Posted May 20, 2011 It's quite simple. The employee is guilty of misconduct, incompetence or breach of contract. Rather than sack him, the employer invites him to resign. The employer saves the severance payment. The employee "saves face" and protects future employment prospects. Often such arrangements are included in a "compromise agreement", a legal document that often prevents both parties from making further public statements. What I heard is not very far from what you have just said.If you read between the lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted May 21, 2011 Report Share Posted May 21, 2011 It's quite simple. The employee is guilty of misconduct, incompetence or breach of contract. Rather than sack him, the employer invites him to resign. The employer saves the severance payment. The employee "saves face" and protects future employment prospects. Often such arrangements are included in a "compromise agreement", a legal document that often prevents both parties from making further public statements. "A friendly super-injunction", which you've just broken. Enjoy your days in court! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
firhillbevy Posted May 22, 2011 Report Share Posted May 22, 2011 Where are people seeing the erskine rumour ? Because I don't believe it, because hearts already have a few flare players like driver, skacel, templeton etc. they've signed hammil from killie and flynn at falkirk is linked with them too! Id happily have the 100 k and brong in consistent performers and bulid a team that can compete for promotion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.