Agents fees released from prem

Leaving southampton in or taking them out makes no difference to Swansea's figures. They are £1.1m with Southampton in and astonishingly £1.1m without them.

If you want to put Southampton in, by all means do so.

You were trying to imply Swansea spent the least, which is untrue.

I wasn't implying anything of the sort.

Although pro rata they did spend the least. Swans spent £1.1m over 52 weeks, Southampton spent 600k over 10 weeks.

What a pointless and boring thread, mirroring the creator of it.

Leaving southampton in or taking them out makes no difference to Swansea's figures. They are £1.1m with Southampton in and astonishingly £1.1m without them.

If you want to put Southampton in, by all means do so.

You were trying to imply Swansea spent the least, which is untrue.

I wasn't implying anything of the sort.

Although pro rata they did spend the least. Swans spent £1.1m over 52 weeks, Southampton spent 600k over 10 weeks.

Well done, and you still need to borrow from the bank.

Leaving southampton in or taking them out makes no difference to Swansea's figures. They are £1.1m with Southampton in and astonishingly £1.1m without them.

If you want to put Southampton in, by all means do so.

You were trying to imply Swansea spent the least, which is untrue.

I wasn't implying anything of the sort.

Although pro rata they did spend the least. Swans spent £1.1m over 52 weeks, Southampton spent 600k over 10 weeks.

Well done, and you still need to borrow from the bank.

I've never borrowed from the bank.

Leaving southampton in or taking them out makes no difference to Swansea's figures. They are £1.1m with Southampton in and astonishingly £1.1m without them.

If you want to put Southampton in, by all means do so.

You were trying to imply Swansea spent the least, which is untrue.

I wasn't implying anything of the sort.

Although pro rata they did spend the least. Swans spent £1.1m over 52 weeks, Southampton spent 600k over 10 weeks.

Well done, and you still need to borrow from the bank.

I've never borrowed from the bank.

As you're a Swansea City supporter, I was talking about Huw.

Spend the least money in the prem and you still need a bank loan.

Leaving southampton in or taking them out makes no difference to Swansea's figures. They are £1.1m with Southampton in and astonishingly £1.1m without them.

If you want to put Southampton in, by all means do so.

You were trying to imply Swansea spent the least, which is untrue.

I wasn't implying anything of the sort.

Although pro rata they did spend the least. Swans spent £1.1m over 52 weeks, Southampton spent 600k over 10 weeks.

Well done, and you still need to borrow from the bank.

I've never borrowed from the bank.

As you're a Swansea City supporter, I was talking about Huw.

Spend the least money in the prem and you still need a bank loan.

Oh Swansea? They certainly don't need a bank loan, but it's certainly a good idea to take one.

Let me educate you.

Finances in football are paid in installments, tv money, transfers etc etc. any extra money made by a company enters into a high interest account, like a savings account. This money has a limit on the amount of withdrawals or you lose a proportion or sometimes all of the interest for that financial year.

If Swansea want to spend in January then it would be cheaper to take the loan and pay the interest on £3m rather than take their own money out of the "savings account" and lose the interest on maybe £30m. It's cash flow loan. Sky money isn't paid until the end of January, which is no good to them as by the the January window will be closed.

Last year they posted a profit of £14m. This year they have had similar outgoings but have sold Allen for £15m, Sinclair for £6m and Rodgers for £5m. Very Healthy indeed.

Profit of 14 mil - yet need a 3mil loan? You think that's good?

Thank god you aren't MY financial advisor.

Which but us confusing you regarding the following?...

Finances in football are paid in installments, tv money, transfers etc etc. any extra money made by a company enters into a high interest account, like a savings account. This money has a limit on the amount of withdrawals or you lose a proportion or sometimes all of the interest for that financial year.

If Swansea want to spend in January then it would be cheaper to take the loan and pay the interest on £3m rather than take their own money out of the "savings account" and lose the interest on maybe £30m. It's cash flow loan. Sky money isn't paid until the end of January, which is no good to them as by the the January window will be closed.

They've already got 14 mil profit though..

Seriously, go to planet swamp and praise their financial model there.

They've already got 14 mil profit though..

Seriously, go to planet swamp and praise their financial model there.

Which would be in a high interest account which if withdrawn would mean a loss of interest on it. So it's better to lose the interest on £3m loan that £14m savings isn't it.

You really are a plum.

Nah, that's you.

Go away.

Nah, that's you.

Go away.

But you couldn't grasp the simple concept of a cash flow loan

Nah, that's you.

Go away.

But you couldn't grasp the simple concept of a cash flow loan

Wasn't it you the other day crying about people personally insulting you because you had a differing opinion to them?

Now you're doing exactly the same. What a hypocrite.

Nah, that's you.

Go away.

But you couldn't grasp the simple concept of a cash flow loan

Wasn't it you the other day crying about people personally insulting you because you had a differing opinion to them?

Now you're doing exactly the same. What a hypocrite.

No, I was asking why people want others banned due to a difference of opinion.

Insult me all you wish I find it funny. However I'm sure I wouldn't be hauled infront of the magistrates for calling you a plum, which you clearly are if you don't understand the simple concept if a cash flow loan.

Nah, that's you.

Go away.

But you couldn't grasp the simple concept of a cash flow loan

Wasn't it you the other day crying about people personally insulting you because you had a differing opinion to them?

Now you're doing exactly the same. What a hypocrite.

No, I was asking why people want others banned due to a difference of opinion.

Insult me all you wish I find it funny. However I'm sure I wouldn't be hauled infront of the magistrates for calling you a plum, which you clearly are if you don't understand the simple concept if a cash flow loan.

K