and you know the wages they are on?

I have a fair idea

Where's your proof of that? Or did you just hear someone on here say it and decide that's what happened.

really, from your own assumptions, or have you seen their pay slips?

you don't have come out with some crap mate

The available evidence and a bit of common sense says that we are spending a fair bit less on the cap this year than we were last year. Therefore why would you think that the club was reinvesting profits when it stands to reason that they are simply re-allocating funds that would normally be set aside for wages?

I dont need to justify what ive seen

What evidence is this then? The club have told us that we aim to spend full cap and have told us that Westerman was paid for using profits. Rumour and speculation are obviously more credible than the spoken word and official statements in your opinion then?

no, but you should justify widly innacurate accusations

I'm not sure what the club telling us that we 'aim' to spend full cap has to do with whether we are actually spending it or not, you do the maths there's no way that we are spending to the cap this year. IIRC the comment about Westerman being paid for out of profits was before Berrigan left so I'm not sure what relevance it has now.

Oh, and when the offical statements are made by Jimmy 'Goebbels' Rule, then yes I think rumour and speculation are often more credible

this is just another (poor) rumours thread, people posting opinion and claiming it to be fact.

We planned on spending full cap, Berrigan and Tansey have since left. We've brought in Obst and Phelps, while also paying a fee for Obst. I'm not denying there is probably cap space left, just that it won't be anywhere near the 150k reported that Westerman cost. There's also rumours that O'Meleys deal was back loaded, why not believe this one? Doesn't it suit your argument.
The Rule comment is just silly really.

Yup.