UniFox21 Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Just now, foxfanazer said: That's the good thing about this clause. We have to accept the £42m from Man city but of PSG come in with £60m we are under no obligation to reject that offer So the clause isn't a dead certain him returning to Man City just gives them an option to buy back at a lower price, yet we can still accept all other offers should we want to?
foxfanazer Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 1 minute ago, Poznan34 said: More money, potentially different manager at man city who wants him , promise of game time, champions league football etc No that was quoting somebody who said Man city could buy him back and sell him instantly for profit.
foxes_rule1978 Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Just now, Poznan34 said: More money, potentially different manager at man city who wants him , promise of game time, champions league football etc Well no, if Man City are just buying him to sell him on then it leaves the player in limbo. He wouldn't choose to move on to just earn Man City money, he would just stay and if a club comes in like Chelsea then he will move straight there rather than going through Man City. It doesn't benefit him at all going back to Man City just to be sold on
foxfanazer Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Just now, UniFox21 said: So the clause isn't a dead certain him returning to Man City just gives them an option to buy back at a lower price, yet we can still accept all other offers should we want to? Exactly. Basically just a release clause exclusively to Man City
UniFox21 Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Just now, foxfanazer said: Exactly. Basically just a release clause exclusively to Man City And at £42million we'd make a tidy profit as well, and if he is that good then chances are other big teams will be after him, and since Man City have thrown him out there's no certainty he'd want to go back
Poznan34 Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 1 minute ago, foxfanazer said: No that was quoting somebody who said Man city could buy him back and sell him instantly for profit. 1 minute ago, foxes_rule1978 said: Well no, if Man City are just buying him to sell him on then it leaves the player in limbo. He wouldn't choose to move on to just earn Man City money, he would just stay and if a club comes in like Chelsea then he will move straight there rather than going through Man City. It doesn't benefit him at all going back to Man City just to be sold on Ah! Didn't read up. Apologies.
Max Power Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 If they activate the buy back clause then no reason Iheanacho has to accept a contract offer from Man City. If he is happy and they are just bringing him back after a year to make £10m profit on a sale to Shanghai SIPG then I doubt he'd accept. If the clause is over £40m I think thats a good deal for us.
foxfanazer Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 4 minutes ago, Max Power said: If they activate the buy back clause then Iheanacho has to accept a contract offer from Man City. If he is happy and they are just bringing him back after a year to make £10m profit on a sale to Shanghai SIPG then I doubt he'd accept. If the clause is over £40m I think thats a good deal for us. Eh? He doesn't have to accept anything
Nick Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Sounds like we'll get a couple of seasons out of him before he turns into the next Lukaku.....
nnfox Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 11 minutes ago, foxfanazer said: That's the good thing about this clause. We have to accept the £42m from Man city but if PSG come in with £60m we are under no obligation to reject that offer. I can't see him going back there personally This is exactly the problem with buy backs. If PSG came in with 60m, then there's nothing to stop Man City buying him from us for 42m and then selling to PSG for the 60m. There will only be one club buying Iheanacho from us whilst the buy back clause is active.
Max Power Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 3 minutes ago, foxfanazer said: Eh? He doesn't have to accept anything Ah, missed a word
foxfanazer Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 1 minute ago, nnfox said: This is exactly the problem with buy backs. If PSG came in with 60m, then there's nothing to stop Man City buying him from us for 42m and then selling to PSG for the 60m. There will only be one club buying Iheanacho from us whilst the buy back clause is active. How many times do I have to say it? Why would Iheanacho do that? Whats in it for him? We could sell directly to PSG
TheUltimateWinner Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Imagine if we made these signings last summer...
Marshall Cockney Fox Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 My Man City mates really rate him and reckon he's a real fox in the box. But they are adamant he's best high up the pitch getting onto stuff. So if he's playing with Vardy it would be two out and out strikers up top. Does that work for us? I'd say not on our recent playing style. So we need a real genuine attacking mid to link this together.
foxfanazer Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Just now, Marshall Cockney Fox said: My Man City mates really rate him and reckon he's a real fox in the box. But they are adamant he's best high up the pitch getting onto stuff. So if he's playing with Vardy it would be two out and out strikers up top. Does that work for us? I'd say not on our recent playing style. So we need a real genuine attacking mid to link this together. Riyad?
Marshall Cockney Fox Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Just now, foxfanazer said: Riyad? He's off to Arsenal for a fiver.
Marshall Cockney Fox Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Sigurdson is the key. Piss off Riyad so we can float your fiver under a gagging Swans Chairman.
lgfualol Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 5 minutes ago, TheUltimateWinner said: Imagine if we made these signings last summer... In hindsight yes, but I remember a lot of people on here happy with last season's business. It's just Ranieri lost the plot and the players seemed to forget how to play football. I hope it isn't the case with these lot!
Babylon Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 Can't see us spending £40m on Sig, when he's only going to replace the bloke we're meant to be signing for £25m.
Al-aLondon-Foxile Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 This strike force excites me in the way Heskey/Collymore did so very briefly. No basis, just exciting times and so looking forward to the coming season
Marutimon Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 9 minutes ago, foxfanazer said: How many times do I have to say it? Why would Iheanacho do that? Whats in it for him? We could sell directly to PSG For all we know Iheanacho may be mad at Man City for the way he was treated last season and could well sabotage any Man City deal in the future just for the hell of it, especially given Guardiola terrible back history with his former players.
Ricey Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 23 minutes ago, foxfanazer said: No that was quoting somebody who said Man city could buy him back and sell him instantly for profit. I didn't say instantly. City would give him a chance, but the aim would be to sell knowing that his resale value is much higher than the buyout clause.
weller54 Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 5 minutes ago, Marutimon said: For all we know Iheanacho may be mad at Man City for the way he was treated last season and could well sabotage any Man City deal in the future just for the hell of it, especially given Guardiola terrible back history with his former players. Can he play against them with this clause in place I wonder?
StanSP Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 My personal opinion is that Man City don't actually want him back but it's just as protection in case he absolutely rockets with us and has a brilliant season (like Vardy 2 season ago) and his value rockets as well. His value might go up to £60m hypothetically and clubs may bid that. As soon as that happens, Man City come in with their clause bid and player free to talk to the club and get a better player back. It's a win win for both clubs because we'd get a good return on him performance wise as well as a profit if he does go back. And win for City cos they get a better player back if it does come to that. (no idea if there's an expiry on it. I'm presuming not).
foxfanazer Posted 7 July 2017 Posted 7 July 2017 4 minutes ago, Ricey said: I didn't say instantly. City would give him a chance, but the aim would be to sell knowing that his resale value is much higher than the buyout clause. Surely if he went back and didn't play or wasn't as good as he was at Leicester he's value would drop. Or if he went back and did well they'd just keep him. Think the FA would be keeping a close eye on the deal to make sure its not exploited in that way
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.