Well done the Thais

[Guest Col city fan]

5 hours ago, hackneyfox said:

Col, have you seen tanner's piece in The Mecury?

www.leicestermercury.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/leicester-city-turn-down-50m-1163718

 

 

Repost the link mate... 

[hackneyfox]

4 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Repost the link mate... 

Tanner

[1972 Fox]

1 hour ago, Bob Hazels shorts said:

Knowing our reputation, Tottenham come in with a £25m bid for Harry Maquire, Leicester laugh it off, Harry sulks and we sell

 

Arsenal see this and offer £20m for Vardy...........

 

Everton see this and offer £18m for Ndidi............

 

Race to the bottom that would cost us more than the £50m

But surely doing what we have done with the Mahrez situation shows that we won't allow this to happen?

 

Our owners are ambitious and we won't fulfill those ambitions by being a selling club. Just about every club has to sell one or two of their best players at some point but not at knockdown prices.

 

In our owners I trust.

[Babylon]

3 minutes ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

But surely doing what we have done with the Mahrez situation shows that we won't allow this to happen?

 

Our owners are ambitious and we won't fulfill those ambitions by being a selling club. Just about every club has to sell one or two of their best players at some point but not at knockdown prices.

 

In our owners I trust.

I think that's what he's suggesting we've attempted to stop by not accepting a bid that's below current market value.

[Bluetintedspecs]

1 hour ago, hackneyfox said:

Tanner

Exactly this, well done owners!

[Guest Col city fan]

25 minutes ago, Bluetintedspecs said:

Exactly this, well done owners!

I'm still not sure mate.

I know what Tanner is saying, but if you look at the individual circumstances, we've kept a player who doesn't want to be here (which is always fraught with dilemma...just look at the current situation), not accepted 50 million quid (still a lot of money) and not taken Patrick Roberts who always looks a great young prospect (and someone who I assume WOULD want to be here?)

We've also signed Diabate who looks to be another cracking piece of business (though still very early days)

This thing about sending out a message is commendable, but looking at the circumstances of this INDIVIDUAL situation, I'm still not sure I wouldn't have sold...and moved on.

The other point I guess is that we must be real. We aren't as big a club as Man City. We don't have their wealth. And Mahrez wanted to go. He's made that clear.

[Bluetintedspecs]

4 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I'm still not sure mate.

I know what Tanner is saying, but if you look at the individual circumstances, we've kept a player who doesn't want to be here (which is always fraught with dilemma...just look at the current situation), not accepted 50 million quid (still a lot of money) and not taken Patrick Roberts who always looks a great young prospect (and someone who I assume WOULD want to be here?)

We've also signed Diabate who looks to be another cracking piece of business (though still very early days)

This thing about sending out a message is commendable, but looking at the circumstances of this INDIVIDUAL situation, I'm still not sure I wouldn't have sold...and moved on.

The other point I guess is that we must be real. We aren't as big a club as Man City. We don't have their wealth. And Mahrez wanted to go. He's made that clear.

I quite fancy lots of stuff that aint gonna happen too 

As in the ship's well and truly sailed!

Edited 6 February 2018 by Bluetintedspecs

[Gerard]

5 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I'm still not sure mate.

I know what Tanner is saying, but if you look at the individual circumstances, we've kept a player who doesn't want to be here (which is always fraught with dilemma...just look at the current situation), not accepted 50 million quid (still a lot of money) and not taken Patrick Roberts who always looks a great young prospect (and someone who I assume WOULD want to be here?)

We've also signed Diabate who looks to be another cracking piece of business (though still very early days)

This thing about sending out a message is commendable, but looking at the circumstances of this INDIVIDUAL situation, I'm still not sure I wouldn't have sold...and moved on.

The other point I guess is that we must be real. We aren't as big a club as Man City. We don't have their wealth. And Mahrez wanted to go. He's made that clear.

 

We were allowing Mahrez to leave.

 

The point here is that should we be allowing Man City to tell us what the price is? They've come in with a low ball bid with two days of the window left and gave us a take it or leave it offer.

[Ian S]

2 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I'm still not sure mate.

I know what Tanner is saying, but if you look at the individual circumstances, we've kept a player who doesn't want to be here (which is always fraught with dilemma...just look at the current situation), not accepted 50 million quid (still a lot of money) and not taken Patrick Roberts who always looks a great young prospect (and someone who I assume WOULD want to be here?)

We've also signed Diabate who looks to be another cracking piece of business (though still very early days)

This thing about sending out a message is commendable, but looking at the circumstances of this INDIVIDUAL situation, I'm still not sure I wouldn't have sold...and moved on.

The other point I guess is that we must be real. We aren't as big a club as Man City. We don't have their wealth. And Mahrez wanted to go. He's made that clear.

And then get held to ransom forever more by the next sulky so and so who wants to force a move despite being under contract, and force a move at way below market value as well.Your suggested strategy is probably a more dangerous one long term than the one we presently are pursuing.Neither particular comfortable but I for one am 100% behind the club on this one.Mahrez has been totally unprofessional (again) and should not be rewarded for his unacceptable stance. 

He needs to man up and get on with what he is contracted to do.

[1972 Fox]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

I think that's what he's suggesting we've attempted to stop by not accepting a bid that's below current market value.

Thanks. Not easy to catch me out! I think the word gullible has been taken out of the dictionary. 

[TheFox1]

The question is what did he promise to Mahrez that pushed him to react like that ?! 

Even if he was very naïve to believe the businessman's words 

[Foxxed]

Top is a business man. He's taken to football team ownership excellently, but a businessman, an excellent businessman, is what he is. We see players and games but he's essentially looking at how his assets will further us up the table, gaining him returns, in the long term.

 

Now Man City tried to take one of his biggest assets, cheaply and quickly. And they have in all probability wrecked one of his biggest assets. But I still think from a business perspective Top's done the right thing. Any businessman knows letting a competitor take his biggest asset, without insane compensation, is, well, insane.

 

Imagine us this time next year. Maguire and Ndidi have improved even more. They're very arguably the best defensive midfielder and centre half in Europe. Bayern, Real Madrid, Man City suddenly need another replacement. What then?

 

We would have Southampton's reputation: a mere shopping market for the bigger clubs. But now Top's fired a warning shot over every mega-club in the Champions League: You may have more cash, you may have more fans, you may have a bigger reputation, but we are not carrion you can fest on. And the players themselves? Are they going to repeat Mahrez's mistake?

 

The situation will probably continue to affect us negatively this season. But Top sincerely wants to make us a Champions League team in the long term. You don't get there having a reputation of easy asset stripping. Or, as Ric posted in another thread, we now have a reputation as "pigs to deal with". And that's probably a very good thing.

 

Edited 8 February 2018 by Foxxed

[AjcW]

The funny thing is, they do have as much money as some of the big boys... they're just not really at a club where they can spend it.

Even with the Premier League win you saw we couldn't attract a £50/60/70m player because everyone just thought it was a fluke... some even thought we'd be relegated the year after.

 

So the one way our owners can show their financial power is to turn down big sums and wait out for crazy sums, because they've got enough money and are making enough money to not have to worry about player sales. 

[Redouane]

12 minutes ago, Foxxed said:

Top is a business man. He's taken to football team ownership excellently, but a businessman, an excellent businessman, is what he is. We see players and games but he's essentially looking at how his assets will further us up the table, gaining him returns, in the long term.

 

Now Man City tried to take one of his biggest assets, cheaply and quickly. And they have in all probability wrecked one of his biggest assets. But I still think from a business perspective Top's done the right thing. Any businessman knows letting a competitor take his biggest asset, without insane compensation, is, well, insane.

 

Imagine us this time next year. Maguire and Ndidi have improved even more. They're very arguably the best defensive midfielder and centre half in Europe. Bayern, Real Madrid, Man City suddenly need another replacement. What then?

 

We would have Southampton's reputation: a mere shopping market for the bigger clubs. But now Top's fired a warning shot over every mega-club in the Champions League: You may have more cash, you may have more fans, you may have a bigger reputation, but we are not carrion you can fest on. And the players themselves? Are they going to repeat Mahrez's mistake?

 

The situation will probably continue to affect us negatively this season. But Top sincerely wants to make us a Champions League team in the long term. You don't get there having a reputation of easy asset stripping. Or, as Ric posted in another thread, we now have a reputation as "pigs to deal with". And that's probably a very good thing.

 

(p.s. i am sorry for yet another thread. but there's no mahrez and the business angle thread. this is a legit useful new thread!)

 

In a business sense, I don't think that keeping Mahrez was the best thing to do, as I doubt his value will increase. He's closing on 27 soon, and he is known for inconsistency, so it would surprise me if next season he doesn't do anything should he stay (assuming he stops the unprofessional behavior). 

 

 

Edited 8 February 2018 by Redouane

[Foxxed]

56 minutes ago, Redouane said:

In a business sense, I don't think that keeping Mahrez was the best thing to do, as I doubt his value will increase. He's closing on 27 soon, and he is known for inconsistency, so it would surprise me if next season he doesn't do anything should he stay (assuming he stops the unprofessional behavior). 

 

 

You're right. I doubt Mahrez's value will increase. But in the long term it means we can't be asset stripped. And having that reputation, among other clubs and our best players, would heavily damage Top's aim of being a top four club. He's taken a painful short term hit to increase his chances in the long term. It's a very good move. But only in the long run.

Edited 8 February 2018 by Foxxed

[WigstonWanderer]

On 06/02/2018 at 08:16, ZeGuy said:

Whch previous? You mean the airport? C'mon the guy behaved professionally after that and played well. Or do you mean last season where everyobody in the team was shit?

 

WELL, I TOLD YA SO.

Well there was the St Mirren incident.

[4everfox]

I think forcing other football clubs into realising that we aren't a selling club and we do intend to break the top four is more important than money. I'm completely overjoyed that our owners share this view. 

[Guest Col city fan]

2 hours ago, Redouane said:

In a business sense, I don't think that keeping Mahrez was the best thing to do, as I doubt his value will increase. He's closing on 27 soon, and he is known for inconsistency, so it would surprise me if next season he doesn't do anything should he stay (assuming he stops the unprofessional behavior). 

 

 

I agree.

I do wish people would start looking at the individual circumstances of this situation.

City not wanting to sell our best players and firing a warning shot across the bough of so-called ‘bigger clubs’ is admirable. It might have longer term benefits?

But in THIS case, I still think we should have sold Riyad. As I said before, he’s got previous. City weren’t rejecting a big bid for a player who would take it on the chin and get on with it until the summer. Instead, we were rejecting a big bid for a pussy. Why on earth did the club not think this would happen and if they did....what is the benefit of not accepting a bid for a player we intend to sell in the summer anyway? And if Mahrez keeps doing this, his value surely won’t increase particularly anyway?

Sticking to the clubs’ principles is one thing. But not accepting a bid for a player who has made it absolutely clear he wants to leave and who has now downed tools cos he can’t... who’s benefitting from this situation?

[Redouane]

1 minute ago, Col city fan said:

I agree.

I do wish people would start looking at the individual circumstances of this situation.

City not wanting to sell our best players and firing a warning shot across the bough of so-called ‘bigger clubs’ is admirable. It might have longer term benefits?

But in THIS case, I still think we should have sold Riyad. As I said before, he’s got previous. City weren’t rejecting a big bid for a player who would take it on the chin and get on with it until the summer. Instead, we were rejecting a big bid for a pussy. Why on earth did the club not think this would happen and if they did....what is the benefit of not accepting a bid for a player we intend to sell in the summer anyway? And if Mahrez keeps doing this, his value surely won’t increase particularly anyway?

Sticking to the clubs’ principles is one thing. But not accepting a bid for a player who has made it absolutely clear he wants to leave and who has now downed tools cos he can’t... who’s benefitting from this situation?

Well I suppose they assumed he would keep his head down and play well, as he has done this season following his failed attempt to force a move in the summer. But I guess he saw how effective it is to get your way if you down tools, as illustrated by Dembele, Payet and Mbappe. 

 

Still they should've known that not dowing tools after Roma put out 30 million is not the same as City putting in 65 million. 

[Channies6thswan]

3 hours ago, Foxxed said:

Top is a business man. He's taken to football team ownership excellently, but a businessman, an excellent businessman, is what he is. We see players and games but he's essentially looking at how his assets will further us up the table, gaining him returns, in the long term.

 

Now Man City tried to take one of his biggest assets, cheaply and quickly. And they have in all probability wrecked one of his biggest assets. But I still think from a business perspective Top's done the right thing. Any businessman knows letting a competitor take his biggest asset, without insane compensation, is, well, insane.

 

Imagine us this time next year. Maguire and Ndidi have improved even more. They're very arguably the best defensive midfielder and centre half in Europe. Bayern, Real Madrid, Man City suddenly need another replacement. What then?

 

We would have Southampton's reputation: a mere shopping market for the bigger clubs. But now Top's fired a warning shot over every mega-club in the Champions League: You may have more cash, you may have more fans, you may have a bigger reputation, but we are not carrion you can fest on. And the players themselves? Are they going to repeat Mahrez's mistake?

 

The situation will probably continue to affect us negatively this season. But Top sincerely wants to make us a Champions League team in the long term. You don't get there having a reputation of easy asset stripping. Or, as Ric posted in another thread, we now have a reputation as "pigs to deal with". And that's probably a very good thing.

 

Excellent post

[leicesterseddon]

Trouble is I don't see how this gets resolved, even in the summer. 

 

Reportedly clubs could have bought him for £50m last summer and declined. 

 

Now because of the mega-deals that have taken place since his price tag has gone up to £80m. 

 

Question is - why would the clubs that didn't bid £50m for him last summer pay £80m now, especially given his behaviour & the fact he's a year older? 

 

Either we're overestimating his value or bigger clubs are trying to have us on because they consider us small fry. 

 

In any case - the only way I can see him moving on is if we lower our expectations...but will that happen? 

[Wymsey]

Not sure how the owners are reacting about this situation tbh.

[Clever Fox]

This situation could end up costing Mahrez everything he's already made from the game.

He's lucky that we're playing Man City this Saturday as he wouldn't have been allowed play in that game, So it probably bought him a bit more time to get over things.  But if he's not back at training on Monday then expect the legal Writs to start fling around.

The last thing he needs now is more publicity. He'll make himself into a Pariah untouchable by other Clubs.

[StriderHiryu]

6 hours ago, Foxxed said:

Top is a business man. He's taken to football team ownership excellently, but a businessman, an excellent businessman, is what he is. We see players and games but he's essentially looking at how his assets will further us up the table, gaining him returns, in the long term.

 

Now Man City tried to take one of his biggest assets, cheaply and quickly. And they have in all probability wrecked one of his biggest assets. But I still think from a business perspective Top's done the right thing. Any businessman knows letting a competitor take his biggest asset, without insane compensation, is, well, insane.

 

Imagine us this time next year. Maguire and Ndidi have improved even more. They're very arguably the best defensive midfielder and centre half in Europe. Bayern, Real Madrid, Man City suddenly need another replacement. What then?

 

We would have Southampton's reputation: a mere shopping market for the bigger clubs. But now Top's fired a warning shot over every mega-club in the Champions League: You may have more cash, you may have more fans, you may have a bigger reputation, but we are not carrion you can fest on. And the players themselves? Are they going to repeat Mahrez's mistake?

 

The situation will probably continue to affect us negatively this season. But Top sincerely wants to make us a Champions League team in the long term. You don't get there having a reputation of easy asset stripping. Or, as Ric posted in another thread, we now have a reputation as "pigs to deal with". And that's probably a very good thing.

 

Great post!

[fuchsntf]

On 6.2.2018 at 18:10, Col city fan said:

I'm still not sure mate.

I know what Tanner is saying, but if you look at the individual circumstances, we've kept a player who doesn't want to be here (which is always fraught with dilemma...just look at the current situation), not accepted 50 million quid (still a lot of money) and not taken Patrick Roberts who always looks a great young prospect (and someone who I assume WOULD want to be here?)

We've also signed Diabate who looks to be another cracking piece of business (though still very early days)

This thing about sending out a message is commendable, but looking at the circumstances of this INDIVIDUAL situation, I'm still not sure I wouldn't have sold...and moved on.

The other point I guess is that we must be real. We aren't as big a club as Man City. We don't have their wealth. And Mahrez wanted to go. He's made that clear.

Thats why,WE aint Multi-Millionaire Business Men,showing how it should be done..

We want our owners to be understanding,but strutt their stuff in our Name,to get the

big descisions right. Morally they are right,Business Side right, contractly right.

 

But more Importantly for....@fuchsntf -wise Spot on..