AjcW Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 19 minutes ago, matty98 said: Our club is a joke if we're not willing to spend over £20 million on this lad. He's proven quality, he fits in well and he's only young. It's not though is it? Monaco absolute ****ed themselves when they loaned him to us. That move showed they didn't value him, just because he did well for half a season doesn't mean we should instantly pay their new valuation now they've realised they screwed up. As i've said before, there's clearly still fitness issues there and a tendency to have a run of off games (half the reason he was loaned out in the first place!) We'd actually be stupid to bow down to £40m up front straight away! No reason why £20m + significant add ons isn't reasonable, it's just us doing our diligance on a player we're not actually 100% sure on yet, no matter how well he settled in. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murphy Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 9 minutes ago, volpeazzurro said: Thora also had some good qualities ? I very much agree with the quantity over quality bit but it's their decision upon whether they feel that 40m, at this stage of their business plan is viable on just one player, particularly if they have no intention of selling anybody. Whether Everton or West Ham shelled out 40m is irrelevant as the spending of money is not always a measure of success ie biggish sums were paid out on two or three of players that have turned out to be millstones round our necks. Our Premiership win with a team of about 25m compared with Man City's 50m is proof in the pudding. It's not what you spend it's what you buy. I'm not suggesting for one minute that that will be repeated but Everton are hardly a great example of a club for wise expenditure. Our owners may simply have no intention whatsoever of spending such large sums of money for their own reasons and that is entirely their perogative. I'm not just advocating chucking millions of pounds of someone else's money around all over the place. It's weighed up against what we need and whether it is value for money and in my opinion Yourri ticks both of those boxes in triplicate. The situation with Yourri is also different as we've effectively had a 'try before you buy' deal which he has passed with flying colours. This takes the risk element from any transfer away. We could easily blow £25m on someone else who turns out to be the new Inler or Silva which would be financially disastrous and as you say, millstones round our neck. I just don't see a downside even if viewed solely as a business investment. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UHDrive Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 16 minutes ago, matty98 said: My bad, I read it as with add ons meaning including add ons We all knew beforehand when signing tielemans on loan that his price tag was £40m however that financial package be made up if we were to sign on a perm basis. This figure was quoted mainstream. I find it staggering the number crunching going on in this forum that lowers that value and in turn inciting that perhaps we aren't good enough to have him. Lcfc and Monaco must've had an informal agreement about what to do at the end of the season pending on the players performances for both clubs and including for more than one outcome at the seasons end. This was always a loan to a perm deal for both clubs. Things can change of course and bidding wars can start, but then you have to take into account future business that our clubs may want to do together in the future and bear that in mind. Personally i don't expect a bidding war. I reckon Silva will go for £10m and we'll take tielemans for £40m plus add ons. Monaco will need a quick overhaul this summer just as much as we want our transfer business dealings completed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volpeazzurro Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 13 minutes ago, KingsX said: If our owners invested like the Glazers at United, we would be in League One. In terms of cash financing, only Man City, Chelsea and Bournemouth have had a higher proportion of owner financing (as opposed to funds generated from operations) than us in the last decade. Much of it was to bring us back from the brink, rather than continue to spend our way to the top. But Top & family have put major skin in the game. footnote: not a penny of Kroenke's money been used to fund Arsenal Yes I totally agree and we can't just forget their past investments. They must, and no doubt will, invest comensuratly with their own game plan whatever that may be. IF that means for example that for this year they don't intend selling anyone and don't intend spending 40m on one individual player then so be it. Their money, their plan, their choice. I can see all the potential bonuses of buying Tielemans like many others but it's up to them for their own reasons which will be business ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murphy Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 14 minutes ago, AjcW said: It's not though is it? Monaco absolute ****ed themselves when they loaned him to us. That move showed they didn't value him, just because he did well for half a season doesn't mean we should instantly pay their new valuation now they've realised they screwed up. As i've said before, there's clearly still fitness issues there and a tendency to have a run of off games (half the reason he was loaned out in the first place!) We'd actually be stupid to bow down to £40m up front straight away! No reason why £20m + significant add ons isn't reasonable, it's just us doing our diligance on a player we're not actually 100% sure on yet, no matter how well he settled in. You could argue that Monaco have actually been quite shrewd in getting Tielemans in the shop window. Surely his value has soared since he has been with us compared to failing in a poor Monaco team. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themightyfin Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 3 minutes ago, UHDrive said: We all knew beforehand when signing tielemans on loan that his price tag was £40m however that financial package be made up if we were to sign on a perm basis. This figure was quoted mainstream. I find it staggering the number crunching going on in this forum that lowers that value and in turn inciting that perhaps we aren't good enough to have him. Lcfc and Monaco must've had an informal agreement about what to do at the end of the season pending on the players performances for both clubs and including for more than one outcome at the seasons end. This was always a loan to a perm deal for both clubs. Things can change of course and bidding wars can start, but then you have to take into account future business that our clubs may want to do together in the future and bear that in mind. Personally i don't expect a bidding war. I reckon Silva will go for £10m and we'll take tielemans for £40m plus add ons. Monaco will need a quick overhaul this summer just as much as we want our transfer business dealings completed. We will not pay £40m plus add-ons. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post AKCJ Posted 21 May 2019 Popular Post Share Posted 21 May 2019 2 13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 1 minute ago, themightyfin said: We will not pay £40m plus add-ons. Wondering how many times you're going to have to say that we won't pay £40mill before the window ends Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UHDrive Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 1 minute ago, themightyfin said: We will not pay £40m plus add-ons. If Silva goes for 10 that rounds it up to 40. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 Just now, AKCJ said: Wondering how many of the older lads are gonna need this explaining 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UHDrive Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 Just now, UniFox21 said: Wondering how many times you're going to have to say that we won't pay £40mill before the window ends Yes please enlighten me? Apparently the credible itk's on here beg to differ from you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UniFox21 Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 1 minute ago, UHDrive said: Yes please enlighten me? Apparently the credible itk's on here beg to differ from you... Think you've quoted the wrong guy pal, I'm no where near an ITK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hackneyfox Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 Just now, UHDrive said: Yes please enlighten me? Apparently the credible itk's on here beg to differ from you... "This was always a loan to a perm deal for both clubs" Not true or we would have stumped up the cash by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankMarvin Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 21 minutes ago, AjcW said: It's not though is it? Monaco absolute ****ed themselves when they loaned him to us. That move showed they didn't value him, just because he did well for half a season doesn't mean we should instantly pay their new valuation now they've realised they screwed up. As i've said before, there's clearly still fitness issues there and a tendency to have a run of off games (half the reason he was loaned out in the first place!) We'd actually be stupid to bow down to £40m up front straight away! No reason why £20m + significant add ons isn't reasonable, it's just us doing our diligance on a player we're not actually 100% sure on yet, no matter how well he settled in. Wow this post after you listed the turd Sunderland signings as decent, really is too much. They loaned him to arguably the best League in world football, where he has produced dynamic displays for the majority of his time added goals and assists to a team outside the top 6. As opposed to keeping him in a Monaco team that battled relegation, yep they really shot themselves in the foot by making a players value go up with plenty more suitors being linked in the press prior to the previous window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
volpeazzurro Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 3 minutes ago, murphy said: I'm not just advocating chucking millions of pounds of someone else's money around all over the place. It's weighed up against what we need and whether it is value for money and in my opinion Yourri ticks both of those boxes in triplicate. The situation with Yourri is also different as we've effectively had a 'try before you buy' deal which he has passed with flying colours. This takes the risk element from any transfer away. We could easily blow £25m on someone else who turns out to be the new Inler or Silva which would be financially disastrous and as you say, millstones round our neck. I just don't see a downside even if viewed solely as a business investment. I'm not in disagreement with reasons for wanting him and all the potential bonuses, I think on the surface they are sound. But, if just for example they decide to ignore any offers for any of our players in order to keep our current squad together, they may just feel that 40m on one player doesn't for them represent good value. I don't necessarily agree with that but they will probably have sound business reasons and a vision behind that which we aren't privy to. It's their money and their decision and although I'd be disappointed, I'd just accept it and think nothing less of them for it. Ambition is one thing, paying for it is another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UHDrive Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 1 minute ago, hackneyfox said: "This was always a loan to a perm deal for both clubs" Not true or we would have stumped up the cash by now. 'Technically' not a loan to perm. If it doesn't happen it doesn't but having my own company myself it does make me frown reading of people clearly caressing their non breakable piggy banks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hackneyfox Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 Your company that you own (sic) won't be around for long if you just buy without checking other options. I'd hazard a guess that a company worth billions may have a better idea of how to make and keep money. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 I’d pay the £40m purely to get the blot that Slimani is our record signing at around £30m of the copybook. We were quoted £40m early on in his loan spell I’m sure I read or heard that and everyone seemed to be aware of that, if the asking price is still £40m after how he’s performed for us I consider that cheap or value and even goodwill by Monaco, they could quite easily be asking for a lot more in this crazy transfer market. Average players are costing £30m - £40m in the modern age of transfers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 Joe Allen it is then. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UHDrive Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 4 minutes ago, hackneyfox said: Your company that you own (sic) won't be around for long if you just buy without checking other options. I'd hazard a guess that a company worth billions may have a better idea of how to make and keep money. Companys make money. The kind business we are needs a progressive element added to it. You can't sit with a squad of such talent whereby 4/5 of your current best players are gone within 3 years. Not when you are aiming to break into the top 6. That message needs nurturing and reinforcing so as to attract and keep the best players we need. If you become stagnant in that, then you deserve what you get. Business is business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerbyshireFox Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 FoxesTalk in overreaction shocker! It would be amazing if we got him, but if we don’t then I’m sure we’ll have other targets on our radar. It’s only been a week since the end of the season!! Gonna be a long long summer ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VLC86 Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 29 minutes ago, UniFox21 said: Wondering how many times you're going to have to say that we won't pay £40mill before the window ends This is true... us being the incompetent jokers we are will probably pay £40m AFTER the window closes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 27 minutes ago, UHDrive said: Yes please enlighten me? Apparently the credible itk's on here beg to differ from you... You know mightyfin is meant to be one of those “credible itk’s”. Which is perhaps reason to take any Itk stuff with a massive pinch of salt. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Leeds Fox Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 Sounds very sensible by us. The money matches what they originally paid, they get a replacement on top and I'm sure a chunky sell on clause added which could pay out a lot with his potential Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UHDrive Posted 21 May 2019 Share Posted 21 May 2019 1 minute ago, Babylon said: You know mightyfin is meant to be one of those “credible itk’s”. Which is perhaps reason to take any Itk stuff with a massive pinch of salt. I know, I've been reading and taking an interest in foxestalk for years and his name is as common as popcorn in a cinema! I'm sticking with my opinion on this though. But thanks for the heads up anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts