Maguire to Man Utd / Man City

[Johnthefoxrayner]

45 minutes ago, SO1 said:

49 days left  

Not long to go then, and still no news on transfers, we will sign 4playets on the last day of the transfer market the club will be 14 seconds late solve all over again, you can just see it happening

[Johnthefoxrayner]

Just now, Johnthefoxrayner said:

Not long to go then, and still no news on transfers, we will sign 4playets on the last day of the transfer market the club will be 14 seconds late solve all over again, you can just see it happening

I meant to say Silva 

[UpTheLeagueFox]

5 hours ago, Mehrez said:

As if somebody’s created a fake account of a fake ITK

The way of the modern world, sadly. 

It's also because fans these days are impatient, so ridiculously impatient, for any slight sniff of transfer news.

Fans are so desperate to believe anything they take what these fake ITKs say as gospel... so many of them, IndyKaila, Sean from Enderby and tons of others.

[Nick]

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/786838/Man-City-transfer-news-Man-Utd-Harry-Maguire-Leicester

 

it’s The Star I know but apparently Man City are back in the hot seat and have pencilled in a medical for later this week and will be paying £65 million for Maguire.

 

Id be surprised at that figure.

[Realist Guy In The Room]

2 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The way of the modern world, sadly. 

It's also because fans these days are impatient, so ridiculously impatient, for any slight sniff of transfer news.

Fans are so desperate to believe anything they take what these fake ITKs say as gospel... so many of them, IndyKaila, Sean from Enderby and tons of others.

Sean from Enderby is the worst.  ‘Just been on Whatsapp with Top’.

[Sly]

Why would we want to sell to a rival?!? 

 

If we sell Harry, it has to be for £80,000,000, non of these low ball silly offers looking to cause unrest. 

 

Also, why sell to a rival? Send him abroad! 

[Leicester_Loyal]

65m is not enough. Add another 10-15 and I'll be happy.

[MPH]

1 hour ago, Swan Lesta said:

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/786838/Man-City-transfer-news-Man-Utd-Harry-Maguire-Leicester

 

it’s The Star I know but apparently Man City are back in the hot seat and have pencilled in a medical for later this week and will be paying £65 million for Maguire.

 

Id be surprised at that figure.

think Tanner has already called that one rubbish..

[st albans fox]

51 minutes ago, Sly said:

Why would we want to sell to a rival?!? 

 

If we sell Harry, it has to be for £80,000,000, non of these low ball silly offers looking to cause unrest. 

 

Also, why sell to a rival? Send him abroad! 

Man City aren’t rivals but they don’t tend to pay over inflated fees cos players really want to go there .....

 

59 minutes ago, Realist Guy In The Room said:

Sean from Enderby is the worst.  ‘Just been on Whatsapp with Top’.

No one takes him seriously ..... I think it’s amusing when he does stuff like that .....

[Deeg67]

12 hours ago, MPH said:

65 million and a player maybe...

De Bruyne?

[crisp packet]

Seems very low ? If true ..

for 65m I would rather keep? 

So a player from palace with one years prem experience worth 55m 

we get 65m  (if true)...

For England’s best centre half !

[wokinghamfox]

Cant believe how people are reacting on here like its happenend. Neither or any club has made an offer, or, stated any intentions of making one. Its incredible how the media can create  frenzy on  something that isn't going to happen.

 

Harry Maguire WILL BE A LEICESTER PLAYER NEXT SEASON.

 

Now stop believing all you read and realise that the media only do it for traffic. 

 

 

 

[foxinsocks]

does anyone have any evidence that harry wants a move?

[LinekersApples]

4 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

The way of the modern world, sadly. 

It's also because fans these days are impatient, so ridiculously impatient, for any slight sniff of transfer news.

Fans are so desperate to believe anything they take what these fake ITKs say as gospel... so many of them, IndyKaila, Sean from Enderby and tons of others.

And sometimes it’s people with multiple accounts/personalities!

 

They’re the worst. Geoff Peters/DJ W@nker

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, foxinsocks said:

does anyone have any evidence that harry wants a move?

If you’re asking if Harry would like to be Man City’s centre half at the start of next season then I think the answer is yes - however, he may be thinking more about whether he ends the season in that position or on the bench with the euros looming ....

[shailen]

People don't seem to realise how good Maguire is on the ball - he's so strong and can run through a teams defence and can create threatening situations. His aerial ability is fantastic and if he had a little bit more positional sense he could seriously challenge Van Djik for the crown of the league's best defender. 

 

The big teams recognise this but I do feel we should get at least £75m for him as he is such a valuable asset.

[Hitesh]

We would take the £65m if they wiped out the rest of what we have to pay for Kalechi. 

[Guest Markyblue]

Draw a line in the sand. Harry and all our young guns are on decent length contracts, lets keep the lot and move forward.  F..k man city and the buying of the title each year it's beyond tedious. 

[weller54]

21 minutes ago, Hitesh said:

We would take the £65m if they wiped out the rest of what we have to pay for Kalechi. 

I hope we had stopped paying for him under the trade descriptions act!!... 

Not fit for purpose. 

[Sol thewall Bamba]

11 hours ago, StevieB said:

??

LCFCHQ low energy stone cold loser! 

Edited 21 June 2019 by Sol thewall Bamba

[Guest TaggertvsWise]

9 hours ago, yorkie1999 said:

We paid 17 million for him, if we sell him for 65 million minus 15% , that’s 65 - 9.75 which is 55.25 million, minus the 17 equals 38.25 million profit, which just about covers YT, as long as we can keep Wes going for a few more years, we’re rockin.

Not quite right. The 17mill we paid for him has been paid back to us by way of him playing. So that transaction is ruled out. We paid 17mill for him to play for us for ‘x’ years. Once those ‘x’ years are done then the debt is settled, hence why sell on value is such a bonus in signing a player. So in effect we get 3 years of his ability plus whatever club earnings and squad influence plus 55mill. Pretty good for a 17mill outlay.

[Countryfox]

 

Two more pages of nonsense since I last looked ...   seeya over the weekend ...    

[hackneyfox]

38 minutes ago, TaggertvsWise said:

Not quite right. The 17mill we paid for him has been paid back to us by way of him playing. So that transaction is ruled out. We paid 17mill for him to play for us for ‘x’ years. Once those ‘x’ years are done then the debt is settled, hence why sell on value is such a bonus in signing a player. So in effect we get 3 years of his ability plus whatever club earnings and squad influence plus 55mill. Pretty good for a 17mill outlay.

So if we bought a player for £30m with 10% sell on clause and sold him for £33m three years later we'd actually lose money?

Can you post a link supporting your claim?

 

[Grebfromgrebland]

7 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

So if we bought a player for £30m with 10% sell on clause and sold him for £33m three years later we'd actually lose money?

Can you post a link supporting your claim?

 

33m X 10%= 330000

 

330000 - 30000000 = 29,670,000

[bmt]

1 minute ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

33m X 10%= 330000

 

330000 - 30000000 = 29,670,000

Beat me to it haha