Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

Once again it makes absolutely no sense. We didn't want to sell Fofana this summer, nor did we need to but possibly had in mind cashing in next summer either out of necessity or because we wanted more funds for the rebuild. Either way, selling him now and then claiming we can't spend the money when transfers are amortised over the entire length of the players contract once again contradicts our financial position.

 

Watford would take a £5m loan fee and another £20m next summer anyway. Its baffling, the only 2 possibilities I can make sense of is o ce again not trusting Brendan and trying to force him out or keeping our powder dry to sell up (don't like this angle though I must admit)

Not buying the not trusting Brendan given the profile of the CB we’re buying - looks like we’re back to our previous recruitment policy and suggests we’re happy to do deals on our terms.
 

It’s a very dangerous game to be playing if true and I don’t think the owners would try to force him out by holding back resources. 
 

Watford are tough negotiators as shown by their stance over Joao Pedro. 
 

I think it’s cock-up rather than conspiracy - players not leaving when we thought they’d go and the FFP situation being worse then realised added to King Power’s difficult financial performance. 

Edited by lcfc_forever
Posted
5 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

Not buying the not trusting Brendan given the profile of the CB we’re buying - looks like we’re back to our previous recruitment policy and suggests we’re happy to do deals on our terms.
 

It’s a very dangerous game to be playing if true and I don’t think the owners would try to force him out by holding back resources. 
 

Watford are tough negotiators as shown by their stance over Joao Pedro. 
 

I think it’s cock-up rather than conspiracy - players not leaving when we thought they’d go and the FFP situation being worse then realised added to King Power’s difficult financial performance. 

The article is bizarre, Sarr was always going to cost a package north or £20-25m so why did we even consider trying to sign him. Either we have money or we don't, none of this makes sense.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

The article is bizarre, Sarr was always going to cost a package north or £20-25m so why did we even consider trying to sign him. Either we have money or we don't, none of this makes sense.

Things around our club are currently bizarre! Maybe they did what you suggested by trying to split the deal up over time but were given short shrift?
 

None of us properly know what’s really going on, one day it will all come out. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, Will1981 said:

I'm pretty sure all sell on fees are only on the profit, as if the player was not a success and we sold them for less than we signed them for it would not be fair to to pay the original club a percentage and make even more of a loss.

They wouldn’t make more of a loss the initial transfer is made the sell on fee percentage is a variable.

it’s effectively an add on, if he was sold for half the transfer value which was extremely unlikely given the talent, they would’ve made another £5m 

it’s normally a win win for both clubs as it lowers the initial fee for the buying club, and the selling club can make substantially more if the player is a prospect or highly regarded talent.

Posted

3 signings that strengthen the starting 11 please. Ideally two CB's and a winger.

If we are signing players to be brought in only to warm the bench then we may aswell not bother! 

Posted
43 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

So the club didn't want or need to sell Fofana this summer but now we are selling him we can only spend 33% of what we get for him 🤔

I thought the narrative was that transfer fees wasn’t a problem anyway, it was always about squad numbers and the wage bill.

That 23m could possibly be supplementing a previously agreed amount. 

Posted

Can still see at least one of Praet, Perez, Tielemans leaving.

 

I think we will see another perm coming in alongside Faes and a couple of loans with option to buy. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Can still see at least one of Praet, Perez, Tielemans leaving.

 

I think we will see another perm coming in alongside Faes and a couple of loans with option to buy. 

Praet is basically gone

Posted

Fractionally fewer games before Jan due to WC, Rodgers on thin ice, and head of recruitment starting after the summer window has closed, to me would suggest we'll keep some funds for Jan. Think that window might be a busier one for us.

Posted

If the Fofana & Faes deals get completed tomorrow, then the only action on deadline day would need to be wingers. 
 

We are crying out for a right winger, we also need a back-up left winger, we don’t need anymore centre backs or central midfielders unless we have outgoings.

 

With funds seemingly tight, any two of the following.


Permanently - Josh Bowler, Chris Willock, Mike Tresor or Michel Ange Balikwisha.

Loan - Josip Brekalo, Reiss Nelson or Cole Palmer.

 

Posted
22 minutes ago, LFox99 said:

pretty sure he picked up an injury recently

Ah, seems that way, nevermind. 
 

As much as I’d like someone like Sarr or Tsygankov, someone like Reiss Nelson seems to be our level :mellow:

Posted

I honestly believe there is a massive disconnect between Brendan and the club as to the profile of players and recruitment policy. I think the club want to return to the buy young hungry prospects and sell at a profit, whereas Brendan wants to buy ready made established  players who will command higher wages and have limited sell on value. 
 

I think the club are cutting their cloth but also withholding funds ready for the next couple of windows that will likely be led by a new manager, who buys into the clubs strategy. 
 

I wouldn’t be surprised following the cleverly selected wording explaining the sacking of Scott Parker if we don’t use similar to justify our reasoning for letting Rodgers go over the coming weeks. 

Posted

It’s so funny that despite that article from John Percy who is mostly bang on, some of you still insist that we can spend £40m-£50m even though he’s clearly shown that we can’t 😂

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...