Bilal El Khannouss loaned to Stuttgart - Official

[Number 6]

There are other factors here. Fee may be lower if we've got a better sell on fee or a high fee for the loan. Can understand scepticism given our track record, but we only have part of the picture, and even that part may not be 100% accurate.

[CornwallFox]

2 hours ago, jayfox26 said:

I dont like this attitude of "just accept it". The club is being burnt to the ground and there is zero accountability at any level of the club? Can we as fans do anything about transfers? Absolutely not. But what we can, and everyone should be doing, is protesting to try and force out these useless people in charge. Why have many of our fans become accepting of utterly appalling standards at every level of the club? 

I don't really see the link between questions about this transfer and protests about the club leadership, beyond the obvious. In terms of the price we get in not sure on what basis you're complaining? We bought the lad as one of Europe's top prospects. After a year of delivering not much he's not held in such high esteem, hence him ending up at stutgart. This idea we should hold out for more money is bonkers, current leadership and league position or not. The nonsense about fans accepting where we are etc is a load of guff btw. 

[Reg Vardy]

4 hours ago, Stadt said:

What did we get?

£9m? But like I say we don’t really know……

[South Shire Fox]

15 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

They are posting a story for Bild and a few other German sources sayings it’s 20m euros including the loan fee

They also say the fee will rise on top of that with bonuses. At the time it was reported by most reliable sources to be 25mil euros including loan fee. So bonuses likely to be in that 25 mil as well.. with a sell on clause on top of that

Edited 12 March by South Shire Fox

[South Shire Fox]

5 hours ago, Stadt said:

How much evidence of incompetence do some need before they stop siding or giving the club the benefit of the doubt?  

 

I flat out refuse to believe that Stuttgart would only have stretched to £20m or whatever, they'd just sold Woltemade for big money. It's like Rudkin doesn't actually know you can negotiate.

 

 

 

Look at the money they got for Bednarek, "Amo-Ameyaw", Onauchu, Edwards and ABK, never mind the top two who'd done nothing to justify those fees. If we had Southampton's players we'd have gotten closer to half of those fees. We sold Barnes and maddison for about £75m and they're England internationals with 59 and 75 PL goals contributions between them. Dibling and Fernandes had 2 & 6 respectively!

 

 

The problem is the wages our players are on. Maddison and Barnes would of been on close to 200k a week between them. Id be amazed if that Fernandes and Dibling were on more then 40 at Southampton.

Higher wages obviously impacts the fee a club is willing to pay as it affects the overall cost of the deal. Plus Barnes and Maddison only had a year or two left on their contract. I think Fernandes had 4 years left on his contract.

 

Our number one priority over the next few seasons should be to get the wage bill right down to a normal and sustainable level for a club with our turnover.

Edited 12 March by South Shire Fox

[Reg Vardy]

Offload over £40-£90k (although Winks might be staying) sign players £20-£35k per week, times it by 52 (weeks) You do the maths……

[HankMarvin]

19 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

The problem is the wages our players are on. Maddison and Barnes would of been on close to 200k a week between them. Id be amazed if that Fernandes and Dibling were on more then 40 at Southampton.

Higher wages obviously impacts the fee a club is willing to pay as it affects the overall cost of the deal. Plus Barnes and Maddison only had a year or two left on their contract. I think Fernandes had 4 years left on his contract.

 

Our number one priority over the next few seasons should be to get the wage bill right down to a normal and sustainable level for a club with our turnover.

Plus the fact that those players were 19 and 20 odd with an unknown ceiling. 

[MPH]

Loan fee was £3.5m and transfer fee was £15m.

[Stadt]

34 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

The problem is the wages our players are on. Maddison and Barnes would of been on close to 200k a week between them. Id be amazed if that Fernandes and Dibling were on more then 40 at Southampton.

Higher wages obviously impacts the fee a club is willing to pay as it affects the overall cost of the deal. Plus Barnes and Maddison only had a year or two left on their contract. I think Fernandes had 4 years left on his contract.

 

Our number one priority over the next few seasons should be to get the wage bill right down to a normal and sustainable level for a club with our turnover.

The buying parties were Tottenham and Newcastle, they could pay the wages AND bigger fees. In the same window Newcastle spent about as much on Barnes as they did Livramento - to be second choice RB! 

 

We've consistently sold player last 10-20% below their market value, it's quite apparent.

[South Shire Fox]

6 minutes ago, Stadt said:

The buying parties were Tottenham and Newcastle, they could pay the wages AND bigger fees. In the same window Newcastle spent about as much on Barnes as they did Livramento - to be second choice RB! 

 

We've consistently sold player last 10-20% below their market value, it's quite apparent.

They are still bound by FFP hence why the richest club in the World Newcastle arent dominating the league. Livramento would of been on low wages at Southampton. Maddison deal was supposedly cheaper so that we would get Winks in return for less. The wages players are on at this club definitely hurt us when it comes to transfer fees.

[Stadt]

7 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

They are still bound by FFP hence why the richest club in the World Newcastle arent dominating the league. Livramento would have been on low wages at Southampton. Maddison deal was supposedly cheaper so that we would get Winks in return for less. The wages players are on at this club definitely hurt us when it comes to transfer fees.

The wages haven’t helped at all but we have still consistently got less than we ought to for players. Look at Hermansen’s fee vs Trafford’s or Petrovic’s you can caveat it whichever way you like but there’s a consistent pattern. 

[ceebeefox]

8 hours ago, Stadt said:

Brentford are institutionally smart, it’s their systems and processes rather than their scouts and analysts. They have a smart owner who made his fortune using football data to beat the gambling markets.

 

Top & Rudkin couldn’t find an edge at Leicester market.

Ok but someone has to look at them and run them? Poach ‘em!

[South Shire Fox]

2 minutes ago, Stadt said:

The wages haven’t helped at all but we have still consistently got less than we ought to for players. Look at Hermansen’s fee vs Trafford’s or Petrovic’s you can caveat it whichever way you like but there’s a consistent pattern. 

I agree 100 percent. Maybe clubs knowing we are in big trouble with FFP who use that to play hard ball on deals. Knowing full well that we will have to compromise 

[Stadt]

10 minutes ago, ceebeefox said:

Ok but someone has to look at them and run them? Poach ‘em!

It's a bit like how people poach Brentford's managers and they all tend to fare poorly - they lost Frank and they're better with an inexperienced set piece coach  

[Leicester_Loyal]

1 hour ago, South Shire Fox said:

The problem is the wages our players are on. Maddison and Barnes would of been on close to 200k a week between them. Id be amazed if that Fernandes and Dibling were on more then 40 at Southampton.

Higher wages obviously impacts the fee a club is willing to pay as it affects the overall cost of the deal. Plus Barnes and Maddison only had a year or two left on their contract. I think Fernandes had 4 years left on his contract.

 

Our number one priority over the next few seasons should be to get the wage bill right down to a normal and sustainable level for a club with our turnover.

We've been saying this for years, then signing Aribo on loan whos' the biggest earner at Saints.

 

We will never learn.

 

We haven't had a deal for years where I thought yep we've done good business there, last one was probably Fofana. 

[Reg Vardy]

9 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We've been saying this for years, then signing Aribo on loan whos' the biggest earner at Saints.

 

We will never learn.

 

We haven't had a deal for years where I thought yep we've done good business there, last one was probably Fofana. 

We don’t know the deal though or do you? Southampton I would guess are paying a % of his wages….saving them from paying a player in full til the end of the season…..

[jayfox26]

4 hours ago, CornwallFox said:

I don't really see the link between questions about this transfer and protests about the club leadership, beyond the obvious. In terms of the price we get in not sure on what basis you're complaining? We bought the lad as one of Europe's top prospects. After a year of delivering not much he's not held in such high esteem, hence him ending up at stutgart. This idea we should hold out for more money is bonkers, current leadership and league position or not. The nonsense about fans accepting where we are etc is a load of guff btw. 

How can you not see the link? Who deals with transfers in and out of the club? Rudkin, literally one of the people fans are protesting against. In the list of issues against Top and Rudkin, i understand this transfer isn't that important but it just continues to show that Rudkin is useless at transfer dealings and should be nothing to do with it, yet Top promotes him. 

[CornwallFox]

"beyond the obvious"

 

I don't know why we're conflating the general malaise at the club we're all annoyed with, and an individual transfer which isn't really necessarily a bad deal in the circumstances. It would be nice to not always have to bang on about rudkin when it's obvious he's shit.

[CornwallFox]

34 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We've been saying this for years, then signing Aribo on loan whos' the biggest earner at Saints.

 

We will never learn.

 

We haven't had a deal for years where I thought yep we've done good business there, last one was probably Fofana. 

Jordan James £5m clause was a great deal

[South Shire Fox]

36 minutes ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

We've been saying this for years, then signing Aribo on loan whos' the biggest earner at Saints.

 

We will never learn.

 

We haven't had a deal for years where I thought yep we've done good business there, last one was probably Fofana. 

Jordan James will be if thats activated

[LCFCJohn]

6 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Jordan James £5m clause was a great deal

I think we are kidding ourselves if we think we are securing James permanently….

 

He has far better options than us let’s be honest.

[Leicester_Loyal]

29 minutes ago, Reg Vardy said:

We don’t know the deal though or do you? Southampton I would guess are paying a % of his wages….saving them from paying a player in full til the end of the season…..

They'll be paying some but I bet we're being stung for a good few quid, and it's not like he's a world beater (and another Southampton reject). We keep just putting blind faith in the people running the asylum and expecting different results.

 

6 minutes ago, CornwallFox said:

Jordan James £5m clause was a great deal

 

4 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

Jordan James will be if thats activated

Agree with JJ, if it's 5m and we can activate it then yeah great deal. I don't think he'll be here next season though sadly.

[Reg Vardy]

7 minutes ago, jayfox26 said:

How can you not see the link? Who deals with transfers in and out of the club? Rudkin, literally one of the people fans are protesting against. In the list of issues against Top and Rudkin, i understand this transfer isn't that important but it just continues to show that Rudkin is useless at transfer dealings and should be nothing to do with it, yet Top promotes him. 

I still am amazed, that the manager, who is judged on the team and it’s result, don’t recommend the players they want. Seems like they can’t win, if shite is signed by a third party, they then get fired…..which is unlike any other organisation I have worked in. In short Rudkin has signed ALL the players and three managers have been fired as a result of letting him do so…..are we sure this is correct? 

[jayfox26]

1 minute ago, Reg Vardy said:

I still am amazed, that the manager, who is judged on the team and it’s result, don’t recommend the players they want. Seems like they can’t win, if shite is signed by a third party, they then get fired…..which is unlike any other organisation I have worked in. In short Rudkin has signed ALL the players and three managers have been fired as a result of letting him do so…..are we sure this is correct? 

None of us have extensive knowledge of who does what as regards transfers but at a guess, id say Glover and his team recommend players and then Rudkin oversees the deals and contracts. Whether any managers get any say in transfers im not sure. Either way, Rudkin is ultimately accountable for our transfers dealings being the director of football, and most clubs that have continued poor transfer dealings, tend to sack the DOF but we just promote him instead 

[damolcfc]

4 hours ago, Leicester_Loyal said:

They'll be paying some but I bet we're being stung for a good few quid, and it's not like he's a world beater (and another Southampton reject). We keep just putting blind faith in the people running the asylum and expecting different results.

 

 

Agree with JJ, if it's 5m and we can activate it then yeah great deal. I don't think he'll be here next season though sadly.

And if we do buy him it won't be til mid July 😝