bluebeau Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Why is it that whenever we sell a player we always seem to lose money? With the odd exception we never sell a player for more than we paid for him. Now it appears that we are going to sell Chris Wood to Wolves for £1.25m that would be a loss of £0.25m Surely he has to be worth more than that? We are being asked to pay £10m for Deeney which is 8 times more than the fee for Wood!!! Is he 8 times a better player, not imo. Personally I would prefer to see Wood loaned to Wolves not sold, as I think he could do a job for City in The Prem. if given games at Wolves.
cjslcfc Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Why is it that whenever we sell a player we always seem to lose money? With the odd exception we never sell a player for more than we paid for him. Now it appears that we are going to sell Chris Wood to Wolves for £1.25m that would be a loss of £0.25m Surely he has to be worth more than that? We are being asked to pay £10m for Deeney which is 8 times more than the fee for Wood!!! Is he 8 times a better player, not imo. Personally I would prefer to see Wood loaned to Wolves not sold, as I think he could do a job for City in The Prem. if given games at Wolves. Maybe because we want to buy the players they don't want to sell and they're trying to buy the players we want to sell. If bids were coming in for our better players we'd push them all the way!
Mark_w Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 If we had failed to go up like Watford, then maybe we'd be getting some big bids for the likes of Moore and Knockaert. But we ran away with the league, we don't have to sell our best players and we can afford to take Watford's best players.
langtonfox Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Can't think of them all, can somme of you help me- players we made money on: Smith, heskey, Lineker, mcallister, connelly, mcdonald,draper...help, I'm sure there's more....
Babylon Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Pearson has stated he's paid no more than £1.2m for a player... So we'd make a hefty £50k profit on him potentially. Wood has been a disappointment since here really, we've not seen signs of him for filling his potential as yet, that's why he's not commanding a big fee.
Nalis Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Pearson has stated he's paid no more than £1.2m for a player... So we'd make a hefty £50k profit on him potentially. Wood has been a disappointment since here really, we've not seen signs of him for filling his potential as yet, that's why he's not commanding a big fee. I think that's a bit of a harsh assessment in my opinion. Vardy and Nugent had excellent seasons and stepped up when needed off the bench or injury/suspension to Vardy or Nuge. Plus he's in his early twenties. The only advantage I can see in letting him go on a permanent deal rather than on loan would be to free up a squad place for the 25 man quota.
MHC Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 I'm not sure Nigel will sign Deeney unless we sell Wood, if however he signed Deeney and kept Wood, that would leave us with 6 players fighting for potentially one of the eleven places on the pitch. I'd rather have Deeney.
mozartfox Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 If we let Wood go for 1.25M, then we have been mugged - simple.
bluebeau Posted 12 August 2014 Author Posted 12 August 2014 Can't think of them all, can somme of you help me- players we made money on: Smith, heskey, Lineker, mcallister, connelly, mcdonald,draper...help, I'm sure there's more.... You are going back to the days when Noah was building his ark! We didn't pay a fee for Smith or Lineker so whatever we sold them for was profit. I'm sure if you look at more recent seasons, you will find that I am correct.
bluebeau Posted 12 August 2014 Author Posted 12 August 2014 If we let Wood go for 1.25M, then we have been mugged - simple. EXACTLY!!!! But what is new, we always get mugged when we sell & then again when we buy!!!
Captain... Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Ben Marshall turned a small profit, think we made a profit on Fryatt, Hume and McCauley going back a bit Youth products like Mattock and Stearman and Gradel Really we aren't a selling club, we very rarely lose a player we want to keep and that puts us at a disadvantage in the selling market, half the time we just want players off the wage bill and will do what we can limit our liability on a player even if it means selling at a loss, or farming them out on loan until they run out their contract. Should we end up selling one of our first team (can't remember that happening since we got relegated) you will see a very nice profit. Likewise when buying, the reason we paid so heavily for the likes of Ulloa, Waghorn, Beckford, Mills, is that we identified them as a target and had the funds to get the selling club to part with someone they didn't want to.
notnow john Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 It could be argued we've done well to re-coup our money. Whilst he has potential,he's seems to have regressed.
langtonfox Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 I'm not that old! We signed smith from Alvechurch for 30k, but sorry can't count heskey
HankMarvin Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Shane long is expected to go the Southampton for 12m thats a 4.5m increase in the last 6 months on a allready inflated 7.5m deal. Crazy times !!!!
ZeljkoKalac1 Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Crazy fees at the minute! Ulloa worth about 3m but we pay more than double. McCormack worth 4m and he goes for more than double. Deeney being touted at more than double his real worth. It's a sellers market when unfortunately we're a buying club and no longer a selling one!
Richard Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Would rather us lose money on buying players than make money on being forced to sell players we don't want to for a profit
notnow john Posted 12 August 2014 Posted 12 August 2014 Shane long is expected to go the Southampton for 12m thats a 4.5m increase in the last 6 months on a allready inflated 7.5m deal. Crazy times !!!! He's not been exactly prolific, wonder who his replacement is?
Carlos88LCFC Posted 13 August 2014 Posted 13 August 2014 He's not been exactly prolific, wonder who his replacement is? Southampton are in the same boat if not a much worse one than us. They have cash to spend and need to bring in at least 5 first team players to show they are still ambitious. Clubs will demand ridiculous fees from Southampton. The reason we are paying some say 'over the odds' is because we are buying championship teams best players. Deeney and Ulloa were the main men of both clubs so it's bound to happen. How much do you think Vardy, Drinkwater, Mahrez, Kasper, De Laet are worth? If we sold them at their real worth people would be calling for Pearson's head. That being said, If Ulloa has a good season, from what I've seen he's not far off Shane Longs quality and will probably score as many goals as him.... Ulloa could be worth 12+ being the type of striker he is... If Deeney bagged 15-20 goals next year, who knows what his asking price will be!
Bettsj2 Posted 13 August 2014 Posted 13 August 2014 Can't think of them all, can somme of you help me- players we made money on:Smith, heskey, Lineker, mcallister, connelly, mcdonald,draper...help, I'm sure there's more.... Connoly, Stearman, Mattock, McAuley, Hume, Grayson... The list could go on. We're about the same as most clubs in making massive profits on some and not so much on others.
indierich06 Posted 13 August 2014 Posted 13 August 2014 You are going back to the days when Noah was building his ark! We didn't pay a fee for Smith or Lineker so whatever we sold them for was profit. I'm sure if you look at more recent seasons, you will find that I am correct. Have we actually had any players worth selling on over the past ten years? It's been a right load of shit. Nothing to do with how we conduct business, just that anyone we've sold has been generally a bit shit.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.