Summer Transfer Shit and Everything Else

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KSE Comedy Club

Havertz is £50m over 3 instalments and then £15m of add-ons

---

That's literally ludicrous. Obviously this is some sort of money laundering scheme designed to suck as much money from the pockets of fans into the offshore accounts of the unscrupulous con-artists who pose as necessary representatives of the stupid children who pose as football players. Sure, if you can get it then take it. But it's as immoral as fuck. Players who can barely kick a ball being traded like meat so fat, useless bastards who nobody would pay to see get huge payments. That's the number one reason football exists today.

Why are Arsenal not after Tonali?

Surely he would rather come to London than the North East.

Far cheaper than Rice as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn

The add ons would have included premier league win etc but they are mostly minimum amount of appearances, plus it begs the question if buying players for that kind of money doesn’t make winning a title over the period of the players contract a realistic prospect what’s the point of spending that much money on them to begin with.

As I’ve said, I can understand why fans want Garlick and Edu to be the ones to blame because that way there is hope that if they are replaced there is a more speedy approach but I just don’t see why that would be the case.

In fact Rice is only the third player we’ve bid for of such high value under those two. Mudryk there was just no way we should ever have paid what Shatkah were asking, and with Brighton we could have bid twice what we did and they wouldn’t have sold him in January.

West Ham have made our bids public in order to get the attention of other clubs and the reason they’ve done this is because they have issues with FFP themselves.

It’s been in their interest to create a bidding war, and short of giving them 100million up front and one of our players (even if we could afford to do that fuck right off) they have wanted to drag this out to get City, United involved.

I’m not blaming them for that, it’s good business sense from their point of view. But when everyone on here agrees that we need to strengthen in terms of numbers it’s totally illogical to think we should stump up whatever the selling club wants

---

Well it's been widely reported that both Shaktar and now West Ham have said the add-ons in the deal we have proposed have been unrealistic and in their eyes not achievable. Both clubs have gone Public with this, I see no reason not to believe them given the amounts we are offering, it's not like we aren't putting down a big fee.

No we failed to secure Mudryk due to the add-ons, we offered exactly the same as Chelsea except that Chelsea's add-ons were a lot more realistic. We are coming from a position of not having won anything major in a long time, we need to be a bit more creative with the add-ons we are offering, it's seems to be a common theme, see above regarding Shaktar.

I agree with you on the Caicedo deal and them not wanting to sell him at the time, but i still felt we wasted time pursuing that deal when it was clear they had no intention of selling.

I don't think West Ham do want a bidding war, this issue has nothing to do with the money, it's to do with the way we are structuring the deal with the add-ons!!! That's what West Ham are not happy about hence why we are continuing the negotiations. This isn't about them wanting 150million and us offering 100million, they want the 100million, but they want the deal structured fairly or at least realistically.

If we want to play in the "BIG BOY MARKET" then we are going to need to approach these deals like a "BIG CLUB". Otherwise what's the point? This is the point I am trying to make, it's not about us not being competitive in the Market because we clearly are these days, it's about our inability to close the BIG deals, not the mid range deals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dostoy

Why are Arsenal not after Tonali?

Surely he would rather come to London than the North East.

Far cheaper than Rice as well.

---

Tonali isn't all that. He broke through and looked great but has stalled in his development. Newcastle have massively overpaid IMO. Barella is the Italian Midfielder who looks the business but I reckon he would cost similar to Rice if Inter ever sanctioned his sale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by selassie

Well it's been widely reported that both Shaktar and now West Ham have said the add-ons in the deal we have proposed have been unrealistic and in their eyes not achievable. Both clubs have gone Public with this, I see no reason not to believe them given the amounts we are offering, it's not like we aren't putting down a big fee.

No we failed to secure Mudryk due to the add-ons, we offered exactly the same as Chelsea except that Chelsea's add-ons were a lot more realistic. We are coming from a position of not having won anything major in a long time, we need to be a bit more creative with the add-ons we are offering, it's seems to be a common theme, see above regarding Shaktar.

I agree with you on the Caicedo deal and them not wanting to sell him at the time, but i still felt we wasted time pursuing that deal when it was clear they had no intention of selling.

I don't think West Ham do want a bidding war, this issue has nothing to do with the money, it's to do with the way we are structuring the deal with the add-ons!!! That's what West Ham are not happy about hence why we are continuing the negotiations. This isn't about them wanting 150million and us offering 100million, they want the 100million, but they want the deal structured fairly or at least realistically.

If we want to play in the "BIG BOY MARKET" then we are going to need to approach these deals like a "BIG CLUB". Otherwise what's the point? This is the point I am trying to make, it's not about us not being competitive in the Market because we clearly are these days, it's about our inability to close the BIG deals, not the mid range deals.

---

I honestly at this point don’t know where you’re coming from

Of course West Ham want a bidding war, it’s simple economics demand for the players services will invariably up the price…when a club is public about wanting 120 million for a player they must know that’s not realistic if it’s just one club after him…what leverage do they then have to offer such an amount?

Shatkah are the same, this is a club that will want to squeeze every bit of money from a club for a player, they are in a precarious situation. Because of the Russian occupation of the Donbass that’s essentially been going on for almost a decade…they haven’t been able to get any revenue from a relatively newly built stadium which has mainly become a place for derelicts to piss, that plus they have had to play in Lviv or Kyiv and pay to do so.

City’s offer hasn’t been accepted, and it’s debatable whether they will be prepared to go higher.


If by big boy clubs you mean Chelsea where a completely deranged owner has spent ridiculous amounts of money for players who have turned out to be sub par, or United who have won fuck all despite having a larger wage bill than City. No I’m content with what we are doing. The fact is to a degree the power is with selling clubs but unless you’re a complete retard like Todd Boehly you don’t dance to their tune

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HCZ_Reborn

I honestly at this point don’t know where you’re coming from

Of course West Ham want a bidding war, it’s simple economics demand for the players services will invariably up the price…when a club is public about wanting 120 million for a player they must know that’s not realistic if it’s just one club after him…what leverage do they then have to offer such an amount?

Shatkah are the same, this is a club that will want to squeeze every bit of money from a club for a player, they are in a precarious situation. Because of the Russian occupation of the Donbass that’s essentially been going on for almost a decade…they haven’t been able to get any revenue from a relatively newly built stadium which has mainly become a place for derelicts to piss, that plus they have had to play in Lviv or Kyiv and pay to do so.

City’s offer hasn’t been accepted, and it’s debatable whether they will be prepared to go higher.


If by big boy clubs you mean Chelsea where a completely deranged owner has spent ridiculous amounts of money for players who have turned out to be sub par, or United who have won fuck all despite having a larger wage bill than City. No I’m content with what we are doing. The fact is to a degree the power is with selling clubs but unless you’re a complete retard like Todd Boehly you don’t dance to their tune

---

I am not sure how many times I need to explain myself!!!

We are not failing to close these deals over valuation gaps!!! We are failing to close these deals because the selling clubs do not like how we are structuring the deals (time period for payments) and the add-ons we are putting forward which the selling clubs think are unachievable!

Chelsea did not outbid us for Mudryk, they offered the exactly the same amount but structured the deal more favourably with in Shaktar's eyes more realistic add-ons.

West Ham have been very clear in this and said Rice is free to go if a club meets their valuation and that they are happy with the deal. Our 2 offers that have been rejected so far have both been slightly below the valuation, but not only that they did not like the structure of the deal and said the add-ons were unrealistic, pretty much a mirror image of our issues with Shaktar aside from the fact we met their valuation.

My point about the big boys, isn't about copying Chelsea or City or whoever, it's about when you enter this top end market for a player, the deals are completely different due to the big sums of money being transferred, not just in football in any profession. We are clearly not approaching these deals like a big player, hence why two clubs now have said that the add-ons we have put forward have been unrealistic.

We can make this sound as complicated as possible and almost impossible but on the face of it we must know by now what West Ham want and roughly how they would like it structured. If we don't have the budget (bigger payments made over a shorter time period) then we should move on and shop in a more affordable market. There is a reason why we don't struggle to close deals such as Jesus, Zinchenko, Havertz etc

Example: If you offer 100million for a player but propose to spread the payments over 6 years, that's a lot different to offering the same but spreading it over say 3 years. That can make or break a deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dostoy

Why are Arsenal not after Tonali?

Surely he would rather come to London than the North East.

Far cheaper than Rice as well.

---

It’s funny because for years we rarely signed anyone from the PL under Wenger.

Now it looks like we only want players from the PL.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by selassie

I am not sure how many times I need to explain myself!!!

We are not failing to close these deals over valuation gaps!!! We are failing to close these deals because the selling clubs do not like how we are structuring the deals (time period for payments) and the add-ons we are putting forward which the selling clubs think are unachievable!

Chelsea did not outbid us for Mudryk, they offered the exactly the same amount but structured the deal more favourably with in Shaktar's eyes more realistic add-ons.

West Ham have been very clear in this and said Rice is free to go if a club meets their valuation and that they are happy with the deal. Our 2 offers that have been rejected so far have both been slightly below the valuation, but not only that they did not like the structure of the deal and said the add-ons were unrealistic, pretty much a mirror image of our issues with Shaktar aside from the fact we met their valuation.

My point about the big boys, isn't about copying Chelsea or City or whoever, it's about when you enter this top end market for a player, the deals are completely different due to the big sums of money being transferred, not just in football in any profession. We are clearly not approaching these deals like a big player, hence why two clubs now have said that the add-ons we have put forward have been unrealistic.

We can make this sound as complicated as possible and almost impossible but on the face of it we must know by now what West Ham want and roughly how they would like it structured. If we don't have the budget (bigger payments made over a shorter time period) then we should move on and shop in a more affordable market. There is a reason why we don't struggle to close deals such as Jesus, Zinchenko, Havertz etc

Example: If you offer 100million for a player but propose to spread the payments over 6 years, that's a lot different to offering the same but spreading it over say 3 years. That can make or break a deal.

---

You can explain yourself as many times as you like.

I don’t think we got anywhere near the valuation Shaktah placed on Mudryk, even with add ons what we offered did not amount to 88.5million which is what Chelsea’s deal for him amounted to.

I’m sorry you don’t like this but it is quite standard to pay off the transfer fee for a player over the length of the players contract, Amortisation works as an insurance policy in this regard.

And as I’ve said before the reason selling clubs make these offers public is because they want to leverage the most amount of money they can get from the buying club, whether that’s in cash up front or in the overall amount of the transfer fee.

What we did wrong with Mudryk was that we hung around too long hoping that the player wanting to come to us would force Shatkah’s hand that I agree was amateurish and we should have immediately moved on.

I sincerely hope we’ve learnt from this with West Ham, and if the third bid isn’t enough…walk away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marc Overmars

It’s funny because for years we rarely signed anyone from the PL under Wenger.

Now it looks like we only want players from the PL.

---

Couldn’t afford to

With the premier league you’re paying high prices for a player you know can perform at the required level.

To be honest, I wish we’d do more shopping abroad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dostoy

Why are Arsenal not after Tonali?

---

I guess we're Tonali deaf :rimshot: