Robb
__
Just being realistic
I have nothing against massive financial outlays but purchases, very expensive ones, post fergie smacks of desperation at times.
It's common knowledge we've been poor in the transfer market, Ed would be the main cause
—
Ed doesn’t identify the players, that’s our managers job, he gets it done once the manger says he wants someone, usually paying over the odds for someone our manager wants, if anything that makes him a good man to have as he will usually get the job done just 20% more than it should be, obviously the shareholders are happy as it’s not effecting our turnover
comment by Mr Chelsea - Flustrated (U3579)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Mr Chelsea - Flustrated (U3579)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
£65m for Sanchez isn't terrible value, what are people seeing here?
We paid £75m for Lukaku few, less for Sanchez is a good deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 30m signing on fee I think? 20m to Sanchez and 10m to his agent if I'm correct. Or is it 25 and 5 to his agent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does it matter if we are paying arsenal £35m for him?
It isn't exactly record breaking. Relatively speaking it's similar to the RVP transfer, if he has an impact anything like that it's worth every penny.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bubsy I was talking about the signing on fee? The transfer fee isn't that outrageous.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does it matter who gets the money? It's a total of £65m.
Nobody mentioned £5/£10m signing on fees 5 years ago. Hazard agent got £7m off you years ago.
Kaz
__
Ed clearly is the main negotiator. He loves a deal. The suitability of the player is secondary to him.
Granted, we've made poor managerial choices post fergie and it is another reason why our transfer activity appears one without any thought of a playing style.
I think I said that didn’t I?
comment by Conte'nt = eism (U20893)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
the agent has clearly poured honeyed poison in his client's ear; if Alexis goes to Man U, it'll be the agent after the cash, with Man U taking full advantage of the situation... an act of pure mercenary if ever there was one, all fully endorsed by Man U, a club whose sanctimonious fans preach supposed high ideals to everyone. Yet more hipocrisy from a sickeningly rich corporate monstrosity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing wrong with that. I would want my agent to get the best possible deal for me?? Wouldnt you??
Each day the fee and the numbers are rising. Initially City didn't want to pay the fee and agent's fee. Then the fees and wage. United were going to pay the fees and wage demand with some noting that Mhiki will go the other way (£20m + Mhiki or £35m only). This was initially reported with Alexis missing out in £30 in signing on fee he would get were he to join City or PSG for free at the end of the season. Now the agent's fee has gone from £5m to £10m and reports are saying he'll still get a signing on fee of £30m.
If that is true, there are players who would end up being cheaper and last longer that I'd prefer over this signing. I also don't think City need him and he isn't going to make them that much better.
How can then sign on fee increase if city dropped out the race to sign him, are we to believe we’re highballing ourselves
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 19 minutes ago
Each day the fee and the numbers are rising. Initially City didn't want to pay the fee and agent's fee. Then the fees and wage. United were going to pay the fees and wage demand with some noting that Mhiki will go the other way (£20m + Mhiki or £35m only). This was initially reported with Alexis missing out in £30 in signing on fee he would get were he to join City or PSG for free at the end of the season. Now the agent's fee has gone from £5m to £10m and reports are saying he'll still get a signing on fee of £30m.
If that is true, there are players who would end up being cheaper and last longer that I'd prefer over this signing. I also don't think City need him and he isn't going to make them that much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He’s not getting £30 million. At all
comment by Robb Woodward 🎬⚽️⭐️ (U21234)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 19 minutes ago
Each day the fee and the numbers are rising. Initially City didn't want to pay the fee and agent's fee. Then the fees and wage. United were going to pay the fees and wage demand with some noting that Mhiki will go the other way (£20m + Mhiki or £35m only). This was initially reported with Alexis missing out in £30 in signing on fee he would get were he to join City or PSG for free at the end of the season. Now the agent's fee has gone from £5m to £10m and reports are saying he'll still get a signing on fee of £30m.
If that is true, there are players who would end up being cheaper and last longer that I'd prefer over this signing. I also don't think City need him and he isn't going to make them that much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He’s not getting £30 million. At all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is Woodward we're talking about remember.
It just doesn't make sense. It all seems strange. Why would we pay £30m signing on fee, plus the fee, wages, agents fee when City don't want to pay him the wages he is asking for as he would get more than their highest earner which could cause disharmony in such a squad that doesn't really need him? In that case, all clubs could wait till the end of the season. He can talk to foreign clubs right now and when 3 months left on his contract, domestic clubs.
The fees keep increasing, and yet we're out bidding ourselves?
comment by Conte'nt = eism (U20893)
posted 8 hours, 57 minutes ago
United have offered Armenia playmaker Henrikh Mkhitaryan as a makeweight in the deal as they seek to match Arsenal’s £35m valuation of Sanchez.
They are also prepared to meet Sanchez’s demand for a signing-on fee of up to £20m in addition to footing a potential £10m bill for the striker’s agent, Fernando Felicevich, which would value the overall deal at £65m for a 29 year-old who is out of contract at the end of the season.
That figure does not include the reputed £400,000-a-week wages, including bonus, Sanchez is in line to earn and which would make him the highest-paid player in the Premier League.
(Telegraph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow that’s just ludicrous no wonder we walked away.
How long is the contract for?
comment by Cantona 7 (U11258)
posted 15 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by Conte'nt =eism (U20893)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
the agent has clearly poured honeyed poison in his client's ear; if Alexis goes to Man U, it'll be the agent after the cash, with Man U taking full advantage of the situation... an act of pure mercenary if ever there was one, all fully endorsed by Man U, a club whose sanctimonious fans preach supposed high ideals to everyone. Yet more hipocrisy from a sickeningly rich corporate monstrosity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing wrong with that. I would want my agent to get the best possible deal for me?? Wouldnt you??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing wrong with that at all - just the player should pay the agent not the club.
Agents shouldn't be getting a penny from the clubs!
comment by mancWoohoo - Maximus Mardius Cob-onius (U10676)
posted 3 hours, 18 minutes ago
How long is the contract for?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably till the end of the season....then he makes the move across Manchester on a free...
comment by Cornelius Oofterom (U15867)
posted 16 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by mancWoohoo - Maximus Mardius Cob-onius (U10676)
posted 3 hours, 18 minutes ago
How long is the contract for?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably till the end of the season....then he makes the move across Manchester on a free...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.... move into Manchester on a free....
FTFY.
Sign in if you want to comment
Man City end interest in Sanchez
Page 3 of 3
posted on 15/1/18
Robb
__
Just being realistic
posted on 15/1/18
I have nothing against massive financial outlays but purchases, very expensive ones, post fergie smacks of desperation at times.
It's common knowledge we've been poor in the transfer market, Ed would be the main cause
—
Ed doesn’t identify the players, that’s our managers job, he gets it done once the manger says he wants someone, usually paying over the odds for someone our manager wants, if anything that makes him a good man to have as he will usually get the job done just 20% more than it should be, obviously the shareholders are happy as it’s not effecting our turnover
posted on 15/1/18
comment by Mr Chelsea - Flustrated (U3579)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Mr Chelsea - Flustrated (U3579)
posted 5 seconds ago
comment by Busby (U19985)
posted 1 minute ago
£65m for Sanchez isn't terrible value, what are people seeing here?
We paid £75m for Lukaku few, less for Sanchez is a good deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The 30m signing on fee I think? 20m to Sanchez and 10m to his agent if I'm correct. Or is it 25 and 5 to his agent.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does it matter if we are paying arsenal £35m for him?
It isn't exactly record breaking. Relatively speaking it's similar to the RVP transfer, if he has an impact anything like that it's worth every penny.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bubsy I was talking about the signing on fee? The transfer fee isn't that outrageous.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Does it matter who gets the money? It's a total of £65m.
Nobody mentioned £5/£10m signing on fees 5 years ago. Hazard agent got £7m off you years ago.
posted on 15/1/18
Kaz
__
Ed clearly is the main negotiator. He loves a deal. The suitability of the player is secondary to him.
Granted, we've made poor managerial choices post fergie and it is another reason why our transfer activity appears one without any thought of a playing style.
posted on 15/1/18
I think I said that didn’t I?
posted on 15/1/18
comment by Conte'nt = eism (U20893)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
the agent has clearly poured honeyed poison in his client's ear; if Alexis goes to Man U, it'll be the agent after the cash, with Man U taking full advantage of the situation... an act of pure mercenary if ever there was one, all fully endorsed by Man U, a club whose sanctimonious fans preach supposed high ideals to everyone. Yet more hipocrisy from a sickeningly rich corporate monstrosity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing wrong with that. I would want my agent to get the best possible deal for me?? Wouldnt you??
posted on 15/1/18
Each day the fee and the numbers are rising. Initially City didn't want to pay the fee and agent's fee. Then the fees and wage. United were going to pay the fees and wage demand with some noting that Mhiki will go the other way (£20m + Mhiki or £35m only). This was initially reported with Alexis missing out in £30 in signing on fee he would get were he to join City or PSG for free at the end of the season. Now the agent's fee has gone from £5m to £10m and reports are saying he'll still get a signing on fee of £30m.
If that is true, there are players who would end up being cheaper and last longer that I'd prefer over this signing. I also don't think City need him and he isn't going to make them that much better.
posted on 15/1/18
How can then sign on fee increase if city dropped out the race to sign him, are we to believe we’re highballing ourselves
posted on 15/1/18
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 19 minutes ago
Each day the fee and the numbers are rising. Initially City didn't want to pay the fee and agent's fee. Then the fees and wage. United were going to pay the fees and wage demand with some noting that Mhiki will go the other way (£20m + Mhiki or £35m only). This was initially reported with Alexis missing out in £30 in signing on fee he would get were he to join City or PSG for free at the end of the season. Now the agent's fee has gone from £5m to £10m and reports are saying he'll still get a signing on fee of £30m.
If that is true, there are players who would end up being cheaper and last longer that I'd prefer over this signing. I also don't think City need him and he isn't going to make them that much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He’s not getting £30 million. At all
posted on 15/1/18
comment by Robb Woodward 🎬⚽️⭐️ (U21234)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by CurrentlyInChina (U11181)
posted 19 minutes ago
Each day the fee and the numbers are rising. Initially City didn't want to pay the fee and agent's fee. Then the fees and wage. United were going to pay the fees and wage demand with some noting that Mhiki will go the other way (£20m + Mhiki or £35m only). This was initially reported with Alexis missing out in £30 in signing on fee he would get were he to join City or PSG for free at the end of the season. Now the agent's fee has gone from £5m to £10m and reports are saying he'll still get a signing on fee of £30m.
If that is true, there are players who would end up being cheaper and last longer that I'd prefer over this signing. I also don't think City need him and he isn't going to make them that much better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He’s not getting £30 million. At all
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is Woodward we're talking about remember.
posted on 16/1/18
It just doesn't make sense. It all seems strange. Why would we pay £30m signing on fee, plus the fee, wages, agents fee when City don't want to pay him the wages he is asking for as he would get more than their highest earner which could cause disharmony in such a squad that doesn't really need him? In that case, all clubs could wait till the end of the season. He can talk to foreign clubs right now and when 3 months left on his contract, domestic clubs.
The fees keep increasing, and yet we're out bidding ourselves?
posted on 16/1/18
The scenes, the scenes
posted on 16/1/18
comment by Conte'nt = eism (U20893)
posted 8 hours, 57 minutes ago
United have offered Armenia playmaker Henrikh Mkhitaryan as a makeweight in the deal as they seek to match Arsenal’s £35m valuation of Sanchez.
They are also prepared to meet Sanchez’s demand for a signing-on fee of up to £20m in addition to footing a potential £10m bill for the striker’s agent, Fernando Felicevich, which would value the overall deal at £65m for a 29 year-old who is out of contract at the end of the season.
That figure does not include the reputed £400,000-a-week wages, including bonus, Sanchez is in line to earn and which would make him the highest-paid player in the Premier League.
(Telegraph)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow that’s just ludicrous no wonder we walked away.
posted on 16/1/18
How long is the contract for?
posted on 16/1/18
comment by Cantona 7 (U11258)
posted 15 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by Conte'nt =eism (U20893)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
the agent has clearly poured honeyed poison in his client's ear; if Alexis goes to Man U, it'll be the agent after the cash, with Man U taking full advantage of the situation... an act of pure mercenary if ever there was one, all fully endorsed by Man U, a club whose sanctimonious fans preach supposed high ideals to everyone. Yet more hipocrisy from a sickeningly rich corporate monstrosity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing wrong with that. I would want my agent to get the best possible deal for me?? Wouldnt you??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nothing wrong with that at all - just the player should pay the agent not the club.
Agents shouldn't be getting a penny from the clubs!
posted on 16/1/18
comment by mancWoohoo - Maximus Mardius Cob-onius (U10676)
posted 3 hours, 18 minutes ago
How long is the contract for?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably till the end of the season....then he makes the move across Manchester on a free...
posted on 17/1/18
comment by Cornelius Oofterom (U15867)
posted 16 hours, 10 minutes ago
comment by mancWoohoo - Maximus Mardius Cob-onius (U10676)
posted 3 hours, 18 minutes ago
How long is the contract for?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably till the end of the season....then he makes the move across Manchester on a free...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
.... move into Manchester on a free....
FTFY.
Page 3 of 3