|
Post by Dingdangdoo on Aug 2, 2018 5:21:56 GMT
Good advice: 50% profit would be 22M for a start.* Everton Are throwing stupid money about - over 100%X original purchase of Rojo. 450%?X original purchase of Richarlason (cant be arsed to look up original fee - this is a rough guess) My problem and the moronism is setting a buyout clause (If one even exists) at ONLY 21M just like for whatever reason the Shaq clause was ONLY set at 14M. You could argue 6-8M profit is a good thing in such a short space of time, and I'd agree to a point. But should it only be 6-8m? It's the arnautovic issue; We sell him for 20 odd million and everybody crows how good it is to get such a net profit. West Ham If they were to sell now would look for upwards of 38M So is the profit decent for Stoke? Yes. Could the Stoke team responsible for N'zonzi's sale too, also have negotiated Arnautovic's sale better? You can bet your bollocks they could and should. Exactly this. Buy out clauses should be set at ridiculous prices. At Stoke they are set at please come and buy me dead cheap prices Then the player wouldn’t sign.....agents aren’t stupid.....clubs such as Stoke are very often only stepping stones
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2018 6:47:17 GMT
Exactly this. Buy out clauses should be set at ridiculous prices. At Stoke they are set at please come and buy me dead cheap prices Then the player wouldn’t sign.....agents aren’t stupid.....clubs such as Stoke are very often only stepping stones Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you.
|
|
|
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Aug 2, 2018 6:54:58 GMT
Then the player wouldn’t sign.....agents aren’t stupid.....clubs such as Stoke are very often only stepping stones Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you. Vicious circle mate. The aforementioned players are actually players that we desperately need. We are not in a position to be so high and mighty as being able to pick and choose. We need precisely the quality of player who is likely to demand this sort of clause in their contract. Unfortunately we just have suck it up I’m afraid.
|
|
|
Post by Dingdangdoo on Aug 2, 2018 7:13:04 GMT
Then the player wouldn’t sign.....agents aren’t stupid.....clubs such as Stoke are very often only stepping stones Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you. We don’t sign available ‘next stage’ players then the fans moan we have no ambition
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 2, 2018 7:14:32 GMT
Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you. We don’t sign available ‘next stage’ players then the fans moan we have no ambition But should part of the point in signing these players be the ability to flog them for as much as possible? We don’t seem to have a very well rounded and smart game plan.
|
|
|
Post by mattythestokie on Aug 2, 2018 7:35:04 GMT
Then the player wouldn’t sign.....agents aren’t stupid.....clubs such as Stoke are very often only stepping stones Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you. You’re living in a dream world if you think quality players dream of playing for stoke. Players use us to showcase themselves for the big boys.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2018 8:59:08 GMT
Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you. You’re living in a dream world if you think quality players dream of playing for stoke. Players use us to showcase themselves for the big boys. West Ham, Palace, Newcastle etc all manage to do it and get good fees on return.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Aug 2, 2018 11:23:26 GMT
We don’t sign available ‘next stage’ players then the fans moan we have no ambition But should part of the point in signing these players be the ability to flog them for as much as possible? We don’t seem to have a very well rounded and smart game plan. Why not try to look at it from all angles instead of just what you'd like as a supporter. Try seeing it from the player's perspective. You're joining a team who look likely to drop. You want to get yourself in the Premier League shop window so you agree to join, but no way do you want to end up in the Championship. So you agree to join, but make sure you've got an escape route in the event of relegation. Why would you agree to a release clause for an amount way above what the club are paying for you? It makes zero sense. From the club's point of view, they were desperate to secure his services to try to avoid relegation. At that stage, making a profit was a secondary issue. And remember, it's a relegation release clause. Maybe the release clause if we'd stayed up might have been more in line with your requirements, or maybe there wouldn't have been one. When we bought him, we were the beggars. We weren't in a position to be choosers.
|
|
|
Post by Laughing Gravy on Aug 2, 2018 11:40:21 GMT
You’re living in a dream world if you think quality players dream of playing for stoke. Players use us to showcase themselves for the big boys. West Ham, Palace, Newcastle etc all manage to do it and get good fees on return. London and being a huge club (Newcastle) might have some part to play in that.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 2, 2018 12:27:21 GMT
But should part of the point in signing these players be the ability to flog them for as much as possible? We don’t seem to have a very well rounded and smart game plan. Why not try to look at it from all angles instead of just what you'd like as a supporter. Try seeing it from the player's perspective. You're joining a team who look likely to drop. You want to get yourself in the Premier League shop window so you agree to join, but no way do you want to end up in the Championship. So you agree to join, but make sure you've got an escape route in the event of relegation. Why would you agree to a release clause for an amount way above what the club are paying for you? It makes zero sense. From the club's point of view, they were desperate to secure his services to try to avoid relegation. At that stage, making a profit was a secondary issue. And remember, it's a relegation release clause. Maybe the release clause if we'd stayed up might have been more in line with your requirements, or maybe there wouldn't have been one. When we bought him, we were the beggars. We weren't in a position to be choosers. I get it from the players position. I wouldn't sign them if the fee was too low.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Aug 2, 2018 13:14:18 GMT
Why not try to look at it from all angles instead of just what you'd like as a supporter. Try seeing it from the player's perspective. You're joining a team who look likely to drop. You want to get yourself in the Premier League shop window so you agree to join, but no way do you want to end up in the Championship. So you agree to join, but make sure you've got an escape route in the event of relegation. Why would you agree to a release clause for an amount way above what the club are paying for you? It makes zero sense. From the club's point of view, they were desperate to secure his services to try to avoid relegation. At that stage, making a profit was a secondary issue. And remember, it's a relegation release clause. Maybe the release clause if we'd stayed up might have been more in line with your requirements, or maybe there wouldn't have been one. When we bought him, we were the beggars. We weren't in a position to be choosers. I get it from the players position. I wouldn't sign them if the fee was too low. You wouldn't sign a player you needed if you couldn't potentially make a massive profit? Even when you need the player to try to avoid relegation?
|
|
|
Post by GreaterGlasgowstokie on Aug 2, 2018 13:19:27 GMT
Then don't sign him then. Why would you want to sign players who don't really want to play for you. You’re living in a dream world if you think quality players dream of playing for stoke. Players use us to showcase themselves for the big boys. Players will go to the club that pays best, after that the player will look at the ambition and the trajectory of the club. This is why stoke have usually failed to sign their top targets for years now
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 2, 2018 13:28:37 GMT
I get it from the players position. I wouldn't sign them if the fee was too low. You wouldn't sign a player you needed if you couldn't potentially make a massive profit? Even when you need the player to try to avoid relegation? What's the point? We're a club that needs to be making money from player sales. There are other players. So move on or set the get outs at a level that makes sense for the club and the player still believes is a good fee.
|
|
|
Post by Absolution on Aug 2, 2018 13:35:36 GMT
You wouldn't sign a player you needed if you couldn't potentially make a massive profit? Even when you need the player to try to avoid relegation? What's the point? We're a club that needs to be making money from player sales. There are other players. So move on or set the get outs at a level that makes sense for the club and the player still believes is a good fee. So no consideration of our situation at the time we signed the player. Any decent player would cover his back in the event of a relegation that looked highly possible at the time Badou signed. You'd have to turn them all down then you'd be left with no one.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Aug 2, 2018 14:32:20 GMT
We don’t sign available ‘next stage’ players then the fans moan we have no ambition But should part of the point in signing these players be the ability to flog them for as much as possible? We don’t seem to have a very well rounded and smart game plan. We have a plan?
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 3, 2018 21:07:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by terryconroysmagic on Aug 3, 2018 21:36:20 GMT
Did they do a Berahino in that article and get the match day wrong??
|
|
|
Post by mrpickles on Aug 3, 2018 21:47:21 GMT
I know I'll probably end up eating my words here, but I'm very suprised we've got to this stage in the window without a transfer request. I was quick to judge the bloke when he supposedly didn't turn up for training on time, but there has been a lot of positive talk from Rowett about him since he joined back up with the squad. I'm actually getting slightly hopeful that he could stay.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Aug 3, 2018 22:02:59 GMT
You’re living in a dream world if you think quality players dream of playing for stoke. Players use us to showcase themselves for the big boys. West Ham, Palace, Newcastle etc all manage to do it and get good fees on return. They both pay higher wages which probably helps.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 5, 2018 6:46:01 GMT
Only Stoke-related line from Nixon this morning:
"Stoke will sell Badou Ndiaye to boost their transfer kitty".
Literally just that one line.
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Aug 5, 2018 7:30:34 GMT
Only Stoke-related line from Nixon this morning: "Stoke will sell Badou Ndiaye to boost their transfer kitty". Literally just that one line. Welcome to the championship
|
|
|
Post by GreaterGlasgowstokie on Aug 5, 2018 7:32:30 GMT
No one wants to buy badou.
Pure guesswork as always from Nixon
|
|
|
Post by stokeykez on Aug 5, 2018 8:54:23 GMT
Only Stoke-related line from Nixon this morning: "Stoke will sell Badou Ndiaye to boost their transfer kitty". Literally just that one line. How the fuck does he call himself a journalist !
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Aug 5, 2018 8:57:07 GMT
Only Stoke-related line from Nixon this morning: "Stoke will sell Badou Ndiaye to boost their transfer kitty". Literally just that one line. How the fuck does he call himself a journalist ! Sales led transfer policy totally at odds with stated ambition to return first time round , writing well on the wall now ,
|
|
|
Post by musik on Aug 5, 2018 8:58:58 GMT
"Stoke will sell Badou ...." is this just what Nixon wants?
|
|
|
Post by mrred on Aug 5, 2018 12:48:36 GMT
Only Stoke-related line from Nixon this morning: "Stoke will sell Badou Ndiaye to boost their transfer kitty". Literally just that one line. I don't listen to any journalist other than Percy. The only one worth your time.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2018 12:54:09 GMT
I feel like Nixon often has part of the story.
Can't see us loaning him, we'd only lose him to give us more money to spend. With that said I could see us selling him if a good offer comes in so Nixon may be half right in we're saying that he's available for the right offer.
|
|