|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 27, 2015 16:48:38 GMT
Sentinel“We are not going to go out and spend the amounts Manchester Untied did last summer but Mark knows that if he highlights the right deal he will be supported. “(Xherdan) Shaqiri (a £10m January target from Bayern Munich) is a good example of that. “We have done some very good deals in the transfer market since Mark came to the club. It’s never about the size of the fee, it’s about identifying the right player for the best deal. “Of course we all recognise the market we are competing in.”
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Mar 27, 2015 16:50:42 GMT
Curious example to use given he was a pie in the sky, never happening in a million years signing.
The fact he's signed his contract presumably means he's had some assurances though.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Mar 27, 2015 16:51:27 GMT
Sentinel“We are not going to go out and spend the amounts Manchester Untied did last summer but Mark knows that if he highlights the right deal he will be supported. “(Xherdan) Shaqiri (a £10m January target from Bayern Munich) is a good example of that. “We have done some very good deals in the transfer market since Mark came to the club. It’s never about the size of the fee, it’s about identifying the right player for the best deal. “Of course we all recognise the market we are competing in.” Is that the sound of SheikMomo typing and spitting blood at the same time?
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 27, 2015 16:51:36 GMT
Very exciting times.
My god he deserves real financial backing after what he's done.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2015 16:54:54 GMT
We don't need those deals though, as nice as they are. They are huge fees and wages.
We should be looking at the 5-8M bracket for young uns here and abroad, with sensible wages over 4 years.
That way we get a good 2 and a half years for our money at least with more if the terms are right and the potential to make money should we need it.
For example, Villa paid around 7M for 21 year old Benteke. Perfect type of deal.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 27, 2015 17:06:18 GMT
We don't need those deals though, as nice as they are. They are huge fees and wages. We should be looking at the 5-8M bracket for young uns here and abroad, with sensible wages over 4 years. That way we get a good 2 and a half years for our money at least with more if the terms are right and the potential to make money should we need it. For example, Villa paid around 7M for 21 year old Benteke. Perfect type of deal. Very true but that would represent a huge leap forward after the last 6 or so windows. Hopefully we've realised that Hughes can't be expected to continually make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Mar 27, 2015 17:12:09 GMT
Bojan cost a reported 500k Euro's. Palacious 8 million sterling. It is not all about the size of the transfer fee.
|
|
|
Post by slpmarc on Mar 27, 2015 17:13:47 GMT
Curious example to use given he was a pie in the sky, never happening in a million years signing. The fact he's signed his contract presumably means he's had some assurances though. Not pie in the sky. Inter Milan wanted a loan with a view to a perm deal, Munich were not prepared to do that deal and wanted to sell in January. Stoke had agreed a deal with Munich to buy in January which was excepted, we were favourites to sign him till Milan matched our offer, so then it was just down to a decision for the player.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 27, 2015 17:14:41 GMT
Bojan cost a reported 500k Euro's. Palacious 8 million sterling. It is not all about the size of the transfer fee. Very true but it's the exception rather than the rule. To think we can continue to pluck Bojan's out of the air is unrealistic.
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Mar 27, 2015 17:17:03 GMT
Bojan cost a reported 500k Euro's. Palacious 8 million sterling. It is not all about the size of the transfer fee. Very true but it's the exception rather than the rule. To think we can continue to pluck Bojan's out of the air is unrealistic. Diouf on a free rather that several million the year before. He is still the same player.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 27, 2015 17:17:43 GMT
Expectations,'re spending,have now been raised. If the club delivers supporters will respond.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Mar 27, 2015 17:19:39 GMT
Curious example to use given he was a pie in the sky, never happening in a million years signing. The fact he's signed his contract presumably means he's had some assurances though. Not pie in the sky. Inter Milan wanted a loan with a view to a perm deal, Munich were not prepared to do that deal and wanted to sell in January. Stoke had agreed a deal with Munich to buy in January which was excepted, we were favourites to sign him till Milan matched our offer, so then it was just down to a decision for the player. Which is why it was pie in the sky. He was never going to come was he? He's one of Europe's elite players and was always going to go to one of the bigger names in Europe. Being 'favourites to sign him' doesn't mean a whole lot in that context.
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 27, 2015 17:21:19 GMT
Very true but it's the exception rather than the rule. To think we can continue to pluck Bojan's out of the air is unrealistic. Diouf on a free rather that several million the year before. He is still the same player. In no way does that make my post any less viable. Doing things on the cheap in this league will catch up with you and now is the time to invest (within our means).
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 27, 2015 17:22:44 GMT
Sentinel“We are not going to go out and spend the amounts Manchester Untied did last summer but Mark knows that if he highlights the right deal he will be supported. “(Xherdan) Shaqiri (a £10m January target from Bayern Munich) is a good example of that. “We have done some very good deals in the transfer market since Mark came to the club. It’s never about the size of the fee, it’s about identifying the right player for the best deal. “Of course we all recognise the market we are competing in.” Is that the sound of SheikMomo typing and spitting blood at the same time? depends on whether he's finished licking his windows clean GD
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 27, 2015 17:29:05 GMT
So there's money there for players we're never going to get in a month of Sundays.
Thanks Scholes, your point is abundantly clear, you fucking dimwit.
|
|
|
Post by mywaydesolzan on Mar 27, 2015 17:29:49 GMT
Diouf on a free rather that several million the year before. He is still the same player. In no way does that make my post any less viable. Doing things on the cheap in this league will catch up with you and now is the time to invest (within our means). But it is not about the transfer fee per se, it is about value for money. Dalglish spent 35 million sterling on Carroll, and a fraction of that cost on Suarez. And we all know how that turned out.
|
|
|
Post by upthefud on Mar 27, 2015 17:34:40 GMT
In no way does that make my post any less viable. Doing things on the cheap in this league will catch up with you and now is the time to invest (within our means). But it is not about the transfer fee per se, it is about value for money. Dalglish spent 35 million sterling on Carroll, and a fraction of that cost on Suarez. And we all know how that turned out. Completely agree. Money shouldn't be spent just because we have it. It has to be the right deal
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Mar 27, 2015 17:34:50 GMT
In no way does that make my post any less viable. Doing things on the cheap in this league will catch up with you and now is the time to invest (within our means). But it is not about the transfer fee per se, it is about value for money. Dalglish spent 35 million sterling on Carroll, and a fraction of that cost on Suarez. And we all know how that turned out. That's a given but there is a big difference between comparing fees and comparing our realistic spend and shopping in the bargain basement.
|
|
|
Post by shrewspotter on Mar 27, 2015 17:35:26 GMT
The proof of the pudding will be in the eating Tony
|
|
|
Post by slpmarc on Mar 27, 2015 17:36:12 GMT
Not pie in the sky. Inter Milan wanted a loan with a view to a perm deal, Munich were not prepared to do that deal and wanted to sell in January. Stoke had agreed a deal with Munich to buy in January which was excepted, we were favourites to sign him till Milan matched our offer, so then it was just down to a decision for the player. Which is why it was pie in the sky. He was never going to come was he? He's one of Europe's elite players and was always going to go to one of the bigger names in Europe. Being 'favourites to sign him' doesn't mean a whole lot in that context. If Milan did not match our deal he would of come Stoke
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Mar 27, 2015 17:37:07 GMT
Which is why it was pie in the sky. He was never going to come was he? He's one of Europe's elite players and was always going to go to one of the bigger names in Europe. Being 'favourites to sign him' doesn't mean a whole lot in that context. If Milan did not match our deal he would of come Stoke Based on what?
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Mar 27, 2015 17:51:33 GMT
Sentinel“We are not going to go out and spend the amounts Manchester Untied did last summer but Mark knows that if he highlights the right deal he will be supported. “(Xherdan) Shaqiri (a £10m January target from Bayern Munich) is a good example of that. “We have done some very good deals in the transfer market since Mark came to the club. It’s never about the size of the fee, it’s about identifying the right player for the best deal. “Of course we all recognise the market we are competing in.” Great news about Hughesy but the only time I'll be convinced is when these targets happen starting with Moses. I don't think he's out of our league but I do think we have to go out to get him with a decent offer to both Chelsea and to the player not some derisory one. We still need to be canny on fees but be realistic about wages which is what I think has lost us deals in the past.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on Mar 27, 2015 17:55:19 GMT
WTF does "would of" mean?
|
|
|
Post by onionman on Mar 27, 2015 18:03:29 GMT
Our bid for Shaqiri was like when Phil Brown claimed Hull were in a two-horse race with Man United for Michael Owen.
At the time it felt like a publicity stunt for the benefit of the fans that the club knew was never going to actually happen; the fact Tony Scholes is bringing it up now only reinforces that.
That said, I'd much prefer us to continue building slowly and steadily rather than suddenly splashing the cash. Other than 7-10 million on Moses, or a comparable alternative, I don't think we really need to spend huge.
Our squad needs reinforcing, but not overhauling.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Mar 27, 2015 18:13:11 GMT
If Milan did not match our deal he would of come Stoke Based on what? I presume its based on the fact that Bayern Munich only accepted our bid first, so Milan had to raise theirs. The point is moot really. We did bid genuinely but against Inter Milan a player will never pick us in a million years
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Mar 27, 2015 18:15:22 GMT
Like I posted on a thread before ALL of our best players have been bought for 4m or less.
Everytime we have paid more there has been no value for money.
If it is a Yarmolenko type deal then YES we should splash the cash. But otherwise keep our powder dry Stoke
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Mar 27, 2015 18:18:21 GMT
I presume its based on the fact that Bayern Munich only accepted our bid first, so Milan had to raise theirs. The point is moot really. We did bid genuinely but against Inter Milan a player will never pick us in a million years Even if Inter hadn't bid for him it's still an awfully big leap to suggest he'd have signed for us.
|
|
|
Post by cheekymatt71 on Mar 27, 2015 18:27:28 GMT
I presume its based on the fact that Bayern Munich only accepted our bid first, so Milan had to raise theirs. The point is moot really. We did bid genuinely but against Inter Milan a player will never pick us in a million years Even if Inter hadn't bid for him it's still an awfully big leap to suggest he'd have signed for us. big leap YES but no team bothers to put a bid in unless the players agent has given a signal of some interest. I think the case is he would have actually come if we were the ONLY bidder in town. But that was never likely given the guys quality. So it was a bit silly from that point of view. But wasnt a complete waste of time.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Mar 27, 2015 18:30:09 GMT
Even if Inter hadn't bid for him it's still an awfully big leap to suggest he'd have signed for us. big leap YES but no team bothers to put a bid in unless the players agent has given a signal of some interest. I think the case is he would have actually come if we were the ONLY bidder in town. But that was never likely given the guys quality. So it was a bit silly from that point of view. But wasnt a complete waste of time. A player's agent is different from a player though, and plenty of clubs have expressed an interest, been linked to or bid for players they were never going to get in a month of Sundays. I don't think he would've come even if we were the only bidder in town. There were still three weeks of the transfer window left at the time and I think he'd have either played a waiting game until the end of the window or the summer, during which point there would surely have been some interest from a big club, even if only on loan.
|
|
|
Post by hartzchoco on Mar 27, 2015 18:35:49 GMT
Shaqiri was never ever coming here. That offer was nothing more than a publicity stunt, most of us even said as much at the time. That being said, I do believe Hughes will have some decent financial backing this summer. But there's no reason to go nuts with it, especially with the squad we're gonna have coming back.
|
|