| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Perry NG apparently, £3.6 m
One year left on his current contract
https://thetransferroom.com/others/c...ransfer-window
In other circumstances you'd snatch their hands off.
Can we afford to sell with being able to spend zilch?
It certainly changes the train of thought on deals like this.
You'd usually think take the money we could get a replacement for half that and invest it elsewhere.
Having said that would we? Or would it disappear in the pockets of Vinnie The Long Trousers?
If we could get a few irons in the fire and get some loans without the fee or freebie replacements with that cash spent partly on quality players wages I'd take it all day.
He's decent enough but £3.6m is ridiculous money with a year left on his contract.
Originally Posted by blue lewj
Make your mind up!
There are many reasons to complain about Vincent Tan - and you have covered all of them, and more, with tedious persistence.
But trousering transfer fees isn't one of them.
Your other post (#3) is more to the point.
That said, I don't believe the £3.6m speculation for one minute.
Vaulks to Norwich springs to mind.
that would be a good return on someone we bought for 350k.
it would show the benefits of targeting younger players from lower leagues, rather than sticking with 30 year old cart horses like we used to.
It's also the stuff of fantasy.
Josh Murphy to Chelsea summer 2019!
No one is paying £3.6M for Perry NG.
My thoughts exactly - half of that possibly, but he’s only got a year on his deal left. I reckon there’s a chance we’d accept half of the sum mentioned as well - even if we stay up, you can only see more bargain basement transfer dealing ahead.
actually reading the article, it doesn't say that anyone is contemplating offering us £3.6m for Ng at all.
it says clubs are interested in him, and on transfermarkt.com he has a value of "about £3.6m" (actually €3.5m).
Alex Wallace is a kid pretending to be a journalist who comes out with utter bollocks.
His journalist credentials are probably no worse than most these days TBH , anyway , my initial impression was that the article would have been about McGuinness , not him, and I think of all our players he will go before anyone else.
Not sure how much a fee McGuiness would attract though giving that his contract is only for another 12 months
That's £1.3m per lettter !
That's the dilemma though isn't it.
How interested are people in coming here?
How willing are PL clubs and the like to let players come here with no loan fee changing hands?
All dependent on them things before you make a decision.
If I know this club though they're out there now though doing the research and putting in the footwork so we don't get caught out in the summer.
Where did the money for Moore go?
Was he adequately replaced?
Why people feel the need to tell other posters what their opinion on here should be I don't know. It is an opinion.
You've got yours, I've got mine.
It does not matter how much we sell anyone for, we cannot spend any money for two more transfer windows. Whilst not as bad as a points deduction this penalty is now beginning to bite and fans need to remember it is a punishment and will impact on the quality of the squad for the next 12 months whatever league we are in and whoever we sell...
2023/4 is going to be a challenge whichever way you look at it.
Any transfers received will simply go towards reducing our financial woes.
It would have covered two weeks of our losses.
That is my point.
If it isn't going to be used to bolster the squad in Amy way then it achieves very little for the manager.
In that case I'd keep him.
Yes, so that's what I mean by pocketed by
Moore wanted to leave though , so there was no point paying wages , rental fees , medical bills, insurance, and everything else that a modern football player costs , so when you include everything £4.5 m was about right.
As with many transfers , it’s the fact that cash comes into the club that’s is the important thing not just the amount of the fee.
Didn't we sign 5 players on loan that January? That wouldn't have been cheap
Whether players want to leave or not you have to have some idea of what you're doing after it.
Once again here the club acted as if the Moore situation took them by surprise. The replacements that followed were nowhere near of the same standard or had any potential to be.
If you let players leave and not have a good enough plan for what you're going to do after them then you're heading only one way as a club.
Adequate planning across the board seems to be an alien concept at City.
Jordan Hugill had an immediate impact. His first game was far better than Moore had been all season and scored on debut in a vital win I think v Forest.
Funnily enough I do have some idea as the money is referenced on the statement of financial position. Another thing, Tan is keeping the club solvent from what I can see. Have you a short term memory as not so long ago we faced the possibility of being wound up due to arrears with HMRC.
I don’t think the club were surprised by Moore leaving as they turned down a late bid from Wolves earlier in the season.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote