Gyokeres (3 Viewers)

SBT

Well-Known Member
...or the highest fee we've ever received, while in the EFL rather than the EPL, for a player with a year left on his contract.

Don't let facts get in the way of you having a hissy fit, though. Crack on!
What does our record fee have to do with Gyokeres’ value?
 

Ccfcisparks

Well-Known Member
...or the highest fee we've ever received, while in the EFL rather than the EPL, for a player with a year left on his contract.

Don't let facts get in the way of you having a hissy fit, though. Crack on!
Right so if we got £9m would that be good business because it would be the record fee?

Ridiculous excuse.
 

COVKIDSNEVERQUIT

Well-Known Member
Mcnally, twine and 17 mil please


We can see it now, can't we, Mark Robins wants McNally and Twine in exchange for Gyokores but Gyokores fails to agree terms with Burnley and goes elsewhere.
 
Last edited:

SBT

Well-Known Member
Nothing. It does maybe show that a fee of that size being classed as a "disaster" is a bit hyperbolic.
Well if you only have one big chip to cash in, and you sell it well below its proper value, then it’s pretty disastrous - the amount of money we got for a different player 22 years ago won’t really be much comfort, I imagine.
 

mmttww

Well-Known Member
Look, I think we could get more than £15m and I hope we do. With the amount of clubs linked with him, and most being EPL clubs, a fee higher than that is possible.

If Sporting make an offer, and so do others, but Vik insists on SL, it's not on us. Others have to persuade him. We then either accept SL's best offer, or he stays and we get nothing.

We need players. We need funds. A "disaster" for me is getting to the end of the window with Vik p*ssed he didn't get a move, and not having cash we can use for a rebuild from a £15m fee.
 

Legia Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Apparently negotiated a 5 year deal with SL and they've slapped on an 80 million (euro) transfer clause.
(According to the oracle at work this morning)

So Lisbon won't pay over 17m, but nevertheless will then put an 80m transfer clause on his contract? I've mentioned it before but if we feel we have to sell to them under those conditions and end up selling him cheaper than our value of him, them we should seek to counter that by insisting on something like a 50% sell on clause.
 

David O'Day

Well-Known Member
So other clubs are bidding for him now?

But some clowns said we should of accepted the first bid we got!
 

steve cooper

Well-Known Member
We could have cashed in on Vik in January, rumour is that we had an offer. I don't know if anyone has any details on that but we chose to take a gamble and keep him until the season ended and it very nearly paid off.
On that basis I think we shouldn't get too upset if he goes for a bit below what we think he is worth.
It very nearly bought us somewhere in the region of £170M.
It's fine to be wise with hindsight, but it looked like a good gamble to me.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top