Adam Wharton

[M_B]

I replied to you mentioning the fee. Sorry, didn't realise when you mentioned the fee, you weren't actually interested in the fee.

Remiss of me.

Edited 18 hours ago by M_B

[Mattyblue]

I’m not, no, as it makes no material difference to the team, kind of the point of selling players.

[TugaysMarlboro]

10 hours ago, M_B said:

 

So, realistically, what final figure would you be happy with?

So, realistically, are you happy that none of the fees received from Wharton (initial sale or sell on received) goes to increasing the transfer budget?

Edited 7 hours ago by TugaysMarlboro

[A Northern Horde...]

11 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

Nothing to complain about… the lad was bundled out the door as quick as feasibly possible.

The Venkys 'project' in full effect.

[M_B]

1 hour ago, TugaysMarlboro said:

So, realistically, are you happy that none of the fees received from Wharton (initial sale or sell on received) goes to increasing the transfer budget?

No, but the conversation was about the potential fee, not what will happen to it.

[TugaysMarlboro]

.

Edited 6 hours ago by TugaysMarlboro

[TugaysMarlboro]

23 minutes ago, M_B said:

No, but the conversation was about the potential fee, not what will happen to it.

Bit of a cop out.

[wilsdenrover]

I don’t think we can complain if we end up receiving circa £35 million for him.

We certainly can complain about how little (if any) will be reinvested in the squad.

[roversfan99]

Putting aside the fact that none of it goes into improving the squad so its all made redundant.

He would have to be sold for £120m for us to then earn £35m which is a hell of a presumption. But that wouldnt make it a good deal for us because it still assumes that had we got a better initial deal, that we wouldnt have got a sell on.

Say if we had waited and sold him for £30m + 15% sell on and he still went for this wishful £120m. Instead of £20m + (15% x £100m profit) which equals £35m, we would have got £30m + (15%? x £90m) so £44.5m.

Im always wary of basing a transfer fee on sell ons anyway. Its contingent, you cant bank on it coming in.

[bluebruce]

1 hour ago, wilsdenrover said:

I don’t think we can complain if we end up receiving circa £35 million for him.

We certainly can complain about how little (if any) will be reinvested in the squad.

If that ends up being the case it would still be disappointing because with a halfway decent negotiator on our end, it should have been 40+ million.

Although as has been pointed out it seemingly doesn't matter anymore anyway.

[Mattyblue]

Of course, it would never have been a sky high fee in January 2024, nobody said it should’ve been.

He was still not a household name at this level, oh and we were a distressed seller with cash flow problems, so how could we have got anymore there and then.

Obviously a normal club with billionaire owners wouldn’t have been conducting a fire sale in the first place and would have instead been selling post he had developed further and become the league’s hot prospect on their terms at some time down the line, not the buyers.

Edited 1 hour ago by Mattyblue

[JHRover]

The best 'deal' would have been to have backed our manager 12 months prior when the PL was achievable, and again the following summer, and again the following January, whilst Wharton was here.

Had we done any of those things there's a decent chance we'd have got to the PL, kept Wharton and now be naming our price for him like Palace can.

None of the above is far fetched or ludicrous stuff. It was there to be done and our owners flushed it down the toilet because they don't care. So I'm glad they've missed out on millions on Adam, it's the least they deserve for their behaviour.

[lraC]

5 minutes ago, JHRover said:

The best 'deal' would have been to have backed our manager 12 months prior when the PL was achievable, and again the following summer, and again the following January, whilst Wharton was here.

Had we done any of those things there's a decent chance we'd have got to the PL, kept Wharton and now be naming our price for him like Palace can.

None of the above is far fetched or ludicrous stuff. It was there to be done and our owners flushed it down the toilet because they don't care. So I'm glad they've missed out on millions on Adam, it's the least they deserve for their behaviour.

The problem is it’s the fans that missed out. Only seeing one of our own and a generational talent playing for the team he supports, for a very short time.

Not only that, the lad didn’t want the move and had the courtesy to sign a contract, to ensure that the club got at least a half decent fee.

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, roversfan99 said:

Putting aside the fact that none of it goes into improving the squad so its all made redundant.

He would have to be sold for £120m for us to then earn £35m which is a hell of a presumption. But that wouldnt make it a good deal for us because it still assumes that had we got a better initial deal, that we wouldnt have got a sell on.

Say if we had waited and sold him for £30m + 15% sell on and he still went for this wishful £120m. Instead of £20m + (15% x £100m profit) which equals £35m, we would have got £30m + (15%? x £90m) so £44.5m.

Im always wary of basing a transfer fee on sell ons anyway. Its contingent, you cant bank on it coming in.

who says that a club paying a higher fee would have agree 15% sell on? 

 

[Mattyblue]

Hmmm, maybe you don’t sell to them then?