£40m Bid Made For Sigurdsson

[peteblue]

Wasn't banned IIRC.

No mate, he moved to Ireland.......

 

[nsno-chris]

Wasn't banned IIRC.

I'm talking about my ban, bud

 

[bizzaro]

The last three managerial net spending posts.

He's completely made a mess of this, when all I said was we aren't really doing anything here than spending the Lukaku profits:

To put this into a bit of context.

Profit made on Lukaku = £47 million.

That means the club aren't actually making a significant net spend on Sigurdsson.

It is who is signed next that will put the club into net spend territory in conjunction to who was already signed.

The fact that we're essentially only spending the profit of Lukaku on Sigurdsson means its not that big an issue for me.

Provided we're not routinely spending big money on 25 year old + players with no resale value - when not clearly affordable by the club. Means its will not be an issue.


The club bought Keane and Pickford as big spending early on. Along with Sandro and Danny Klaassen. All under 25.

If the club buy one or two young players after Sigurdsson : acquiring another 28-30 year old will not be an issue

Everton can afford it.

 

[Goat]

He's completely made a mess of this, when all I said was we aren't really doing anything here than spending the Lukaku profits:

But your statement totally ignores the almost 100m in players we have already signed.

 

[davek]

I'm talking about my ban, bud

You were banned?!

 

[bizzaro]

But your statement totally ignores the almost 100m in players we have already signed.

No it doesn't. Read it more carefully.

 

[diggerdestroyer]

?
I wonder what Gylfi drives.

Done my back in getting into that last week when hammered. Sciatic nerve. Couldnt get outta of it. 3 physio sessions and a mri told me a f in stupid idea.

 

[peteblue]

I'm talking about my ban, bud

How long for....

 

[ijjysmith]

Done my back in getting into that last week when hammered. Sciatic nerve. Couldnt get outta of it. 3 physio sessions and a mri told me a f in stupid idea.

Hahaha. Is that true mate?

If it is I'll take the 'hahaha' back.

 

[Goat]

No it doesn't. Read it more carefully.

"Profit made on Lukaku = £47 million.

That means the club aren't actually making a significant net spend on Sigurdsson."

As I stated, our current "net spend" is currently at 0, which means anything we spend on Iceland, is infact nothing to do with the already spent Lukaku money.

 

[nsno-chris]

You were banned?!

I was, only 3 days. It was deserved

 

[toffeeblue9]

Starting to twitch with rage at the frequent mention of the term "net spend" here

 

[davek]

I was, only 3 days. It was deserved

I agree.

 

[bizzaro]

"Profit made on Lukaku = £47 million.

That means the club aren't actually making a significant net spend on Sigurdsson."

As I stated, our current "net spend" is currently at 0, which means anything we spend on Iceland, is infact nothing to do with the already spent Lukaku money.

@davek please tell Goat that Sigurdsson simply Everton spending the Lukaku proceeds.

The net spend is clearly on the younger players and the players yet to come in (replacement striker and a winger).

 

[RooneyPJ's]

For the net spending freaks....do u really think they haven't made significant moves to improve the team present and future this summer?