£40m Bid Made For Sigurdsson

[MikeH72]

Dear Deidre,

The football team I follow are thinking of buying a footballer from Iceland, but I have really have concerns over it and it is causing me sleepless nights amongst other issues.

First of all, he is 27 years old and will be 28 in September. This is causing me great distress, as what if they cannot get money back on him in 4 years time? I realise it is not my money, but that is something I just cannot seem to shake off and it is keeping me awake at nights.

I am a quivering mess with it all and it is leading me to make brash, unfounded and sometimes over aggressive remarks, especially when I am over tired and grumpy from blurting pap on my keyboard all day. it is also causing erectile dysfunction, but I know a bloke down the pub who can help with that.

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Your hopefully
ANON - AKA Roberto's army from Merseyside.

lol lol lol

 

[Boss_Blue]

ANNOUNCE SIGURDSSON

Mate come on you know better than that.

Harsh ban that Mick.

 

[a bell maul]

My arl fella's 78 and only recently stopped typing text messages like they were a telex (stop)

I just got him a macbook and it's completely foxed him

lol

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

@Thomasc : a supplement of the amino acid Argenine is de rigueur if the transfer window's causing erectile dysfunction...or anything else for that matter. It's vasodilatory facilitations are scientifically proven.

Thanks for clearing that up mate.

 

[a bell maul]

Thanks for clearing that up mate.

...I see what you did there... lol

 

[ijjysmith]

Maybe James McCarthy for 20m and Ross Barkley for 30m? The crazy, zany world of football transfers eh!

Exactly.

 

[Lanolin]

I should start by saying I'm not really concerned about sell on fee in the case of Sigurdsson because 27 is kind of peak age for a player of his type and we need some of those (I'm hugely concerned about the fee being talked about but that's another matter). All these people saying sell on fees don't matter though, are seemingly missing the point quite spectacularly.

It's clear now, I think, that we don't have a sugar daddy. Moshiri is doing OK in my book, there have been slight improvements in certain financial matters and it looks like his plan is just to improve us a bit rather than bankroll us to titles like we maybe thought - and were led to believe - initially. When that's the case, it is absolutely vital that your players have sell on value. It's not that you 'want to sell them' like many are saying, but in order to facilitate player trading and upgrading, you need to be able to generate funds by selling the players you no longer need. It's exactly what we've done with Cleverley, Deulofeu, Oviedo, Gibson etc over the past year. That's what has allowed us to bring in the players we have.

Sign a load of players with little to no resale value - Sigurdsson. Giroud, Vermaelen etc - and when you come to upgrade you find that you can't do it without an injection of cash from the owner or the sale of a player you don't really want to sell. We're not City or Chelsea, is our owner going to stump another £150m in 3 years if we want to upgrade/replace a couple of players to push on to the next level? I'm not so sure.

 

[a bell maul]

In hindsight, we let Cleverley go too cheaply at 8 mio. Right now he's a 15mio footballer.
Football inflation is insane...I blame Chelsea

 

[trueblue10]

And if he doesn't we are left with a massive irrecoverable £50M hole in finances with nothing to show for it.

But , what if we do? Just imagine, for once, that the team you support and care so much about, did win something this season, or we seriously challenged for a coveted CL spot?

The money we would generate through success on the pitch, surely balances out any lose we might/will make on Gylfi's transfer fee and wages.

Koeman is building a team that will hopefully challenge for honours in the next few years.

We have bought Pickford, Keane, Davy and Sandro relatively cheaply.

Any profit we make on them in the future, if we decide to sell, would surely offset any lose we make on Gylfi.

Look at the bigger picture.

 

[Thomasc]

I should start by saying I'm not really concerned about sell on fee in the case of Sigurdsson because 27 is kind of peak age for a player of his type and we need some of those (I'm hugely concerned about the fee being talked about but that's another matter). All these people saying sell on fees don't matter though, are seemingly missing the point quite spectacularly.

It's clear now, I think, that we don't have a sugar daddy. Moshiri is doing OK in my book, there have been slight improvements in certain financial matters and it looks like his plan is just to improve us a bit rather than bankroll us to titles like we maybe thought - and were led to believe - initially. When that's the case, it is absolutely vital that your players have sell on value. It's not that you 'want to sell them' like many are saying, but in order to facilitate player trading and upgrading, you need to be able to generate funds by selling the players you no longer need. It's exactly what we've done with Cleverley, Deulofeu, Oviedo, Gibson etc over the past year. That's what has allowed us to bring in the players we have.

Sign a load of players with little to no resale value - Sigurdsson. Giroud, Vermaelen etc - and when you come to upgrade you find that you can't do it without an injection of cash from the owner or the sale of a player you don't really want to sell. We're not City or Chelsea, is our owner going to stump another £150m in 3 years if we want to upgrade/replace a couple of players to push on to the next level? I'm not so sure.

But hold on Mr Lanolin.....if we want to bridge the gap between us and the teams above us, then surely buying one or two players at their peak now and not considering the fee or the sell on value is a necessity?

We seem to be good at producing and finding players who we can turn over a large profit on (Lukaku, Stones etc), but surely you need a mixture of both?

 

[BlueToff]

I should start by saying I'm not really concerned about sell on fee in the case of Sigurdsson because 27 is kind of peak age for a player of his type and we need some of those (I'm hugely concerned about the fee being talked about but that's another matter). All these people saying sell on fees don't matter though, are seemingly missing the point quite spectacularly.

It's clear now, I think, that we don't have a sugar daddy. Moshiri is doing OK in my book, there have been slight improvements in certain financial matters and it looks like his plan is just to improve us a bit rather than bankroll us to titles like we maybe thought - and were led to believe - initially. When that's the case, it is absolutely vital that your players have sell on value. It's not that you 'want to sell them' like many are saying, but in order to facilitate player trading and upgrading, you need to be able to generate funds by selling the players you no longer need. It's exactly what we've done with Cleverley, Deulofeu, Oviedo, Gibson etc over the past year. That's what has allowed us to bring in the players we have.

Sign a load of players with little to no resale value - Sigurdsson. Giroud, Vermaelen etc - and when you come to upgrade you find that you can't do it without an injection of cash from the owner or the sale of a player you don't really want to sell. We're not City or Chelsea, is our owner going to stump another £150m in 3 years if we want to upgrade/replace a couple of players to push on to the next level? I'm not so sure.

Is it clear though?

The only reason our 'net spend' is so low so far is because we've sold Lukaku for a £90m (then world record) fee...

We have spent a massive amount of money still. I think Koeman was simply pointing out that our dealings in terms of outgoings will enable us to do more.

Next season, we shouldn't be looking to sell 'any' major player. Or at least, no major players will be looking to leave (hopefully).

 

[keverton]

In hindsight, we let Cleverley go too cheaply at 8 mio. Right now he's a 15mio footballer.
Football inflation is insane...I blame Chelsea

Or maybe us as we hold the highest fee ever received by a English club for a player at £95 million. And we spent 30 million on a goalkeeper with no international caps. We are definitely to blame

 

[Lanolin]

But hold on Mr Lanolin.....if we want to bridge the gap between us and the teams above us, then surely buying one or two players at their peak now and not considering the fee or the sell on value is a necessity?

We seem to be good at producing and finding players who we can turn over a large profit on (Lukaku, Stones etc), but surely you need a mixture of both?

That's pretty much exactly what I said. I'm not concerned about the sell on value in this instance, as I said in my original post. The point was regarding people who say 'why would we care about sell on value' 'it's not like we want to sell him' etc.

 

[nevsonlymate]

I love this thread. So much angst. I was 14 when we won stuff in the 80's and apart from 95 and a few short European adventures nothing since.

The winning feeling is great, but lads, come on, we do not have a title winning side here. No Steven, sharp, Southall, Radcliffe in this side.

Take it easy

I was 14 when this thread started, married with 4 kids now.

 

[Sapie88]

Mate come on you know better than that.

Wrong.