John Stones transfer saga

[Khalekan]

For me, Talksport and the entire media is very nearly in the same bracket as The Sun.

Pay no attention to them. Not one bit.

talkSPORT is little more than The Sun on the airwaves.

That Kelvin MacKenzie bloke used to own it.

 

[Moomin]

Who did we sell that summer?

It was the previous summer outgoings and the increased TV money which funded that transfer. I'd say that transfer is the reason we have spent so little so far this summer.

People will say, we have only spent 4.5 million this summer. But, add in Lakaku payment and it's 11.5 million. Increase in wages will be 6 million at a guess. Bonuses and signing on fees for new contracts will take up a bit of the current TV deal. Reduced prize money by finishing 11th is a hit in the region of nine million.

That's it people, the new TV deal money is spent like that, all gone.

 

[hibbo'sclass]

sidenote on this loan - the rumour is the people in charge of the investment group who fund jg financial are the same people in charge of the investment group who fund vibrac. both have the same address as bcr sports in the virgin islands.
the question I want answered is Green or earl in these investment groups ?

Side note on the side note...
Vibrac and another BVI company called Mousehole have the same investor, and Mousehole is appatently an associated company of Mousehole which used to provide finance to European rather than English clubs. Source for this is an old Guardian article from memory,
Mousehole, Vibrac and BCR Sports have the same registered agent in the BVI and therefore the dame address.
If Robert Earl were the man behind Vibrac to any great extent, Everton would have to disclose this by way of a note to the accounts under the heading "Related party transactions"
The excitement of accountancy or what?

 

[sageyefc]

Ped going to town on Talksport, fantastic.

CBA listening, is he giving them a good dressing down?

 

[Hibbertinho]

It's not the airhead pundits that irk me so much - they can only validate their continued 'celebration' in life after playing football by promoting themselves as pseudo-intellectuals... they need their ramblings to stay relevant and will conveniently forgot whatever stance they took up once the window has closed.

I actually prefer it that Danny Murphy chat's guff and no-one alerts him to how crap his shirts are... let the kopites stew in their own self-created, warped realities.

It's more Sky's agenda that bothers me - they appoint some of the aforementioned airheads, and it's as though they feel they have a stake in the Premier League - cos they were there at its birth, and ensured its safe delivery. But rather than rock the boat by promoting the league to, yes, open up to be more competitive, it is in their interests to keep things as they are - to pander to the biggest swathe of their viewership, the bandwagon blurts of the so-called 'big four' (or whoever we are including these days). It is their collective dummies which must be dusted off and picked up.

Our previous 80's dominance was before their involvement and hence they have no interest in that narrative whatsoever... over the course of their tenure we have merely been cast (more or less accurately) as the paupers, the fodder, and in more recent times - more respectable but still unable to match the titans. They only deal in these embarrassing caricatures... and we just 'tore up the script' - to allude to one of their BS, Hollywood-style commentary soundbites.

I will enjoy watching the ensuing malfunctioning of Ex-RS/Chelski pundits in the coming days.

 

[Moomin]

It's a common practice among football clubs to take out these sort of short term loans. Hasn't all this been discussed on here years ago?

Anyway, what's all this got to do with the tinfoil hat brigade saying:

a) The board pressured Stones into handing in a transfer request.
b) We won't sign anybody significant if we don't sell Stones
c) When we sell Stones, somebody will rob half of the money

The echo would have you believe it's common practice but only a few clubs use these type of loans in the premier league. If we were to sell Stones, the money would not be robbed. But, with us being badly managed it would get eaten up in our costs.

 

[FTY]

In terms of who and why
Say Chelsea leaks it: they can turn the players head by letting him know their is interest and hopefully get him to submit a TR, but a TR is easily rejected and it also opens the door to MUFC placing bids because they need a CB even worse, have equal or more funding and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Stones support them as a kid? So I see the benefits being matched or even outweighed by the negatives, and especially so if you consider the potential ill will it old create between clubs who had been developing a pretty good relationship regarding transfers and loans. Not saying not possible but if someone at CFC did do so, they certainly acted foolishly and didn't fully consider the consequences. Perhaps my view is shaded by a Chelsea blue lens.

Say EFC leaks it: Create a bidding war, help brace fans for a potential departure OR show fans that the club is standing firm in terms of holding him despite the huge interest. Create goodwill with the fans from a board that really seems to need it or limit backlash from fans while increasing your chances of getting money. Though if Everton leaked the bid, it would of made more sense for them to approach Barnsley before the leak regarding buying out the sell on clause. Kind of weakens their hand when Barnsley knows the huge sums being offered

Stones and his agent: try and force a move or get a bigger salary and staying. Yet they would only know if Everton had a clause requiring them to inform Stones of any transfer offers from certain clubs or if CFC let them know directly.

My personal opinion is that I don't know but have a feeling that some mid to low level employee at one of the clubs probably sold the information to a person, and that this was not sanctioned. It just seems odd, given the business between clubs last season, that one or the other would intentionally sabotage that relationship. In fact I would be mighty curious to know if any employees of either club have been dismissed who may of been privy to such information. That said, please don't mind my tin foil hat.




I guess the difference is that CFC can offer tangible more to Stones than EFC can compared to the difference of what Madrid or Barca could offer Costa or Hazard.

That aside, let me tell you that I am 99% sure and resigned to the fact that Hazard will likely be in a Real Madrid shirt when Ronaldo retires, if not sooner.

That doesn't mean you should or have to sell Stones now though. You've got him on a contract, you've put in the time and taken the risk of developing him further, and there is no reason to sell someone integral to your plans until it becomes an offer you can't refuse. You probably wouldn't of been able to hold out without the new league tv deals but good for that and a reason why the BPL > LA Liga for me. Chelsea, pre-Roman, have been in this situation before and not been able to show the resilience EFC has in this saga. It sucked, and as I've always liked Everton as a kind of second BPL club, I'm somewhat glad to see times and tables have changed ( I also hated FFP despite knowing how good it would be for CFC now we are situated as a competitively elite club. It's not fair and runs counter to sportsmanship in my mind. Either no restrictions or an equal wage cap for all clubs. Why shouldn't another club get to experience what us and city have?)

And yes I would praise Mourinho/board just as you should praise Martinez/board if Stones is a Toffee come October or gets a massive fee and actually reinvests it prudently.

Someone asked something about Roman possible leaving and to that I would say he is too invested emotionally and financially. He goes to every home game, he isn't even close to bored. Yet if he did so, he would be selling CFC to someone else who obviously is mega loaded and obviously willing to spend cash. It might make us less influential in transfers but it's long past a situation of us becoming a Leeds or a Portsmouth in my opinion. City I don't know because their owner clearly isn't as passionate in terms of attending and their owner could just walk away not caring such is his wealth compared to Roman.... but I doubt it for them too.

Also apologize in advance for poor grammar, spelling and the like. The auto spell on this device is dreadful and frequently changes correctly spelt word to complete nonsense...and I'm not good at it....

Good preview.

11-0 Everton

COYB

 

[thirdmantackle]

It's going to be a long weekend, isn't it?

 

[marmor]

That lad on talk sport was class.think he made those 2 numpties see this situation more for what it is and what it means to this football club.

Well in Pete.

 

[4737carlin]

We had sold felli year before chebes aswell then jelevic, also Got a sell on from forshaw.

Yeah but that summer we also spent 20odd million on Wigan players, Also McCarthy, the most expensive one was also done on the same hour.

 

[DanEFC92]

Ped did alright there.

 

[4737carlin]

That lad on talk sport was class.think he made those 2 numpties see this situation more for what it is and what it means to this football club.

Well in Pete.

Yeah he was great, who was he? Was on for about 10 minutes, spoke really well, one of the best calls i have heard so far on the subject.

 

[kithnou]

Great if someone explained what this Pete said....

 

[Prevenger17]

No worries, Prev.

It would be a boring world if even two fine fellows like your good self and me were always singing off the same hymn sheet

Aye, you're a good man and no doubt! I would fight any man who says otherwise.

 

[Gil]

Atletico Madrid developed Courtois.

If only he'd developed Kev De Bruyne as Wolfsberg did....

Salah, McEchran, Manciene, Johnson, Joe Cole, Scott Parker, Del Horno, Obi Mikel, Daniel Sturridge

De Bruyne left because he's supposedly an awful trainer, wanted a guaranteed starting spot. Hell, he's even admitted as much in several interviews. Better to let him go in that instance rather than forcing him to stay. Oscar, Schurrle & Hazard who played in the same positions all got significant gametime under him in the same time period so logically you'd have to say it had nothing to do with his age or inexperience.
McEachran & Mancienne were both babies when Mourinho left & made their debuts long after he'd gone.
Joe Cole & Mikel?? Joe Cole was borderline World Class at one point under Jose, injuries just derailed his career. Mikel has had an excellent career, just never reached the potential he was originally projected too. Multiple managers have tried & failed with him.

Again, the original poster insinuated Mourinho never played young players, at all. Obviously, Mourinho isn't some prolific talent developer & that's fine. He's brought in to win trophies, not groom young players, he's already long proved that side of his game at Porto anyway.

It was pretty stupid getting into a Mourinho debate on a forum where's he's swiftly moved to public enemy number one in a matter of weeks so lets leave it at that & stay on topic.