John Stones transfer saga

[Lids1978]

Need to show you something is that ok?

Can you play this tune in my honour in falaraki mate? Also play it for john stones sure

 

[Lids1978]

Can you play this tune in my honour in falaraki mate? Also play it for john stones sure

@marnie

 

[bizzaro]

As with all of these stories, it comes with a massive get out clause for the journo - '... if Everton change their stance...'.

That's written from the City perspective not Chelsea's.

Darren Lewis was on Twitter earlier, getting laughed at by EFC fans, so he's being all bullish now, claiming there will be a 3rd Chelsea bid.

And where they get this idea that £34m is the magic number we'd accept when we've said he's not for sale and have no intention of selling is once again baffling.

Some journalists lie and make things up

 

[Lids1978]

if we sell stones for anything less than 40m, im gonna set up 20 tents outside the park end and fill aload of gypsies with a months supply of food and booze and tell them to cause complete havoc

Ha ha lol

 

[bizzaro]

if we sell stones for anything less than 50m, im gonna set up 20 tents outside Bill Kenwrights house and fill aload of gypsies with a months supply of food and booze and tell them to cause complete havoc

corrected

 

[ijjysmith]

Some journalists lie and make things up

He loves a go at the press mate. Even though it's the same every season.

 

[davek]

As we both know Dave that was because of the club running up against its overdraft/credit limit year in year out due to a lack of income relative to expenditure and a lack of capital for headroom or player acquisition.

Now the Board at least has choices, (i) invest in additional playing staff, or (ii) reduce the accumulated shareholder deficit by paying down existing debt.

Both choices arise only out of the increase in broadcasting revenues not the acumen of the Board.

Whatever way we wish to cut this it doesn't make it any less the case that net spend has been consistently low or even negative in transfer windows since they took up the reins. To point to overdraft is merely to highlight their inadequacy, it's not an explanation or mitigating factor that can be offered for them.

Lack of income is down to them. They're cluelessness on the commercial side. Lack of spending power is also a product of their determination never to sink any of their own cash into the club, as directors and major shareholders of other clubs have. They had a £30M securitisation deal which had to go to cover bank debt and the general running costs of the club rather than on player or stadium investment. It's been a millstone round the club's neck.

That's the root cause of our 'choices': whereby it has to be mulled over whether to use greater revenue now at our disposal to add to the squad and keep existing quality players, or to pay off historical debt they ran up. In fact, there is no real choice. Not whilst we have homegrown players coming through or who cost relatively nothing and can be sold on at a massive profit. There's no need to make that choice on where extra revenue goes...as we both know.

 

[Blue Truth]

4 years left on his contract so I'm not worried at all even if he asks for a move which I don't think he will.

 

[sd_1992]

Amazing how the media don't want to write about this....

 

[Titus Bramble]

I still can't see him leaving this summer. All of this paper talk is tosh. Even if Everton come out to the press and say "We will not be selling John Stones, so koff" there will still be newspaper headlines along the lines of "Mourinho still keen on Stones/ City want him now/ Stones wants to move".

Chelsea are making naff bids, we're knocking them back telling them we don't want to sell him. I can't see that changing this summer.

 

[TheFinnFan]

Amazing how the media don't want to write about this....

This is perfect example about how media works and how clubs use media...AND how powerful media houses have become...
it's almost like they have their own intrests innit DO THEY?

 

[KevMirallas]

Amazing how the media don't want to write about this....

Probably why we don't bother with public statements. Everyone just ignores them anyway.

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

You doubting the boss man, man?

As if!

 

[Shibbywiggles]

Probably why we don't bother with public statements. Everyone just ignores them anyway.

I think also that public statements are the only time we've looked truly silly in the transfer market. Overall no one can deny that we tend to get more than enough when we do sell a player and we usually reinvest the money wisely (obviously barring a few flops like Kone, Bilyaletdinov).

The only time we've looked really stupid IMO is when Bill said he wouldn't sell Rooney for 50 mil and then we ended up selling him for a rumoured 30+ add ons. If he'd have kept his mouth shut then what was a huge fee in those days for an unproven but potentially world class player would've seemed more palatable.

 

[Boxcar Ira]

There you go lads...more rubbish for you all to "discuss"

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/manchester-city-john-stones-chelsea-6161434

Manchester City ready to join John Stones chase as Chelsea prepare THIRD bid for Everton defender

Chelsea will return with a fresh bid for John Stones after Everton rejected their second offer of £26million.

But Manchester City are ready to join the chase to land the England defender if Chelsea look like they are close to signing him.

The champions, who had a £20m move turned down two weeks ago, returned with a fresh offer on Tuesday. Everton dismissed it and continue to publicly insist that 21-year-old Stones is not for sale.

As revealed by Mirror Sport earlier this month, the Toffees are holding out for around £34m - a British record fee for a defender.

The Etihad club have held a long standing interest in Stones, but would like to see him play a full season as a first choice for Everton in the Premier League before launching an all out bid to sign him.

City’s top brass though, have become increasingly nervous about the interest from Stamford Bridge in the Everton centre half, and now they are on stand-by to enter the fray if it seems the player will be sold this summer.

If it seems possible that the Merseyside club – who have stated bluntly they have no financial pressure to sell and no intention of doing so – will change their stance and listen to offers, then City will match anything Chelsea offer, and hope to persuade Stones to make the short journey down the East Lancs road to join them.

City are desperate to add young English players to their roster, but their scouts feel even though Stones is clearly a top player in the making, he would benefit from more time at Goodison learning the difficult arts of the centre half.

It seems possible the fee should Everton ever agree to sell would go beyond £30m, and that figure won’t be substantially different next summer, even should Stones become an England regular.

So there is no risk in that respect in City waiting for another season to make an approach for a player who could be a long term replacement for Vincent Kompany, but the gamble comes with Chelsea’s interest.

And we understand City have been asked to be kept informed of any developments relating to Stones’ situation by the Everton board, allowing them to rival any Chelsea bid should it be seriously considered.

Across the park at Anfield meanwhile, Liverpool maintain an interest in French international defender Lucas Digne, but will only make a move for the defender if he is valued below £7m.

Digne has been in talks with his club Paris St Germain over his future, and if he doesn’t get guarantees over game time, then he will ask to leave.

Liverpool rate the left back – who can also play in midfield – but they will not be lured into a bid if the asking price is too high.

Well I for one believe this - I mean, look at all the direct quotes from their sources .............