| Anyone want some delap def info ? 10:34 - Nov 26 with 16848 views | The_Romford_Blue |
The buyback situation is far better for us than we all thought.
It’s only that city have the first option to match any bids we receive. There’s no specific fee set for them to have him back on the cheap. It’s just that they can match whatever someone like Chelsea offer. They have a few days to react to the bid that we must disclose to them.
Found out on Sunday. Good news. |  |
| |  |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 20:39 - Nov 26 with 1528 views | Vegtablue |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 19:30 - Nov 26 by ReusersTown |
Why does there have to be multiple? (my point is addressing you and others who do this). What has a link got to do with anything? By parroting this crap (which you yourself actually say "don't know who they are") you make the forum a worse place, or does it not count unless there's a link!? |
So 'it's time I stop regurgitating' behaviour that I've committed once? That was poorly articulated, particularly your verb choice. It was clear from my post that I provided no credibility to the alternative 'revelations', hence my description of lightweight articles and my decision not to name or post these. I made my post not to further any site's cause or promulgate clickbait sh!te, but to make posters aware of the amount of contradictory noise on this; some may prefer to mute it all and just wait and see.
I mentioned TBR Football as the provenance of the other pieces because they claim to have an inside source, like Romford does, but I made clear that I do not endorse or know them. I mentioned their name in the event other users do, whether they're entirely unreliable or partly. I know the BBC website often references them in their gossip pieces, which increasingly seems to mean less and less.
You've offered nothing on this thread from what I can tell, other than blind conviction that Ashton wouldn't have agreed to a clause that you falsely believe only exists abroad; it is uncommon in English football but it exists (referencing a previous thread on this subject). Romford has offered well-meaning assurance via his source, whom I hope is correct, but I don't obviously know how reliable this source's information is. We seem to agree on that. All I know is that it's been faithfully relayed by Romford. |  | | |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:16 - Nov 26 with 1379 views | ReusersTown |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 20:39 - Nov 26 by Vegtablue |
So 'it's time I stop regurgitating' behaviour that I've committed once? That was poorly articulated, particularly your verb choice. It was clear from my post that I provided no credibility to the alternative 'revelations', hence my description of lightweight articles and my decision not to name or post these. I made my post not to further any site's cause or promulgate clickbait sh!te, but to make posters aware of the amount of contradictory noise on this; some may prefer to mute it all and just wait and see.
I mentioned TBR Football as the provenance of the other pieces because they claim to have an inside source, like Romford does, but I made clear that I do not endorse or know them. I mentioned their name in the event other users do, whether they're entirely unreliable or partly. I know the BBC website often references them in their gossip pieces, which increasingly seems to mean less and less.
You've offered nothing on this thread from what I can tell, other than blind conviction that Ashton wouldn't have agreed to a clause that you falsely believe only exists abroad; it is uncommon in English football but it exists (referencing a previous thread on this subject). Romford has offered well-meaning assurance via his source, whom I hope is correct, but I don't obviously know how reliable this source's information is. We seem to agree on that. All I know is that it's been faithfully relayed by Romford. |
So do you really believe that we would have negotiated a deal where depending on the add-on on clauses, we may make a grand profit of £3 million pounds? on one of the hottest English striker prospects. Have a think about that, and maybe consider it before putting such rubbish out there.
If you don't believe the credibility of the sources then why continue to share their ideas which are clearly rubbish, I couldn't give a damn whether you're directing people to that site, it's the absolute crap content you're still sharing and contributing to a heavy flow of.
Maybe consider that the reason I may not have offered anything tangible to the thread, is that there is nothing the majority of people from outside the clubs can offer at the moment, other than mostly spewing nonsense it seems. My positions are ones of common sense. | | | |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 23:10 - Nov 26 with 1283 views | Vic |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 14:36 - Nov 26 by The_Romford_Blue |
Martial.
Albeit it got nowhere at al.
Edit - and yes know it sounds mental but all I know is we enquired. They didn’t really even entertain it (the agent mainly). I didn’t want to name him at the time as it almost sounds too ridiculous to be true and I didn’t want to become a meme on twitter [Post edited 26 Nov 2024 14:39]
|
Martial? Really? I was honestly expecting a bigger name than him! |  |
| |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 23:11 - Nov 26 with 1283 views | Vegtablue |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:16 - Nov 26 by ReusersTown |
So do you really believe that we would have negotiated a deal where depending on the add-on on clauses, we may make a grand profit of £3 million pounds? on one of the hottest English striker prospects. Have a think about that, and maybe consider it before putting such rubbish out there.
If you don't believe the credibility of the sources then why continue to share their ideas which are clearly rubbish, I couldn't give a damn whether you're directing people to that site, it's the absolute crap content you're still sharing and contributing to a heavy flow of.
Maybe consider that the reason I may not have offered anything tangible to the thread, is that there is nothing the majority of people from outside the clubs can offer at the moment, other than mostly spewing nonsense it seems. My positions are ones of common sense. |
You talk about 'continuing', it was a single action, and my single action wasn't designed to achieve what you claim it did. That's your take and a quick scan of your posts shows pops at other posters, attempts to police what should and shouldn't be added to the forum, it's not a great look in my opinion. I agree on the final paragraph. My original post was reinforcing that reality; there's a lot of swirling talk around and what more can be contributed other than guesswork? My posts since have been in defence of your attack, not further promoting anything.
On the buy-back clause itself, you wrongly claimed or implied in a previous discussion on this subject that they're only used by foreign clubs. That's factually wrong. I don't know how you've come to £3m profit - did you try to deduct 20% from the purported figure and then go a bit awry with your calculations? A buy-back clause would be a fixed amount separate to the 20% sell-on clause. Romford reveals it's a matching clause, great news if true. I appreciate 'buy-back' and 'matching' are often loosely used terms, synonymous; it may well be that the original confusion was due to ambiguity and looseness in language, and chancers have since rolled with it to create annoying speculation and misinformation.
Is a buy-back clause of £30m at all believable? It would amount to a profit of £10m-£15m on the player. There's a scenario in which it is: City valued the player highly and were reluctant to let him go permanently, but due to PSR constraints they were open to accepting a move that extended beyond the traditional loan. It was reported at the time that Southampton had also agreed terms, then the player decided in our favour.
Why would we agree to terms which potentially limited our profit ceiling so severely? We could have done this if we thought the player had the talent to seriously contribute to keeping us in the league, which is worth so much more than an extra £20m in transfer profit. We could have decided he was too good to not compete with Southampton for his signature. We could have understood that these were the terms under which City were prepared to do business, because City knew very well what we've quickly learned ourselves - that the boy is bloody good. Why are fans not keen on him leaving in January for £50m, £60m or even £100m? Because talent like that is very hard to acquire, and sometimes clubs are prepared to secure such talent even when the conditions aren't great for future profit. We could have adjudged that there was no better alternative in the market, even with onerous future-profit terms imposed on us.
Another scenario: City didn't think he'd make the cut and were happy to bank £15m-£20m plus the 20% sell-on clause. We and Southampton negotiated adeptly from positions of relative strength, with Delap not in City's future sights, and no such clause exists. Or City were torn but a buy-back clause was a red line for us both, and no better offers arrived, or it simply didn't come up as it's less common in English transfers. Maybe a matching clause was an agreeable alternative for all parties.
The only questionable conclusion is to pretend to know these answers with 'almost certainty' when you weren't privy to the negotiations at all. Your common sense is arguably another man's incomplete thought process. Romford's now heard definitively to his mind and he knows his source, so I respect that, and I choose to place faith in it.
*I've edited this post because I was rude in the original one. [Post edited 26 Nov 2024 23:26]
| | | |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:19 - Apr 9 with 733 views | the_toff |
Worse than we thought | | | |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:30 - Apr 9 with 651 views | berkstractorboy |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:19 - Apr 9 by the_toff |
Worse than we thought |
Based on what, you blindly just believing something the Guardian have written about?
If the details are true then someone is in breach of contract as I am sure anyone who has access to see probably has non-disclosure agreements they signed upto | | | |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:50 - Apr 9 with 553 views | the_toff |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:30 - Apr 9 by berkstractorboy |
Based on what, you blindly just believing something the Guardian have written about?
If the details are true then someone is in breach of contract as I am sure anyone who has access to see probably has non-disclosure agreements they signed upto |
Agents release things like this to trusted sources all the time when they stand to benefit. If you think it’s a coincidence that it’s come out as our relegation is all but confirmed and the guardian would report it without substance you’re kidding yourself. | | | |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:55 - Apr 9 with 513 views | NeedhamChris |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:19 - Apr 9 by the_toff |
Worse than we thought |
In fairness Rommers never said anything about a relegation release clause. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:58 - Apr 9 with 496 views | berkstractorboy |
| Anyone want some delap def info ? on 22:50 - Apr 9 by the_toff |
Agents release things like this to trusted sources all the time when they stand to benefit. If you think it’s a coincidence that it’s come out as our relegation is all but confirmed and the guardian would report it without substance you’re kidding yourself. |
We shall see won't we. If the contract was so loose the agent can just share info then there is nothing to stop MA just being honest if everything reported is true as no bidding war is possible they just have to offer the £30M and can then talk to Delap.
If there is nothing more to be gained now in Delaps's value we should just develop Hirst for next season and bench Delap, but we still want to get as many points as we can and finish 18th. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
