| muric to sassuolo 12:22 - Jun 1 with 3067 views | positivity |
and presumably, soon to be sold on to a bigger club for a quick profit?
not sure we were "very, very well covered" on this one! |  |
| |  |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:24 - Jun 1 with 2258 views | bournemouthblue |
I imagine they are happy to be shot of him? |  |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:32 - Jun 1 with 2161 views | positivity |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:24 - Jun 1 by bournemouthblue |
I imagine they are happy to be shot of him? |
"they" meaning us or sassuolo?
if us, then yes, but wouldve been nice to get the full profit ourselves! maybe hindsight makes it look worse though, after he was booed by our own "fans", the negotiating position would've been heavily weakened... | |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:34 - Jun 1 with 2133 views | waveneyblue |
Oh, another little dig .... Very subtle.
We bought him,
He wasn't very good
He went on loan to a different country
He was decent there
We sold him (without making an enormous loss)
What am I missing ? |  | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:38 - Jun 1 with 2110 views | positivity |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:34 - Jun 1 by waveneyblue |
Oh, another little dig .... Very subtle.
We bought him,
He wasn't very good
He went on loan to a different country
He was decent there
We sold him (without making an enormous loss)
What am I missing ? |
what we're missing is the profit!
shame it didn't work out, clearly the highest ceiling of any of our keepers, but sometimes you're just not the right fit for the club i guess. | |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:43 - Jun 1 with 2069 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
Not sure if you meant that to come rover as negatively as it did, but :
- a player where his position here has been made untenable by his mistakes and the reaction by some fans
- presumably we got a decent loan fee for him last season £1M+
- wages reduced for 12 months
- value on the books down to what? £4M
- a provision made in the accounts to reduce this even further
From a financial perspective I'd say the club have done a pretty good job of reducing the risk and covering us. [Post edited 1 Jun 12:48]
| | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:45 - Jun 1 with 2048 views | positivity |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:43 - Jun 1 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Not sure if you meant that to come rover as negatively as it did, but :
- a player where his position here has been made untenable by his mistakes and the reaction by some fans
- presumably we got a decent loan fee for him last season £1M+
- wages reduced for 12 months
- value on the books down to what? £4M
- a provision made in the accounts to reduce this even further
From a financial perspective I'd say the club have done a pretty good job of reducing the risk and covering us. [Post edited 1 Jun 12:48]
|
yeah, like i said in the reply, it's a bit captain hindsight, but we could've maybe made a profit instead of a loss.
but it may be that a few fans wouldn't have ever accepted him, so our hands were tied? | |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:05 - Jun 1 with 1924 views | BABLUE |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:45 - Jun 1 by positivity |
yeah, like i said in the reply, it's a bit captain hindsight, but we could've maybe made a profit instead of a loss.
but it may be that a few fans wouldn't have ever accepted him, so our hands were tied? |
Sometimes a loan works in your favour sometimes it doesn’t.
We could probably flip Kipre when the window opens and make a profit.
They wouldn’t have taken him if the option was to pay £10m though, so I guess we got as good a deal as we could at the time. |  | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:12 - Jun 1 with 1857 views | Trequartista |
What happened to the €10 million (£8.7 million) option they had on him. Have they negotiated that down? [Post edited 1 Jun 13:13]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| muric to sassuolo on 13:18 - Jun 1 with 1774 views | burnbudgiesburn |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:12 - Jun 1 by Trequartista |
What happened to the €10 million (£8.7 million) option they had on him. Have they negotiated that down? [Post edited 1 Jun 13:13]
|
There was never any official confirmation of those fees - there never is.
For example, Town usually use the EADT to push a price we want to be known whereas the other club pushes a price that puts them in a better light.
That £8.7m maybe included a loan fee for the season just gone as well. | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:19 - Jun 1 with 1769 views | HighgateBlue |
The positives are to get a fee of substance in, and achieve certainty very early in the window.
The negative is that this is a player whose stock is surely higher after his successful Serie A season than it was when we signed him, and yet we've made a clear loss.
I guess if Kieran has taken a very firm decision that there's no way he's going to play here, and there aren't any actual bidders this early in the window other than Sassuolo, then our hand is forced and we have no negotiating position. Better to take the bird in the hand now, rather than hope we get two later, whilst potentially missing out on replacements.
A misstep, and a case of what might've been. But we move on. |  | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:22 - Jun 1 with 1740 views | football |
Think this is a good deal for the club. Many fans dont want him back and we would have had a decent loan fee last season so its a win really | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:25 - Jun 1 with 1707 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:18 - Jun 1 by burnbudgiesburn |
There was never any official confirmation of those fees - there never is.
For example, Town usually use the EADT to push a price we want to be known whereas the other club pushes a price that puts them in a better light.
That £8.7m maybe included a loan fee for the season just gone as well. |
Possible too that there are additional clauses and triggers that may take it beyond the £8.7m |  |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:25 - Jun 1 with 1708 views | Zx1988 |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:19 - Jun 1 by HighgateBlue |
The positives are to get a fee of substance in, and achieve certainty very early in the window.
The negative is that this is a player whose stock is surely higher after his successful Serie A season than it was when we signed him, and yet we've made a clear loss.
I guess if Kieran has taken a very firm decision that there's no way he's going to play here, and there aren't any actual bidders this early in the window other than Sassuolo, then our hand is forced and we have no negotiating position. Better to take the bird in the hand now, rather than hope we get two later, whilst potentially missing out on replacements.
A misstep, and a case of what might've been. But we move on. |
I suppose all will become known based upon how quickly he ends up moving on from Sassuolo. | |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:32 - Jun 1 with 1625 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:19 - Jun 1 by HighgateBlue |
The positives are to get a fee of substance in, and achieve certainty very early in the window.
The negative is that this is a player whose stock is surely higher after his successful Serie A season than it was when we signed him, and yet we've made a clear loss.
I guess if Kieran has taken a very firm decision that there's no way he's going to play here, and there aren't any actual bidders this early in the window other than Sassuolo, then our hand is forced and we have no negotiating position. Better to take the bird in the hand now, rather than hope we get two later, whilst potentially missing out on replacements.
A misstep, and a case of what might've been. But we move on. |
We likely had no alternative if Sassuolo triggered their option. With loans with an option to buy, it's normally impossible for the owning club to refuse if the option is taken up. The transfer fee and player's personal terms are agreed as part of the loan, and the transfer completed of the option is triggered.
We would only have got him back to be able to open up bids if Sassuolo had failed to trigger the option. | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:36 - Jun 1 with 1577 views | Illinoisblue |
Wonder if the data gurus at goalkeeper.com will be recommending us another 15million keeper. |  |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:46 - Jun 1 with 1506 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:36 - Jun 1 by Illinoisblue |
Wonder if the data gurus at goalkeeper.com will be recommending us another 15million keeper. |
Well hopefully that makes any recommendation twice as good as Muric.
Muric was reported at £8M possibly rising to over £10M with addons (which may never have been triggered at a guess) | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:50 - Jun 1 with 1460 views | Illinoisblue |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:46 - Jun 1 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Well hopefully that makes any recommendation twice as good as Muric.
Muric was reported at £8M possibly rising to over £10M with addons (which may never have been triggered at a guess) |
BBC reported it as 10m rising to 15m with add-ons which, as you say, were presumably not met in full. | |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:54 - Jun 1 with 1436 views | DJR |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:36 - Jun 1 by Illinoisblue |
Wonder if the data gurus at goalkeeper.com will be recommending us another 15million keeper. |
Their website has this.
"Case Study
In Practice
How our data informed one club's most consequential goalkeeping decision"
Unsurprisingly, the case study doesn't involve Ipswich and Muric.  |  | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 13:59 - Jun 1 with 1375 views | Billywitch |
Brought for £8m
We likely got a loan fee last season
Sold for £7m
I make that about quid's in?
Could have been better, but could have been a whole lot worse. We move on | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:32 - Jun 1 with 1241 views | naa |
| muric to sassuolo on 12:34 - Jun 1 by waveneyblue |
Oh, another little dig .... Very subtle.
We bought him,
He wasn't very good
He went on loan to a different country
He was decent there
We sold him (without making an enormous loss)
What am I missing ? |
The only thing I'd say to "he wasn't very good" is he was very good but made too many mistakes. We conceded loads more from set pieces after he left, his shot stopping percentage was better than Walton or Palmer. His command of the area was also much more convincing than Walton or Palmer (both of whom are perfectly decent keepers).
Remove the mistakes and he's a top keeper.
I appreciate that you can't just ignore the mistakes as several were at crucial moments. It's just a shame we couldn't find a way to give him a break and let him play his way back. But we are where we are. | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:34 - Jun 1 with 1216 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
First financial loss from 2024 summer window. Unfortunately, some more to come there.
I thought I read the option was more than that mind. |  |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:45 - Jun 1 with 1175 views | Zx1988 |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:34 - Jun 1 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
First financial loss from 2024 summer window. Unfortunately, some more to come there.
I thought I read the option was more than that mind. |
You're not wrong.
Initially reported by multiple sources as €10m when the loan first went through last year.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/sport/2 | |
| |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:47 - Jun 1 with 1161 views | naa |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:45 - Jun 1 by Zx1988 |
You're not wrong.
Initially reported by multiple sources as €10m when the loan first went through last year.
https://www.eadt.co.uk/sport/2 |
That might include the loan fee though, which would put things around the 10m Euro mark | | | |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:49 - Jun 1 with 1156 views | Zx1988 |
| muric to sassuolo on 14:47 - Jun 1 by naa |
That might include the loan fee though, which would put things around the 10m Euro mark |
I'd be surprised if that was the case.
The various sources all state that the option to buy was set at €10m, which I would assume would be exclusive of any loan fee. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
