| delap: why would city not be interested? 17:06 - Apr 9 with 3918 views | positivity |
buy him for a discount, then sell him for maybe 40m, receive >£10m
or
let him be sold for 30m to a rival, receive 2m (20% of 10m profit)
have i missed something obvious? |  |
| |  |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:09 - Apr 9 with 2976 views | J2BLUE |
I think they would be interested in actually signing him. FFP issues and the ideal back up CF for Haaland. |  |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:11 - Apr 9 with 2952 views | positivity |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:09 - Apr 9 by J2BLUE |
I think they would be interested in actually signing him. FFP issues and the ideal back up CF for Haaland. |
yes, it seems a no-brainer, but pretty much ruled out in the guardian article, figured i must be missing something! | |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:57 - Apr 9 with 2831 views | Exiled2Surrey |
are they allowed to under the rules - could he play for the third club? | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:58 - Apr 9 with 2828 views | positivity |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:57 - Apr 9 by Exiled2Surrey |
are they allowed to under the rules - could he play for the third club? |
that clause is only for one season... | |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:03 - Apr 9 with 2812 views | PhilTWTD |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 17:09 - Apr 9 by J2BLUE |
I think they would be interested in actually signing him. FFP issues and the ideal back up CF for Haaland. |
I was told some time ago they're not interested since signing Marmoush. |  | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:06 - Apr 9 with 2778 views | positivity |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:03 - Apr 9 by PhilTWTD |
I was told some time ago they're not interested since signing Marmoush. |
i can see that, but surely they'd be wise to sell him on again similarly to the cameron archer deal? | |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:10 - Apr 9 with 2750 views | WestStanderLaLaLa |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:06 - Apr 9 by positivity |
i can see that, but surely they'd be wise to sell him on again similarly to the cameron archer deal? |
If the reported figures are true, it’s an absolute no brainer, City will buy and turn a profit |  |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:10 - Apr 9 with 2759 views | PhilTWTD |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:06 - Apr 9 by positivity |
i can see that, but surely they'd be wise to sell him on again similarly to the cameron archer deal? |
Perhaps, but I don't think he'd be interested, would he? They may well be realistic that he'd come in as third choice and not really push on. It'll be United or Chelsea, I think. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:12 - Apr 9 with 2749 views | ITFCBlues |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:03 - Apr 9 by PhilTWTD |
I was told some time ago they're not interested since signing Marmoush. |
Surely you'd be buying him for essentially 24m and selling him for 40m plus?
Makes no sense that they wouldn't be interested |  |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:14 - Apr 9 with 2738 views | positivity |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:10 - Apr 9 by PhilTWTD |
Perhaps, but I don't think he'd be interested, would he? They may well be realistic that he'd come in as third choice and not really push on. It'll be United or Chelsea, I think. |
yes, depends on the terms of the buyback clause i guess.
looks like man city have done very poorly on this deal, a loan would have given them so much more money! delap's agent has played a blinder, if so! [Post edited 9 Apr 18:15]
| |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:16 - Apr 9 with 2720 views | PhilTWTD |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:12 - Apr 9 by ITFCBlues |
Surely you'd be buying him for essentially 24m and selling him for 40m plus?
Makes no sense that they wouldn't be interested |
Can only say what I've heard, and evidently others have heard similar. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 20:05 - Apr 9 with 2548 views | Zx1988 |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:10 - Apr 9 by PhilTWTD |
Perhaps, but I don't think he'd be interested, would he? They may well be realistic that he'd come in as third choice and not really push on. It'll be United or Chelsea, I think. |
Can't see Delap being interested.
I'm sure he'd much rather have free pick of whoever wants to pay £30m for him, rather than being constrained to talking with whoever will offer City the highest fee. | |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:21 - Apr 9 with 2462 views | Guthrum |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 18:06 - Apr 9 by positivity |
i can see that, but surely they'd be wise to sell him on again similarly to the cameron archer deal? |
I didn't think clubs were allowed to buy a player and then sell him on within the same window.
Not sure how the Archer deal got around that. Possibly it's just within the Prem and SheffU had been relegated, so weren't (as would be the situation with us). |  |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:45 - Apr 9 with 2408 views | DJR |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 20:05 - Apr 9 by Zx1988 |
Can't see Delap being interested.
I'm sure he'd much rather have free pick of whoever wants to pay £30m for him, rather than being constrained to talking with whoever will offer City the highest fee. |
If the contract is properly drafted, I would assume the buy-back clause trumps the release clause, and I would assume the value in the buy-back clause is no higher than that in the release clause. Therefore, I assume Delap would have no option if Man City want to buy him back in order to sell him on.
Not sure there is a rule preventing buying and selling in the same transfer window but even if there is Man City could do what Aston Villa did with Philogene, and perhaps in the meantime loan him out.
As regards Philogene, this (from Wikipedia) is what happened.
"On 19 July 2024, Philogene rejoined Aston Villa on a five-year contract.[23] Hull City had agreed an £18 million transfer fee with Ipswich Town earlier in the summer which prompted Aston Villa to enact a clause in the original transfer agreement with Hull City that allowed them to match the fee. However, because of a 30% sell-on clause that was also in place, the fee that Aston Villa paid Hull City was closer to £13 million.]
On 15 January 2025, Philogene signed for fellow Premier League club Ipswich Town for an undisclosed fee, reported to be £20 million, plus add-ons."
Interestingly, the 30% sell-on appears from those figures to have applied to the whole price, so maybe the 20% sell-on for Delap applies to the whole £30 million, meaning in effect a sell-on cut of £5 million not £2 million. [Post edited 9 Apr 22:00]
|  | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:25 - Apr 10 with 2169 views | darkhorse28 |
Why would Delap sign to be sold on for profit? Why wouldn’t he just sign for club ‘b’ in the first place, save them £15 million, and take have of that value in additional fee’s for him and his team.
We’ve made it impossible for him to stay if the numbers are true.., and we can’t get a penny more for an asset worth double that.
His agent and himself will take up half the adotilnal value, and the buying club will enjoy an asset still worth more than the package they pay.
We have given away all the value in the deal, and we’ll never know for sure, but we probably didn’t need to. It’s like Ashton was 100% convinced we’d stay up, and bet the farm. I don’t think people realise the financial consequences of the last 12 months.
Our only sellable asset sold for half his value. £120 million net spend with no sellable assets, and a champions league contract to the manager.
This seasons decision making, will echo for a number of years, irrespective of what happens in the pitch. Hey ho. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:39 - Apr 10 with 2141 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:25 - Apr 10 by darkhorse28 |
Why would Delap sign to be sold on for profit? Why wouldn’t he just sign for club ‘b’ in the first place, save them £15 million, and take have of that value in additional fee’s for him and his team.
We’ve made it impossible for him to stay if the numbers are true.., and we can’t get a penny more for an asset worth double that.
His agent and himself will take up half the adotilnal value, and the buying club will enjoy an asset still worth more than the package they pay.
We have given away all the value in the deal, and we’ll never know for sure, but we probably didn’t need to. It’s like Ashton was 100% convinced we’d stay up, and bet the farm. I don’t think people realise the financial consequences of the last 12 months.
Our only sellable asset sold for half his value. £120 million net spend with no sellable assets, and a champions league contract to the manager.
This seasons decision making, will echo for a number of years, irrespective of what happens in the pitch. Hey ho. |
Buy-back clauses are likely to trump any other clauses - witness Jaden's move back to Villa at our expense. Jaden had no choice, Delap would probably have no choice if Man City exercised their buy-back option. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 13:13 - Apr 10 with 2046 views | monkeymagic |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:25 - Apr 10 by darkhorse28 |
Why would Delap sign to be sold on for profit? Why wouldn’t he just sign for club ‘b’ in the first place, save them £15 million, and take have of that value in additional fee’s for him and his team.
We’ve made it impossible for him to stay if the numbers are true.., and we can’t get a penny more for an asset worth double that.
His agent and himself will take up half the adotilnal value, and the buying club will enjoy an asset still worth more than the package they pay.
We have given away all the value in the deal, and we’ll never know for sure, but we probably didn’t need to. It’s like Ashton was 100% convinced we’d stay up, and bet the farm. I don’t think people realise the financial consequences of the last 12 months.
Our only sellable asset sold for half his value. £120 million net spend with no sellable assets, and a champions league contract to the manager.
This seasons decision making, will echo for a number of years, irrespective of what happens in the pitch. Hey ho. |
I can understand the disappointment around Delap potentially leaving for only 30m but if we had to ship out others, I feel we have plenty of sellable assets - for instance, Davis (massive profit), O’Shea (money back?), Greaves (15m?), Philogene (£15m?), Ogbene (£10m?) SS (£5m?)
I don’t think our transfer business was inspired but equally, I don’t think we squandered £120m. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 13:53 - Apr 10 with 1999 views | itfc48 |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 13:13 - Apr 10 by monkeymagic |
I can understand the disappointment around Delap potentially leaving for only 30m but if we had to ship out others, I feel we have plenty of sellable assets - for instance, Davis (massive profit), O’Shea (money back?), Greaves (15m?), Philogene (£15m?), Ogbene (£10m?) SS (£5m?)
I don’t think our transfer business was inspired but equally, I don’t think we squandered £120m. |
It’s probably not that realistic for them to be able to do a deal given they’ll be in the same bun fight as everyone else - it doesn’t sound like he has the type of obligation Philogene had. As Phil says they don’t need him and he’s not going to sign with them just to earn them a few extra quid whilst narrowing down his own options. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 14:19 - Apr 10 with 1956 views | positivity |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:25 - Apr 10 by darkhorse28 |
Why would Delap sign to be sold on for profit? Why wouldn’t he just sign for club ‘b’ in the first place, save them £15 million, and take have of that value in additional fee’s for him and his team.
We’ve made it impossible for him to stay if the numbers are true.., and we can’t get a penny more for an asset worth double that.
His agent and himself will take up half the adotilnal value, and the buying club will enjoy an asset still worth more than the package they pay.
We have given away all the value in the deal, and we’ll never know for sure, but we probably didn’t need to. It’s like Ashton was 100% convinced we’d stay up, and bet the farm. I don’t think people realise the financial consequences of the last 12 months.
Our only sellable asset sold for half his value. £120 million net spend with no sellable assets, and a champions league contract to the manager.
This seasons decision making, will echo for a number of years, irrespective of what happens in the pitch. Hey ho. |
no sellable assets, eh?!
1st post today? norwich not doing so well? hmmm! | |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 15:52 - Apr 10 with 1854 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:25 - Apr 10 by darkhorse28 |
Why would Delap sign to be sold on for profit? Why wouldn’t he just sign for club ‘b’ in the first place, save them £15 million, and take have of that value in additional fee’s for him and his team.
We’ve made it impossible for him to stay if the numbers are true.., and we can’t get a penny more for an asset worth double that.
His agent and himself will take up half the adotilnal value, and the buying club will enjoy an asset still worth more than the package they pay.
We have given away all the value in the deal, and we’ll never know for sure, but we probably didn’t need to. It’s like Ashton was 100% convinced we’d stay up, and bet the farm. I don’t think people realise the financial consequences of the last 12 months.
Our only sellable asset sold for half his value. £120 million net spend with no sellable assets, and a champions league contract to the manager.
This seasons decision making, will echo for a number of years, irrespective of what happens in the pitch. Hey ho. |
1. "we probably didn’t need to". Oh really?
2. "Our only sellable asset". Oh really?
10 years is a long time to be registered on your rivals' site without speaking. |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 20:58 - Apr 14 with 1435 views | darkhorse28 |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:39 - Apr 10 by SuffolkPunchFC |
Buy-back clauses are likely to trump any other clauses - witness Jaden's move back to Villa at our expense. Jaden had no choice, Delap would probably have no choice if Man City exercised their buy-back option. |
The player always has the choice. Jayden wanted to go back.., we have the same issue with Delap. If it’s a low fee, the buying club can pay more to the payment.
I’d guess Villa with their buy back plus % sell on saved so much that there’s no way we could match terms.
Great deal for them. Didn’t fan y him and sold him for an easy profit.
Good player talent wise, looks quality, but he’s very lazy, I can see why Emry didn’t fancy him, but great bit of business.., Villa did great, but so did Jayden.., two signing in fees, and probably two pay rises too, in six months.
Only ITFC and Hull lost out in that deal. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:16 - Apr 14 with 1358 views | Coastalblue |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 10:25 - Apr 10 by darkhorse28 |
Why would Delap sign to be sold on for profit? Why wouldn’t he just sign for club ‘b’ in the first place, save them £15 million, and take have of that value in additional fee’s for him and his team.
We’ve made it impossible for him to stay if the numbers are true.., and we can’t get a penny more for an asset worth double that.
His agent and himself will take up half the adotilnal value, and the buying club will enjoy an asset still worth more than the package they pay.
We have given away all the value in the deal, and we’ll never know for sure, but we probably didn’t need to. It’s like Ashton was 100% convinced we’d stay up, and bet the farm. I don’t think people realise the financial consequences of the last 12 months.
Our only sellable asset sold for half his value. £120 million net spend with no sellable assets, and a champions league contract to the manager.
This seasons decision making, will echo for a number of years, irrespective of what happens in the pitch. Hey ho. |
As I understodd it the deasl from Citeh was pretty much this is what it is, take it or lump it. Of course I have no idea how the clauses work, and neither does anybody else on here but I don't think there was a lot of negotiating to be done. |  |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:16 - Apr 14 with 1357 views | darkhorse28 |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 15:52 - Apr 10 by The_Flashing_Smile |
1. "we probably didn’t need to". Oh really?
2. "Our only sellable asset". Oh really?
10 years is a long time to be registered on your rivals' site without speaking. |
It’s 20 plus years, 10 year assessing, 10’yearw waiting to pounce .., none of our player are Fleck, or Fox levels of genius.., I couldn’t bring myself to even type Sutton if that helps.
In all seriousness I just don’t subscribe to ‘pluck’my’ and ‘couldn’t possibly stay up’
I’m watching Huijsen now, what a quality player, he cost £12 million, he’s 20, he’s less expensive and twice as good as Jacob…, and Bournemouth, Brighton, Brentford, Fulham, Forest, they have scores and scores of examples.
Better players, many of which cost less than what we spent…, we could have stayed up, but we needed MUCH better talent ID, and coaching and management too if we’re honest.
Mitoma cost £3 million, Mbeuno £7 million, Brighton turn £10 million players into £100 million players for fun.., we turned £150 million gross spend in to £80 million balance sheet valuations.
It’s not how you build a club in the long or short term. We bought below averagely and were competing against world class recruitment, and world class management, and that’s why we are short, we just aren’t at those levels and if we don’t change some of those dynamics, we won’t be either.
Big Mal McKay .., he was a good player, met him at a wedding once, he believed I’m an Ipswich fan .., I stood on his toes during a dance, I would have kicked his shins, but he’s bigger than me. | | | |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:22 - Apr 14 with 1331 views | Zx1988 |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:16 - Apr 14 by darkhorse28 |
It’s 20 plus years, 10 year assessing, 10’yearw waiting to pounce .., none of our player are Fleck, or Fox levels of genius.., I couldn’t bring myself to even type Sutton if that helps.
In all seriousness I just don’t subscribe to ‘pluck’my’ and ‘couldn’t possibly stay up’
I’m watching Huijsen now, what a quality player, he cost £12 million, he’s 20, he’s less expensive and twice as good as Jacob…, and Bournemouth, Brighton, Brentford, Fulham, Forest, they have scores and scores of examples.
Better players, many of which cost less than what we spent…, we could have stayed up, but we needed MUCH better talent ID, and coaching and management too if we’re honest.
Mitoma cost £3 million, Mbeuno £7 million, Brighton turn £10 million players into £100 million players for fun.., we turned £150 million gross spend in to £80 million balance sheet valuations.
It’s not how you build a club in the long or short term. We bought below averagely and were competing against world class recruitment, and world class management, and that’s why we are short, we just aren’t at those levels and if we don’t change some of those dynamics, we won’t be either.
Big Mal McKay .., he was a good player, met him at a wedding once, he believed I’m an Ipswich fan .., I stood on his toes during a dance, I would have kicked his shins, but he’s bigger than me. |
Decent players such as Huijsen, Mitoma, Mbuemo et al don't sign for newly-promoted clubs that are all but guaranteed to be relegated.
It's also worth bearing in mind the entire cost of the deal, and not getting fixated on the transfer fee. Factor in wages over the length of the contract, and various bonuses, and I'm willing to bet you that that lot end up as far more expensive propositions than any of our signings.
It's the whole Malen v Philogene argument again; you're not comparing similar situations. | |
| |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:26 - Apr 14 with 1318 views | BarcaBlue |
| delap: why would city not be interested? on 21:16 - Apr 14 by darkhorse28 |
It’s 20 plus years, 10 year assessing, 10’yearw waiting to pounce .., none of our player are Fleck, or Fox levels of genius.., I couldn’t bring myself to even type Sutton if that helps.
In all seriousness I just don’t subscribe to ‘pluck’my’ and ‘couldn’t possibly stay up’
I’m watching Huijsen now, what a quality player, he cost £12 million, he’s 20, he’s less expensive and twice as good as Jacob…, and Bournemouth, Brighton, Brentford, Fulham, Forest, they have scores and scores of examples.
Better players, many of which cost less than what we spent…, we could have stayed up, but we needed MUCH better talent ID, and coaching and management too if we’re honest.
Mitoma cost £3 million, Mbeuno £7 million, Brighton turn £10 million players into £100 million players for fun.., we turned £150 million gross spend in to £80 million balance sheet valuations.
It’s not how you build a club in the long or short term. We bought below averagely and were competing against world class recruitment, and world class management, and that’s why we are short, we just aren’t at those levels and if we don’t change some of those dynamics, we won’t be either.
Big Mal McKay .., he was a good player, met him at a wedding once, he believed I’m an Ipswich fan .., I stood on his toes during a dance, I would have kicked his shins, but he’s bigger than me. |
Elephants or horses? It's a tough choice. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
