Rammyblues
Well-Known Member
Sometimes quiet is good.
Ffs just give them the money. It's not like they need to sell him. The cost is amortised over 5 years anyway. Same with Bertrand.City WatchVerified account @City_Watch 7m7 minutes ago
Manchester City and Tottenham are still negotiating a fee for Kyle Walker and no agreement is expected any time soon. [The Independent]
Well Monday next week pre season starts. I imagine Pep wants to have fullbacks available so he can start working. I hope we will complete a number of signings this week.A friend ov a friend who works at city as said will be done by Saturday latest.
Fully agree. I would not be a big fan of Walker but if he is a major target we should get on with it and sign him up. As you correctly point out what difference isFfs just give them the money. It's not like they need to sell him. The cost is amortised over 5 years anyway. Same with Bertrand.
Fully agree. I would not be a big fan of Walker but if he is a major target we should get on with it and sign him up. As you correctly point out what difference is
5m or so going to make over the duration of a 5 year contract.
Fully agree. I would not be a big fan of Walker but if he is a major target we should get on with it and sign him up. As you correctly point out what difference is
5m or so going to make over the duration of a 5 year contract.
Agreed, and that's surely why we are at least trying to negotiate/get the price down. There is I guess for example always the chance that a player hand in a transfer request and change the cards to our advantage. If not we can always choose to pay up.If you add 5m on all of 7 to 8 targets that's alot of money
Why not leave all our business to the last week in August if that is the case. I for one am totally chilled about Walker point is if he is goingWhy rush to pay him 80K for the next few weeks when that's a bill Spurs will have to foot?
No rush lads, chill the fuck out.
It's not really if you look at it from an accounting perspective and factor in amortisation. I do agree that we do need to impose an upper limitIf you add 5m on all of 7 to 8 targets that's alot of money
Agreed, and that's surely why we are at least trying to negotiate/get the price down. There is I guess for example always the chance that a player hand in a transfer request and change the cards to our advantage. If not we can always choose to pay up.
Well thank fuck you,re not in charge of our transfers.It's not really if you look at it from an accounting perspective and factor in amortisation. I do agree that we do need to impose an upper limit
for the vast majority of targets. In the case of walker my outermost limit would be 40m plus 5m in add ons and not a penny more.
Well thank fuck you,re not in charge of our transfers.
Was sending it via my ipad and I couldn`t be arsed turning over the keypad to the numbers etc.Have you lost the ' on your computer. No wonder you're so tetchy ;-)
Was sending it via my ipad and I couldn`t be arsed turning over the keypad to the numbers etc.
Err... you do know that's not quite how the commas and apostrophes work, don't you?Was sending it via my ipad and I couldn`t be arsed turning over the keypad to the numbers etc.