De Bruyne?

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

They didn't get the fee they wanted. They got 44m. They wanted 50. That's only 88% of what they wanted.

The consensus is he was worth 40m. We paid 44m.

So we paid 10% more and they got 12% less.

I'm having fun. Anyone else having fun?

"The consensus is he was worth 40m"

Don't think there was much of a consensus, that was a very hotly debated topic.

We paid £44m of course, with £5m in add ons.

Ey, it helps the time fly until we get news of De Bruyne mate!

 

[Cobwebcat]

Still hoping TH was right about tomorrow looking like being the day but it appears that yet again there has been another delay. I only say that because there are usually a couple of reports from elsewhere when it's this close.

Baffling and frustrating. Anyone with any dosh on this must be tearing their hair out by now.

 

[Ric]

Anyway, back to De Bruyne. They're asking for £57m. That's taking the piss. Should we do it?

Yes, if that's what it takes.

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

...and as well as the 2 years left on his deal and the fact they had slapped a £50mil price tag on his head, you seem to conveniently forget that they had to give QPR 20% of the fee and therefore that was taken into account in Liverpool's valuation.

It's not something I've forgotten, it wasn't our problem, it was Liverpool's.

They agreed to the sell on clause, a player having a sell on clause doesn't inflate his value by the percentage of the clause. That's the selling club's hit to take, not the buyer's.

 

[Rammy Blue]

The fees are ott for the simple reason that we want specific players, not just a couple off a long list. Everyone knows we wanted Sterling and KDB, we will get them both but pay over the odds.

Who cares.

 

[Cobwebcat]

Yes, if that's what it takes.

When does it become too much?

 

[Rammy Blue]

It's not something I've forgotten, it wasn't our problem, it was Liverpool's.

They agreed to the sell on clause, a player having a sell on clause doesn't inflate his value by the percentage of the clause. That's the selling club's hit to take, not the buyer's.

lol

 

[RichardDunneOwnGoal]

City and KDB would be true to their word by all accounts of "we won't stand in his way if he wants to leave".

They've now changed that to "if he hands in a transfer request".

I personally think he needs to grow a set, but then again, if it was me, I wouldn't want to lose out on several million pounds either.

Fair enough, makes sense. Solid source?

 

[Vzla Mcfc]

Got a hunch this will get done for 50m up front and 5m in add-ons. Yes it's pricey but look at it this way, James is a similiar player with similiar stats and he went for 63m. James was 1 year younger when he moved but was also only proven in a weaker league.

So no I don't think we are getting mugged at all.

 

[ojeme]

If 57 million is the price tag, I might be in the minority here, but I belive City should bow out. :( you need a 2 to 3 year production to be worth that much. Fantastic player, and perhaps could become WC if he isn't already on last year's performance. I know it's not my money, but some prices just seem wrong. 57 million pounds? no!

Chech all the threads from before the Summer or even beginning of the summer, no one had DeBryune penciled down for anything over 35 million. This will be 20 million above that. Sorry, we need to do better. Too rich for my palette :(

If we're honest, Bale didnt seem like a £85m player when Real signed him despite how good he was and still is. If the same club could spend £63m for James, then imho maybe, £57m isn't too bad as people/media would want to paint it (even though I hope VW agree to our reported £50m bid). I've noticed that whatever Real does, they get lauded for example, the media could say, Real breaks world record fee for class player but we're always slagged off whenever we try to spend big to land a class act.