Douglas Luiz

[117 M34]

Cheers Dougie.

I doubt the figure is correct as the sell on fee is always for the profit compared to the original fee rather than the new fee.

 

[Gaz (FMwkdsoul)]

I doubt the figure is correct as the sell on fee is always for the profit compared to the original fee rather than the new fee.

yeah think its about 5.5m but reports are running with 8

 

[decmancity]

I doubt the figure is correct as the sell on fee is always for the profit compared to the original fee rather than the new fee.

Not always.

I would imagine its the profit but we could have definitely secured the more lucrative option.

 

[Dax777]

So we are not getting him back?

 

[Monkchester]

So we are not getting him back?

No apparently it was him or Kante and Pep went with the latter !

 

[Xhavenjoe]

I doubt the figure is correct as the sell on fee is always for the profit compared to the original fee rather than the new fee.

Thats not always the case.
It depends on what option we agreed to.

 

[Bournemouth Blue]

I never understood why City weren’t allowed to play him but Villa were. If someone can explain this I can go back to pondering what is beyond the Universe.

 

[1894southstander]

I never understood why City weren’t allowed to play him but Villa were. If someone can explain this I can go back to pondering what is beyond the Universe.

Apparently because he was worth more to them in value he could get a work permit but for us he wouldn't have been one of our better players so wouldn't have

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

I never understood why City weren’t allowed to play him but Villa were. If someone can explain this I can go back to pondering what is beyond the Universe.

Probably something in the 115 charges :)

 

[Colin Bells Boots]

Apparently because he was worth more to them in value he could get a work permit but for us he wouldn't have been one of our better players so wouldn't have

Or put another way, a fucking made-up rule in "operation halt City " .