Does change things. Gives up loyalty bonus for one.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Harry Kane
- Thread starter Super Joey Hart
- Start date
Does change things. Gives up loyalty bonus for one.
Firstly why not 9. Instead of another point, and the Harry Kane Stadium ;) seriously if big money was coming in you wouldn’t have Nuno in charge and waiting for Kane’s money to land before you buy.Your valuation simply does not make any sense.
1. Firstly we know you can afford £160m. You can probably afford £300m
2. You have set the market price high with £100m for the beautiful Jack. Kane is clearly a more valuable player
3. Thirdly despite what many of you are saying, we don't need to sell. Yes, the debt is massive but it is well structured and manageable.
4. Does Kane want to go? Yes, of course. But if he goes on strike until August - so what? In the end he will have to start playing again or he is not in the England squad and he does not get his dream move to United next summer.
5. Three years on his contract means he is still very sellable next year
6. We'll need replacement players - a striker is £60m maybe more now they know we have cash. Plus we hope to buy a few more so we have a good chance of one them becoming a superstar that you can buy in three years (see Bale's money)
7. We want a nice little profit on the deal
8. So £60m for a striker, a few more at £20-40m each and some profit plus the uplift/tax because it is City seems to equal £160m not £100m
One other point that no-one has mentioned is that, maybe, and this is just supposition, the new stadium naming rights could be contingent on Kane staying.
Calv_from_the_frog
Well-Known Member
Your valuation simply does not make any sense.
1. Firstly we know you can afford £160m. You can probably afford £300m
2. You have set the market price high with £100m for the beautiful Jack. Kane is clearly a more valuable player
3. Thirdly despite what many of you are saying, we don't need to sell. Yes, the debt is massive but it is well structured and manageable.
4. Does Kane want to go? Yes, of course. But if he goes on strike until August - so what? In the end he will have to start playing again or he is not in the England squad and he does not get his dream move to United next summer.
5. Three years on his contract means he is still very sellable next year
6. We'll need replacement players - a striker is £60m maybe more now they know we have cash. Plus we hope to buy a few more so we have a good chance of one them becoming a superstar that you can buy in three years (see Bale's money)
7. We want a nice little profit on the deal
8. So £60m for a striker, a few more at £20-40m each and some profit plus the uplift/tax because it is City seems to equal £160m not £100m
One other point that no-one has mentioned is that, maybe, and this is just supposition, the new stadium naming rights could be contingent on Kane staying.
1. Y'see, that where you f*cked up with FFP. Its doesn't stop well fiunded clubs from going under, but it does prevent them being able to pay silly fees for players like the one you want.
2. Yes, you're probably right. Then again, Jack is 3 years younger and we can probably do without a CF if push comes to shove (not that we'd want to, I agree).
3. No idea, you'd know better than me, but I'd be astounded if - with City having felt the pinch and lost 120m - Spurs hadn't lost an awful lot more (no matter how well structured your debt is).
4. True enough. Striking is not sustainable for him or you.
5. Next year he'll be 29. I'd say you'd get 60-70m tops. We can cope with the 60m depreciation given CL participation & other prize money. You probably can't (as much).
6. Fact is that there's a glut of strikers at the moment (as proven by our focus on Kane). You'd be able to get 2 or 3 signings tops with the Kane money.
7. As he's 'one of your own' isn't any money a profit ?
8. You'll get 120m max. No more. Probably no less.
The fact is that you're doing a bit of a 'Messi' with Kane. 120m would be fantastic money (especially in the current climate) but you've had a look at ONE other transfer and figured that he's worth more than that.
Barca paid the price by having to get rid of pretty much half their team to keep Messi, you'll have a player who'll get you no nearer to winning stuff on still massive wages, pissed off at having not won 'owt, and rapidly depreciating in value.
We walked away from Koulibaly. We walked away from Kounde. We bought Dias (leaving Koulibaly & Kounde frustrated at their current clubs and looking for moves still).
It hurts having your players go on strike to leave. I remember when Tevez did it. But you're left having to make the best out of a bad situation, and this - unfortunately - is the best you're gonna get.
Ings sounds like a cheap alternative till they quote us £80mWe could do worse than Grealish and Ings while keeping hold of Bernardo for another season, just imo.
Lord Blue
Well-Known Member
We usually decide on a maximum we're prepared to pay and if we can't get the player for that then we go quiet whilst we pursue an alternative. I'm guessing that we're already looking elsewhere just in case.
I just find it hilarious how certain we were of a top striker coming in letting Kun basically go already in April with the crocodile tears of Pep, then Nmecha did say the same as Kun that a new striker is planned to be brought in and the club kind of let them know of it and their chances due to it, and now here we are about 10 days from PL start and still trying to negotiate with Spurs who we knew exactly how hard it will be to get a deal with and we waited all June/Euros to finish and all July too to end up here.
I would have shit all over the "no negotiation under the Euros", Southgate would have had no balls to bench Kane due to it, put the bid in first of June and I am sure now we would be in a more advanced stage, either by going for another target or have him in the bag.
You forgot Delap to Stoke.
Harsh but fairAny chance the mods can change @JPBB user name to ‘Thrush’?
Irritating **** that he is.
Berts Neck
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 1,735
Can never understand why guys like you spend so much time on an opposing teams forum....is it because there is nothing of note on your own ? If I were you I would be more concerned about losing one of your best managers, replacing him with Mourinho , sacking him,and then getting a totally average manager from Wolves. I believe you have more pressing concerns at home than polluting this forum. It does not matter if Kane comes or not. We have a manager who won the PL without a CF. You had Kane and finished seventh.Without him, you will be bottom half of the table. Think about it.Shhh. £160m for a 28 year old Kane will be Levy's greatest deal.
In the end, everyone will see sense and the deal wont happen.
Maybe next year.