City Raider
Well-Known Member
1961. I’d pipe down.
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
1961. I’d pipe down.
Alan Harper's Tash
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 12 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 60,048
Must have been for you to comment! First post in 12.5 years!That’s some serious bollocks
Well. Back on planet earth City are outraged because Spurs won’t sell at £100m because Kane’s brother says that how much he is worth and City think an alleged gentleman’s agreement supersedes a contract. The problem is you. Not us.
No wonder Levy won’t talk to you lot until you get some grown ups involved.
And you know this key inside information based on your impeccable sources in the boardroom do you?
Our Chairman, who would be negotiating this deal, runs an almost trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund and negotiates with entire countries for deals rather than some tinpot midget at a football club. Having "grown ups" involved on the City side isn't the issue, I can assure you.
Levy wont talk until there's cash on the table. That's got nothing to do with fans perceptions.Well. Back on planet earth City are outraged because Spurs won’t sell at £100m because Kane’s brother says that how much he is worth and City think an alleged gentleman’s agreement supersedes a contract. The problem is you. Not us.
No wonder Levy won’t talk to you lot until you get some grown ups involved.
Kane wouldn't even be up for discussion were it not for the bizarre appointment of Mourinho so in the end it all comes back to 'your' own decision-making.
malg
Well-Known Member
They only problem I can see here is that you're still posting on this Board and are on the wind up. There's a good reason I'm not a Mod as you'd have been gone after that post you arrogant Southern tosser.Well. Back on planet earth City are outraged because Spurs won’t sell at £100m because Kane’s brother says that how much he is worth and City think an alleged gentleman’s agreement supersedes a contract. The problem is you. Not us.
No wonder Levy won’t talk to you lot until you get some grown ups involved.
This is quite perplexing.
As per The Athletic, City ostensibly had a decent sized transfer kitty saved over from the previous year/s. City have sold fringe/youth to generate £60m (as per Pep) so far with the Grealish transfer being £100m in 3 annual installments, but with a book value of £16m per year of his contract.
Aside from them not wanting to be here (and wage reduction), I'm unsure why we desperately need to sell Bernardo & Jesus to fund Kane. Is net 0 the goal? Are the optics that important?
As per The Athletic, City ostensibly had a decent sized transfer kitty saved over from the previous year/s. City have sold fringe/youth to generate £60m (as per Pep) so far with the Grealish transfer being £100m in 3 annual installments, but with a book value of £16m per year of his contract.
Aside from them not wanting to be here (and wage reduction), I'm unsure why we desperately need to sell Bernardo & Jesus to fund Kane. Is net 0 the goal? Are the optics that important?
Well. Back on planet earth City are outraged because Spurs won’t sell at £100m because Kane’s brother says that how much he is worth and City think an alleged gentleman’s agreement supersedes a contract. The problem is you. Not us.
No wonder Levy won’t talk to you lot until you get some grown ups involved.
There doesn't seem to be any outrage from Pep. He said if spurs are prepared to negotiate, a deal can be done. If not, he stays where he is or goes elsewhere. It's not a threat, it's simply an evaluation based on many factors.Well. Back on planet earth City are outraged because Spurs won’t sell at £100m because Kane’s brother says that how much he is worth and City think an alleged gentleman’s agreement supersedes a contract. The problem is you. Not us.
No wonder Levy won’t talk to you lot until you get some grown ups involved.
And you know this key inside information based on your impeccable sources in the boardroom do you?
Our Chairman, who would be negotiating this deal, runs an almost trillion dollar sovereign wealth fund and negotiates with entire countries for deals rather than some tinpot midget at a football club. Having "grown ups" involved on the City side isn't the issue, I can assure you.
Exactly my point, until your Chairman gets on the phone, there is no chance of this happening. Levy won’t talk to the other no hopers.
We don't need to sell them for Kane for financial reasons. We're loaded, still. We need to sell them for squad reasons.This is quite perplexing.
As per The Athletic, City ostensibly had a decent sized transfer kitty saved over from the previous year/s. City have sold fringe/youth to generate £60m (as per Pep) so far with the Grealish transfer being £100m in 3 annual installments, but with a book value of £16m per year of his contract.
Aside from them not wanting to be here (and wage reduction), I'm unsure why we desperately need to sell Bernardo & Jesus to fund Kane. Is net 0 the goal? Are the optics that important?