It will take a huge jump to go from £75m plus player to the level required to get Kane and we're not negotiating with Spurs so we'd have to completely reassess this for it to come back to life. In its favour is that there is nothing else obvious, and City might fall back on Shekh Mansour. Why not? it would pay for itself many times over. If ever there is a case of speculating to accumulate this is it. I would love Kane at City but so far it does not seem to me like a real goer.
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
What?Frankly I find it extraordinarily that a £billion dollar club like City are relying on an alleged third party gentleman’s agreement to buy a £100m asset.
And you call Spurs amateurs…
The only one relying on that is Kane and his brother, they have seriously messed up if it's not in writing.
What on earth have City got to do with that?
That’s some serious bollocksFrankly I find it extraordinarily that a £billion dollar club like City are relying on an alleged third party gentleman’s agreement to buy a £100m asset.
And you call Spurs amateurs…
Delphacito
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 1,703
I have a feeling that **** Levy is purposely leaving this until the last minute, but my gut feeling is this is going to get done. Why? Because Levy doesn’t want to reinvest the money. Kane moves at deadline day and then he could come up with the answer of ‘it was too close to the deadline we couldn’t buy anyone’. Seriously, assuming he sells Kane for 130-150M, do you see him reinvesting 100M on new players? No chance.
You are trying to track football transfers through the media. A mistake. We don't know what City's true intentions are. That is the intrigue.Frankly I find it extraordinarily that a £billion dollar club like City are relying on an alleged third party gentleman’s agreement to buy a £100m asset.
And you call Spurs amateurs…
Nascent Blues
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Sep 2009
- Messages
- 5,354
No. He's wumming.You are trying to track football transfers through the media. A mistake. We don't know what City's true intentions are. That is the intrigue.
But we have bid £75m + a player. It's not Spurs who are leaving this to the last minute. It's us. Or so it appears. Not wise to be definite. I don't think Spurs want to sell Kane. I think they should but that's their look out.I have a feeling that **** Levy is purposely leaving this until the last minute, but my gut feeling is this is going to get done. Why? Because Levy doesn’t want to reinvest the money. Kane moves at deadline day and then he could come up with the answer of ‘it was too close to the deadline we couldn’t buy anyone’. Seriously, assuming he sells Kane for 130-150M, do you see him reinvesting 100M on new players? No chance.
BlueMoonz1977
Well-Known Member
What happens if Kane doesn't happen, do we go false 9 again for one more season and then secure Haaland
That could be a likely scenario, but for myself we would need something in place prior to say haaland will sign
That could be a likely scenario, but for myself we would need something in place prior to say haaland will sign
Spurs are dog muckFrankly I find it extraordinarily that a £billion dollar club like City are relying on an alleged third party gentleman’s agreement to buy a £100m asset.
And you call Spurs amateurs…