John Stones

Status
Not open for further replies.
RichardDunneOwnGoal said:
We did.

If you remember we made a 'take it or leave it' offer of £40m +£4m add ons IIRC, the dippers briefed the press on every bid and rejected that 'take it or leave it' offer outright. And reiterated the £50m fee.

Then we came back a couple of weeks later with the final bid of £44m + £5m in add ons. Our bluff was called and the dippers more or less got their asking price.
Click to expand...

No they didn't. They got a lower price with potential add ons, which many of us have been saying is the likely outcome here & has been with Sane.
 
It would be pretty funny if we walk away get a good price on Bonucci and Stones comes either next year cheaper and more experienced or the year after on a free transfer. I don't see why some of us are so desperate to get him, we don't need to be desperate we should be patient and measured in the transfer market from now on.
 
kupest said:
Agree with the rest of the post but that is the exact thing I would be blaming the manager for. We had the same back 4 as the previous season and added Otamendi to the mix as well. No way should it have been breaking the goals for most goals conceded.
Click to expand...
And yet we had more clean sheets (16) than any other team last season. Conceded 41 but too often more than 2 in a game. Compared with when we last won the title, we conceded 3 more in 15/16 but scored 31 less. I think that should point out where we dropped off but many people won't accept that. Under MP (and hopefully under Pep) we would never be a team that won the title conceding 24 and scoring 62.
 
The thing with the Sterling deal is if we do end up paying the extra £5m we'll be happy to do that because we'll have won the Premier League and Champions League with him, those are the terms of the bonus. :)
 
Last edited:
Neville Kneville said:
But we haven't paid 49 mil for Sterling.

I imagine we will be happy enough to get 5 mil or so in add ons as part of the Stones deal.
Click to expand...
I didn't say we have paid £49m for Sterling but that's the agreed upon deal.

If we offered £44m they wouldn't have accepted it, so the possible £5m in addons was pivotal; some of which I imagine we have paid after last season.

So if Everton feel they can squeeze more money out of us given those previous examples then they have fair reason to; be it outlandish objectives he has to achieve or merely appearance based etc.

I'm sure Txiki thought he got one over on Liverpool when they agreed to a deal £1m less than what they asked for and I'm sure Liverpool were glad to let him think that.
 
Neville Kneville said:
No they didn't. They got a lower price with potential add ons, which many of us have been saying is the likely outcome here & has been with Sane.
Click to expand...

Right, they didn't get their absurd asking price straight up front, and they were never going to, from anyone.

But we were the only club at the table at the money involved and Sterling only had eyes for us, and the dippers made us look like mugs after feigning a final bid, and coming crawling back a couple of weeks later with a 'really really' final bid.

They got their little victory in the press, and we thought we hadn't lost much face because technically we didn't fully meet their asking price.

But truth be told we showed ourselves to be weak negotiators and publicly had our bluff called.

Other clubs have taken notice of this, and now we're going through exactly the same thing with Stones.

Rather predictable.
 
pudge said:
I didn't say we have paid £49m for Sterling but that's the agreed upon deal.

If we offered £44m they wouldn't have accepted it, so the possible £5m in addons was pivotal; some of which I imagine we have paid after last season.

So if Everton feel they can squeeze more money out of us given those previous examples then they have fair reason to.

I'm sure Txiki thought he got one over on Liverpool when they agreed to a deal £1m less than what they asked for and I'm sure Liverpool were glad to let him think that.
Click to expand...
Not a bad saving all the same.
 
So the point is either pay it from the start or make sure the final bid really is the final bid... since we've put our final bid in(allegedly)... we should really tell them that's that and focus on someone else maybe?
 
RichardDunneOwnGoal said:
Right, they didn't get their absurd asking price straight up front, and they were never going to, from anyone.

But we were the only club at the table at the money involved and Sterling only had eyes for us, and the dippers made us look like mugs after feigning a final bid, and coming crawling back a couple of weeks later with a 'really really' final bid.

They got their little victory in the press, and we thought we hadn't lost much face because technically we didn't fully meet their asking price.

But truth be told we showed ourselves to be weak negotiators and publicly had our bluff called.

Other clubs have taken notice of this, and now we're going through exactly the same thing with Stones.

Rather predictable.
Click to expand...

We haven't paid Liverpool's price for Sterling. We paid 6 mil less & allowed them to pretend they got the full amount.

But they didn't.
 
pudge said:
I didn't say we have paid £49m for Sterling but that's the agreed upon deal.

If we offered £44m they wouldn't have accepted it, so the possible £5m in addons was pivotal; some of which I imagine we have paid after last season.

So if Everton feel they can squeeze more money out of us given those previous examples then they have fair reason to; be it outlandish objectives he has to achieve or merely appearance based etc.

I'm sure Txiki thought he got one over on Liverpool when they agreed to a deal £1m less than what they asked for and I'm sure Liverpool were glad to let him think that.
Click to expand...

Liverpool told the press they got thd full amount but they didn't.

Ten deals done in a similar manner defers payment of 50 milliion quid, some of which may never be paid if a player fails. By all accounts we have at least two now with Sterling & Sane. Maybe Stones is 3. That's just in one year. It's an enormous sum of money.
 
Neville Kneville said:
We haven't paid Liverpool's price for Sterling. We paid 6 mil less & allowed them to pretend they got the full amount.

But they didn't.
Click to expand...

Are you deliberately missing the point mate?

They called our bluff re a final offer, and got a vastly inflated fee for a player no one else would touch with a barge poll at the figures quoted, and we were the only club he wanted to play for.

That precedent is what's coming back to haunt us with Stones now.
 
RichardDunneOwnGoal said:
Are you deliberately missing the point mate?

They called our bluff re a final offer, and got a vastly inflated fee for a player no one else would touch with a barge poll at the figures quoted, and we were the only club he wanted to play for.

That precedent is what's coming back to haunt us with Stones now.
Click to expand...

I don't know that we made a 'final offer' in either case. I know Liverpool told the press they wanted 50 mil & didn't get it.
 
Everton's player evaluations are ludicrous. 50 million is a bargain considering they want 75 million for Lukaku. I say we look at other targets or just play this season with what we have if they don't accept a reasonable offer between 40-45 million.

I know I'm in the minority, but I think Otamendi. Mangala, Kompany (when fit), Denayer, and Tosin in Pep's system would be just good enough to win the league and maybe pick up another trophy along the way. Yes, it's not good enough to win the champions league, but even if we got Stones I don't see us winning it this year anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top