John Stones

[baggy]

We are shocking with our outgoing sales.

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if we let stones go for under 30m.

 

[baggy]

Stones just needs a good run of games alongside Laporte and we will be fine imho

Good player? Absolutely.

However, his mental fragility renders him useless more often than not.

I'd get him out on loan and see if he can regain his confidence, he either does well and returns or we get rid.

 

[Citizen Green]

£20m is shockingly bad business for a player we paid £47m for 4 years ago, if he can stay fit and put a run of games together he’s worth £30/35m in today’s market minimum. I’d rather keep him than sell him for that.

 

[kaz7]

Very low fee. Something Chelsea is doing much better if we look at their selling fees for unwanted players.

Look at Bakayoko, they signed him from Monaco around same time , they bought him for 40m from Monaco, then sold him for 35m to a cash strapped Milan.

I swear if it had been Txiki and City, it would have been a loan with option to buy, and then we sell him for 12m in the end.

For Stones to go from 50m to 20m after 4 years at City, still at peak age, homegrown, English tax and 20m only?

We couldnt get a shit noname English defenders from WHU, Brighton, Villa, Everton etc who is worse than Stones for sure.

Give txiki a break ffs

 

[WallyA]

If its 20m, its perhaps better to just keep him as back up. Not sure.

 

[balotelli's back pocket]

he's not going to west ham. they couldn't afford his wages for starters and if he wants to get back into the england set-up, why join a team with virtually no decent defenders and an inept coach?

 

[Damanino]

Well maybe WHU will be the only club interested on him? I still hope Arsenal will come in and maybe trick them into playing 30m for him. that Mustafi guy is horrible, Stones easily better especially if he can gain focus, sort out his mentality etc. Also Arteta knows him.
Well Moyes knows him too. :)

20m is a piss take, what kind of salary Stones have anyway? We are supposed to do the lower basic salary with crazy bonuses thing, but seems like every time we try to sell somebody even our basic salaries are shockingly high for mid table clubs who are slowly started to be able to offer around or even above weekly 100K top the best 4-5 of their payers imo. or am I wrong?

I read somewhere Everton for example has 6-7 players on 90K-125K level, and those their best paid payers. Stones should not be much higher than that.

 

[Mon Autre]

We are shocking with our outgoing sales.

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if we let stones go for under 30m.

We hardly ever sell anyone we want to keep. We've kept Aguero, Silva, Kompany etc in their prime. We could sell players for £100m if you want but we're amazingly good at keeping them.

 

[Stoned Rose]

£20m is shockingly bad business for a player we paid £47m for 4 years ago, if he can stay fit and put a run of games together he’s worth £30/35m in today’s market minimum. I’d rather keep him than sell him for that.

In terms of "book" numbers taking amortization into account, it's actually not that bad.

And how long can we keep saying "if" about Stones? The kid has had 4 years and in that time has not progressed to being a top CL level CB.

 

[roy.or.r]

Maybe I am the only one but I would take the 20m if it's true. In this coronavirus edition, nobody would pay what we would like imo. Shame because he has bags of talent. God knows what happened to him.