Marc Cucurella

Status
Not open for further replies.
alexmcity said:
Starting to think that Brighton were looking for a LB because they thought City were going to pay 50m. Why not, given that Arsenal paid 50m for White! But...turns out they were (probably) wrong. As things stand, a deal is anything but done or close. If there's a deal, it will be closer to 50m than to 40m, that much is certain now.

I think no Cucu deal is more likely now. Things may change a bit with a transfer request. But Sosa/another LB + JWE is the likely way to go forward.
Click to expand...
They are near to signing a LB though
 
Mancity1980 said:
You are entitled to ask for what you want for him, but it sounds like you are basing it on what we have paid for fullbacks before. There is no bidding war here, it is a case of one club wanting him, one club willing to consider selling him and one player willing to accept the move. I don’t think you are in as strong a negotiation position as you think you are. If we walk away you will be left with an unhappy player, then what? Accept a similar bid in 12 months time and an adversely affected team spirit?

The only happy solution for both parties here is a halfway £40 million accepted offer. Otherwise both clubs will be in weaker positions when they next negotiate transfers. If we walk away at £30 mill you will be weaker, if we cough up £50 mill we will be weaker.
Click to expand...

I understand that perception of the buying / selling process - it’s a popular one but, with due respect, I hold that it doesn’t work like that.
I think you’ll find that football clubs carry out an assessment of needs exercise and decide a maximum price that they’ll pay (the buying club) and a minimum price that they’ll sell for (the selling club obviously).
If those figures meet then the player gets bought / sold and if they don’t then the selling clubs valuation is above the market value, as is often the case, and a sale doesn’t happen.
The reason for the poker playing between the parties is that there can be quite a wide crossover so that both clubs will want to maximise their position (buying club wanting to pay less than their maximum and selling club wanting to receive more than their minimum) - though it can still ultimately transpire that there’s a gap between the two.
The added complexity is that the clubs valuations can fluctuate during the process due to matters like the replacement player being more or less expensive than anticipated or the purchasing clubs alternative being more / less expensive than anticipated or simply not available etc.
The days of chairmen spitting in their palms and shaking hands on an artificial mid-point value (we want to pay 30 you want to receive 50 so let’s call it 40) are long gone - if they ever existed in the first place except in movies.
 
CityBluez said:
Yeah i think we could have upped to 40mils considering the price they are paying to Williams
Click to expand...

Hope I'm wrong but don't think their asking price has something to do with Williams. They weren't postering in order to get Williams for 10m+5m.

Postering is not inconsequential because it sets limits to what is seen as acceptable. They won't go from 50m+ to 40m, imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.