Whats the point?

[mammutly]

We've just paid £24 million for Lescott. It's a bit late to be worryng about that.

Theres a difference in wanting to pay an over the top fee as opposed to having to.

And for RSC and for Bellamy?

City would now have to pay £20 million to get David James back as cover!

We have paid way, way over the odds for Lescott. An utterly ridiculous fee in fact. So it is certainly way too late to worry about being 'taken for a ride'.

 

[Corky]

It started with De Jong, then Bellamy. Since then only Given has been reasonable value.

 

[BlueMooner123]

we all know about the wealth of our owner but cooke, khaldoon and the owner are all business men. you don't get to their positions without getin the most for your money. we are not a charity and should get value for our players so stop with stupid comments like we dont need the money, give him them for free.

 

[Jonners]

Theres a difference in wanting to pay an over the top fee as opposed to having to.

And for RSC and for Bellamy?

City would now have to pay £20 million to get David James back as cover!

We have paid way, way over the odds for Lescott. An utterly ridiculous fee in fact. So it is certainly way too late to worry about being 'taken for a ride'.

The point is, we can afford to pay 'a ridiculous fee' if we want a player, but it doesn't follow that we have to let players go for peanuts.

 

[stony]

It started with De Jong, then Bellamy. Since then only Given has been reasonable value.

Judging him purely on his performances so far, we got Barry for peanuts. I'd say Shay is more than "reasonable value" more like an absolute steal.

 

[john blue]

CORKY. YOU DONT THINK BARRY WAS GOOD VALUE. ?

 

[mcfc_nick]

And for RSC and for Bellamy?

City would now have to pay £20 million to get David James back as cover!

We have paid way, way over the odds for Lescott. An utterly ridiculous fee in fact. So it is certainly way too late to worry about being 'taken for a ride'.

The point is, we can afford to pay 'a ridiculous fee' if we want a player, but it doesn't follow that we have to let players go for peanuts.

im not saying that, just that say with a player like ben-haim who is probably not required anymore i dont see why we would try and get the most we can for him rather than just a reasonable offer (not a nothing offer)! im not saying that that isnt what we are doing i was just wondering!

 

[mammutly]

And for RSC and for Bellamy?

City would now have to pay £20 million to get David James back as cover!

We have paid way, way over the odds for Lescott. An utterly ridiculous fee in fact. So it is certainly way too late to worry about being 'taken for a ride'.

The point is, we can afford to pay 'a ridiculous fee' if we want a player, but it doesn't follow that we have to let players go for peanuts.

I'm afraid that is the flipside. we can hold on to a player, but not using price as an excuse.

 

[alphonse groenendijk]

Theres a difference in wanting to pay an over the top fee as opposed to having to.

And for RSC and for Bellamy?

City would now have to pay £20 million to get David James back as cover!

We have paid way, way over the odds for Lescott. An utterly ridiculous fee in fact. So it is certainly way too late to worry about being 'taken for a ride'.

Where's Ade gone. Have you decided he's worth that ridiculous £25m fee? ;)

 

[cleavers]

It started with De Jong, then Bellamy. Since then only Given has been reasonable value.

I think Barry was remarkably good value on what I've seen so far, especially if you compare him to Downing for instance.

Personally I'd prefer we just paid up the contracts of those we don't need, then we're not wasting money on wages for players we'll get sod all for anyway.