Frazzle Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Liverpool probably don't plan to sell the kid, unlike some, so I doubt the 25% will come in handy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Liverpool probably don't plan to sell the kid, unlike some, so I doubt the 25% will come in handy. they will if they get the right offer...see torres. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fenham Mag Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 I doubt he'll be at Liverpool the rest of his career. Btw , how much does £30 Million in the bank accrue in interest each month? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 I doubt he'll be at Liverpool the rest of his career. Btw , how much does £30 Million in the bank accrue in interest each month? At the moment, about 30p per annum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzle Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Liverpool probably don't plan to sell the kid, unlike some, so I doubt the 25% will come in handy. they will if they get the right offer...see torres. True. I guess we'll see. Say if we did buy him back, does this clause still work? We could effectively bid 1/4 over what we want to pay? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Liverpool probably don't plan to sell the kid, unlike some, so I doubt the 25% will come in handy. they will if they get the right offer...see torres. True. I guess we'll see. Say if we did buy him back, does this clause still work? We could effectively bid 1/4 over what we want to pay? divvent, i've been drinking wine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gash Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 Caulkin just tweeted that we've banked £30m up front on this deal, and we have a 25% sell-on clause. Cracking deal that tbf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 25% sell-on profit or full transfer amount? Crazy deal that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Si Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 25% sell on clause, Ashely bent the bin dippers over and made them call him daddy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 25% sell on clause, Ashely bent the bin dippers over and made them call him daddy. Chelsea tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovejoy Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 It's a crazy deal. The timing of it and the message it sends out still leaves a sour taste mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weezertron Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 If we were to buy him back would we get 25% off? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Idiot Posted February 17, 2011 Share Posted February 17, 2011 If we were to buy him back would we get 25% off? No, these clauses are voided if the buying club is the one to benefit. But if there were competing bids you could get Liverpool to agree to a lower amount since they'd be keeping all the money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. I don't Liverpool could of got much more imho for Torres. Likewise I don't we could of got anymore for AC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gash Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." Worst bargaining ever! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." thats what seems strange, if we'd settled for 20million does that mean torres would have gone for 35mill ? i can't really buy that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
9 Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 so they are saying dont laugh at us we didnt pay over the odds for Carroll chelsea did, just incase hes a huge flop Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." thats what seems strange, if we'd settled for 20million does that mean torres would have gone for 35mill ? i can't really buy that. What i find strange is that the interview was cited as evidence the club accepted a price on sunday then upped it on monday when the interview implies that as impossible. The alternative is that Chelsea made the bid of £50m independently on monday and Henry let a few people know this so that we could up our price to £35m. Which is ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." thats what seems strange, if we'd settled for 20million does that mean torres would have gone for 35mill ? i can't really buy that. What i find strange is that the interview was cited as evidence the club accepted a price on sunday then upped it on monday when the interview implies that as impossible. The alternative is that Chelsea made the bid of £50m independently on monday and Henry let a few people know this so that we could up our price to £35m. Which is ridiculous. is it likely that chelsea really said to liverpool "whatever you pay for carroll we'll pay 15mill extra for torres" or more likely that the ball park figure for torres was known (i believe near guesses were in the british press that weekend) and we played on that to up the price ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." thats what seems strange, if we'd settled for 20million does that mean torres would have gone for 35mill ? i can't really buy that. What i find strange is that the interview was cited as evidence the club accepted a price on sunday then upped it on monday when the interview implies that as impossible. The alternative is that Chelsea made the bid of £50m independently on monday and Henry let a few people know this so that we could up our price to £35m. Which is ridiculous. is it likely that chelsea really said to liverpool "whatever you pay for carroll we'll pay 15mill extra for torres" or more likely that the ball park figure for torres was known (i believe near guesses were in the british press that weekend) and we played on that to up the price ? In which case Henry is talking absolute bollocks and there is no link to back up the original claim. Whatever that was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." thats what seems strange, if we'd settled for 20million does that mean torres would have gone for 35mill ? i can't really buy that. What i find strange is that the interview was cited as evidence the club accepted a price on sunday then upped it on monday when the interview implies that as impossible. The alternative is that Chelsea made the bid of £50m independently on monday and Henry let a few people know this so that we could up our price to £35m. Which is ridiculous. is it likely that chelsea really said to liverpool "whatever you pay for carroll we'll pay 15mill extra for torres" or more likely that the ball park figure for torres was known (i believe near guesses were in the british press that weekend) and we played on that to up the price ? In which case Henry is talking absolute bollocks and there is no link to back up the original claim. Whatever that was. good to see you back anyway, did you speak to ben arfa or just scare him with drunken nonsense ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted February 18, 2011 Share Posted February 18, 2011 I reckon I almost qualify as an ITK. Was at a Liverpool talk in yesterday with Dalglish and Hansen - Dalglish said that the deal for Carroll was agreed on Sunday night. Apparently we then upped the price on Monday after we saw all the press on it and on Torres. So Liverpool upped their price for Torres from Chelsea. LFC's owner has already confirmed the deal was done 24 hours before Ashley 'accepted' Carrolls request and reluctantly accepted LFC's bid. LFC's owner knew the price Chelsea would need to pay for Torres would be £15m more than NUFC wanted for Carroll so they could balance the books with the £6m they made off the other centre forward they sold (who's name escapes me) Carroll and the bloke from Holland for torres. Link? http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/feb/04/john-w-henry-interview-liverpool if as he says there, Henry was 'surprised to receive a bid of £50m on the monday morning from chelsea' it must mean that Chelsea knew the Carroll price was £35m on the sunday night. As he says himself, Chelsea were aware the price Liverpool were willing to sell Torres at was the price of Carroll + £15m. Therefore, to have that surprising bid on monday morning of £50m means the price was known on sunday night and there was no 'raising' of the price later on monday by us. seems strange that they would say the price of carroll +15mill and not just name a figure in which case they could have got more. "The negotiation for us was simply the difference in prices paid by Chelsea and to Newcastle," Henry said. "Those prices could have been £35m [from Chelsea for Torres] and £20m [to Newcastle for Carroll], 40 and 25 or 50 and 35. It was ultimately up to Newcastle how much this was all going to cost. They [Newcastle] made a hell of a deal. We felt the same way." thats what seems strange, if we'd settled for 20million does that mean torres would have gone for 35mill ? i can't really buy that. What i find strange is that the interview was cited as evidence the club accepted a price on sunday then upped it on monday when the interview implies that as impossible. The alternative is that Chelsea made the bid of £50m independently on monday and Henry let a few people know this so that we could up our price to £35m. Which is ridiculous. is it likely that chelsea really said to liverpool "whatever you pay for carroll we'll pay 15mill extra for torres" or more likely that the ball park figure for torres was known (i believe near guesses were in the british press that weekend) and we played on that to up the price ? In which case Henry is talking absolute bollocks and there is no link to back up the original claim. Whatever that was. good to see you back anyway, did you speak to ben arfa or just scare him with drunken nonsense ? Scared him with drunken nonsense, started rambling on about the everton goal, asked how is leg was, he asked me wtf i was dojng there, got the photo then left him alone. Think he thought I was a club spy keeping tabs on him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts