Ikon Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Nolito Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". Didn't Pardew say that the Carroll money would contribute to the transfer fees, contracts and signing on fees of any new players? I'm not sure, he might have. Even so, it will never be as simple as that. Why would the club demand that a new player's wages were covered in a lump sum right now? The way Ashley runs the club, it would make much more sense if he signed players whose wages were sustainable on an annual basis for as long as they played for us. Not that everything Ashley does makes sense, I admit! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". Didn't Pardew say that the Carroll money would contribute to the transfer fees, contracts and signing on fees of any new players? The latest quote was that the Carroll money would 'go back into the club'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". Didn't Pardew say that the Carroll money would contribute to the transfer fees, contracts and signing on fees of any new players? The latest quote was that the Carroll money would 'go back into the club'. It's cool, we are getting a scoreboard yeah? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
J7 Posted April 12, 2011 Share Posted April 12, 2011 Well let's just say you're right Colocho and we spend £29m on Lukaku given all those figures you've given. Say Carroll had signed for £50k over 4 years and kept Carroll, we'd have been £49.5m down. (wages + £35m fee) I think in those 4 years I'd rather Lukaku at £29m than Carroll at £50m. Exactly. Funny how people are counting the wages for potential signing or new contracts, but not the freeing up of wages from the sales. But Llambais is probably hoping we think that way anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If you search Newcastle on news.google.fr there's a link to quotes from Lukaku's agent confirming our interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punk77 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 No chance in hell we'll spend so much money on one player. On the other hand, a move to us could tempt him since we will guarantee him a regular spot in the XI. £10 mill upfront and an amount of cash after x games should do it.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If you search Newcastle on news.google.fr there's a link to quotes from Lukaku's agent confirming our interest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinotheprehistoricgeordie Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think it would be a poor decision to spend over 20 million on one player. We have the chance to bolster our squad in multiple positions, rather than going for a trophy signing that will leave us up shit creek with an injury / difficulty adapting or settling in / or a poor run of form. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Punk77 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 If you search Newcastle on news.google.fr there's a link to quotes from Lukaku's agent confirming our interest. Doesn't mean shit. Those cretins will do anything to earn an extra buck. Lying to the papers is just another way to force the price up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Linked to Chelsea in a deal worth £27 million in the Metro today (the same paper that linked him to us). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? The club said that the £35 million would contribute to the wages, signing on and transfers fees of any new players. That's why I put Lukaku's wages as a lump sum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Duper Branko Strupar Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? The club said that the £35 million would contribute to the wages, signing on and transfers fees of any new players. I'm pretty certain 'the club' never said all that Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? The club said that the £35 million would contribute to the wages, signing on and transfers fees of any new players. I'm pretty certain 'the club' never said all that Depends whether or not you believe Pardew speaks on behalf of the club. Be nice if he could like. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 It's pretty obvious anyway, any money that comes in will contribute to all the club's outgoings. What I mean is that we don't have pay a new player for his entire contract right now out of this season's transfer budget, the sums are much more complicated than that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? well there may not be a bank account called carroll money, but if pardew's said the fee we got will have to go towards fees and wages, and we dont spend any more on both. then i would suggest that the money is being spent based on what we brought in rather than projected earnings, in fact, doesnt that sort of tie in with how ashley's been running the club? given the table of spending and the fact that he likes to receive fees in a lump sum rather than installments? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcmk Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think loans with the option to buy, in recent times, has brought about the best value for money. Would hate to see that cash spunked against the wall on someone who turns out to be Torres-esque Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I just don't buy that all our financial dealings are based purely around the £35m we got for Carroll. What if we were planning to spend £10m in the summer before we sold Carroll? Do we now have to spend £45m? The club will be run based on what Mike Ashley decides it can afford this season and for the life of any player's contract. I don't think our activity can just be measured against this magical £35m we got for Carroll. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? The club said that the £35 million would contribute to the wages, signing on and transfers fees of any new players. I'm pretty certain 'the club' never said all that You're right, it was Pardew - reported by George Caulkin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think loans with the option to buy, in return times, has brought about the best value for money. Would hate to see that cash spunked against the wall on someone who turns out to be Torres-esque How could that possibly happen when we have such an amazing scout? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? The club said that the £35 million would contribute to the wages, signing on and transfers fees of any new players. That's why I put Lukaku's wages as a lump sum. "contribute" could well be the key phrase in that sentence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I think loans with the option to buy, in return times, has brought about the best value for money. Would hate to see that cash spunked against the wall on someone who turns out to be Torres-esque How could that possibly happen when we have such an amazing scout? Anyway, if we don't spend every penny of the £35m then the club will be ripped to shreds. Loans with options to buy won't satisfy people this summer. Calculators at the ready... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I'm nopt saying Lukaku is realistic, but wages will be spread over each year's projected income. We're not writing Lukaku a cheque for 4 years's wages in the summer, out of a big bank account called "The Carroll Money". the thing is though, we are. unless we spend more than 35m on fees and contracts. Eh? How does that follow? The club said that the £35 million would contribute to the wages, signing on and transfers fees of any new players. That's why I put Lukaku's wages as a lump sum. "contribute" could well be the key phrase in that sentence. Let's hope so. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts