AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If they were the same price it would be a fair comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 To think the club just let the story run as a smoke screen to cover up other deals is a bit far fetched, you could say they let the rumour run in order to make fans think they were willing to spend money on top players, is that as far fetched? I don't think those at the club who actually run things give a shite about rumours. I don't think there's any conspiracy theory to either a) mask other deals or b) pretend we're doing something. These things are part and parcel of football and happen at every club, we're no different. I personally think we were after N'Zogbia until Marveaux signed then the deal was dead. No conspiracy, we just didn't need him anymore. N'Zogbia would have been a much better signing. What Ian Wuh said. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 What a joke. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 To think the club just let the story run as a smoke screen to cover up other deals is a bit far fetched, you could say they let the rumour run in order to make fans think they were willing to spend money on top players, is that as far fetched? I don't think those at the club who actually run things give a shite about rumours. I don't think there's any conspiracy theory to either a) mask other deals or b) pretend we're doing something. These things are part and parcel of football and happen at every club, we're no different. I personally think we were after N'Zogbia until Marveaux signed then the deal was dead. No conspiracy, we just didn't need him anymore. N'Zogbia would have been a much better signing. Cheers Mystic Meg. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colocho Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If they were the same price it would be a fair comparison. Hypothetically speaking... Marveaux Agent fee + Signing-on fee: £2 million Three years wages at £35,000 a week: £5.5 million = £7.5 million (for NUFC) N'Zogbia Transfer fee + sign-on and agent fees: £9 million Just out of interest, who would you rather have, honestly? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If they were the same price it would be a fair comparison. Hypothetically speaking... Marveaux Agent fee + Signing-on fee: £2 million Three years wages at £35,000 a week: £5.5 million = £7.5 million (for NUFC) N'Zogbia Transfer fee + sign-on and agent fees: £9 million Just out of interest, who would you rather have, honestly? Was N'Zogbia offering to play for free, save his signing on fee? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If they were the same price it would be a fair comparison. Hypothetically speaking... Marveaux Agent fee + Signing-on fee: £2 million Three years wages at £35,000 a week: £5.5 million = £7.5 million (for NUFC) N'Zogbia Transfer fee + sign-on and agent fees: £9 million Just out of interest, who would you rather have, honestly? Given the choice with £35m in the bank... BOTH.. Routledge out, sign both players would make perfect sense Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 So we would be paying £2m to Marveaux and his agent, but Zoggy would only cost £9m including all fees? I would rather have Zoggy anyway personally, as I've never seen Marv play, but what I'm saying is that the club might have decided to go for a cheaper/riskier option. And that's a valid strategy IMO, either because we can't afford the more expensive player or we decide the extra money would be better used elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 This is a f***ing disgrace. f*** off Ashley, f*** off Llambias, f*** off Pardew! (Or "Pardy".... sorry Otter.) f***. OFF!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If they were the same price it would be a fair comparison. Hypothetically speaking... Marveaux Agent fee + Signing-on fee: £2 million Three years wages at £35,000 a week: £5.5 million = £7.5 million (for NUFC) N'Zogbia Transfer fee + sign-on and agent fees: £9 million Just out of interest, who would you rather have, honestly? Was N'Zogbia offering to play for free, save his signing on fee? fuck me and he complains about Pardew's spin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If we assume N'Zogbia would cost about twice as much overall, I think we'd be nearer the truth. I'd still rather have him, but I can understand why the people actually making the decision might have decided otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If they were the same price it would be a fair comparison. Hypothetically speaking... Marveaux Agent fee + Signing-on fee: £2 million Three years wages at £35,000 a week: £5.5 million = £7.5 million (for NUFC) N'Zogbia Transfer fee + sign-on and agent fees: £9 million Just out of interest, who would you rather have, honestly? Was N'Zogbia offering to play for free, save his signing on fee? 9m including signing fee and agent fee is a tad bit low in expectation considering wigan want 9m themselves for the player Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 but what I'm saying is that the club might have decided to go for a cheaper/riskier option. And that's a valid strategy IMO, either because we can't afford the more expensive player or we decide the extra money would be better used elsewhere. You're going too far with all this now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 but what I'm saying is that the club might have decided to go for a cheaper/riskier option. And that's a valid strategy IMO, either because we can't afford the more expensive player or we decide the extra money would be better used elsewhere. You're going too far with all this now. It's just logical based on what I believe about our finances in the past and going forward. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy some big signings, of course I would. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Fire up the relegation measuring device! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 but what I'm saying is that the club might have decided to go for a cheaper/riskier option. And that's a valid strategy IMO, either because we can't afford the more expensive player or we decide the extra money would be better used elsewhere. You're going too far with all this now. It's just logical based on what I believe about our finances in the past and going forward. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy some big signings, of course I would. The team is the priority. Signing N'Zogbia would more than likely pay for itself as he'd be a player who could get us into the top 8 this year. We shouldn't be going for the cheaper/riskier option unless it's the only option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 If we assume N'Zogbia would cost about twice as much overall, I think we'd be nearer the truth. I'd still rather have him, but I can understand why the people actually making the decision might have decided otherwise. Pity the people making the decisions get so many of the big ones wrong we got relegated because of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocker Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Not arsed. Most of you lot didn't expect him in anyway, so what are you fucking whinging about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 It's just logical based on what I believe about our finances in the past and going forward. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy some big signings, of course I would. Weren't we told that our finances going forward was close to breaking even? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Antec Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 It's just logical based on what I believe about our finances in the past and going forward. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy some big signings, of course I would. Weren't we told that our finances going forward was close to breaking even? If we were skint I wonder where Ben Arfa's transfer fee and wages came from Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SimplyAnth Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Whilst I understand this is a forum and it's all about discussing shite throughout the summer whilst nothing is happening, some of the overreactions in the last couple of pages are embarrassing. Feel like I'm in a Facebook group or something, which is a shame because hidden in the shocking drivel is some sensible people/posts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 It's just logical based on what I believe about our finances in the past and going forward. I'm not saying I wouldn't enjoy some big signings, of course I would. Weren't we told that our finances going forward was close to breaking even? And hes keeping them that way in the future by covering our future expenses (players wages) fully upfront using the Carroll Money. It is being reinvested back into the side, but the way they originally suggested it would be was misleading as usual. The money is going towards stopping us from running at a loss, not largely towards transfers atm obviously. For someone whos known as a gambler, hes trying to play it as safe as possible. He isnt investing in players in the hope that their success will increase our future turnover via that success atall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 And hes keeping them that way in the future by covering our future expenses (players wages) fully upfront using the Carroll Money. It is being reinvested back into the side, but the way they originally suggested it would be was misleading as usual. The money is going towards stopping us from running at a loss, not largely towards transfers atm obviously. For someone whos known as a gambler, hes trying to play it as safe as possible. He isnt investing in players in the hope that their success will increase our future turnover via that success atall. 3 years ago Ashley said that he was prepared to put up to £20 million a year into the club. At that time his loans were £110 million, they are now just below £140 million so he still owes us £30 million. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wearside Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Sunderland bound. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2014703/Sunderland-join-chase-Wigan-winger-Charles-NZogbia.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Here we go. How many bites this time? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now