Yankuba Minteh: joins Brighton & Hove Albion on a permanent deal (Official)

[The College Dropout]

3 minutes ago, SUPERTOON said:

One of the purples will go next summer imo.

Aye seems that way. Unless PIF suddenly change their approach or we have a constrained summer.  

[STM]

Every year we grow, the more saleable assets we have on our books. Our issue is where we've come from, not where we are going.

[The College Dropout]

7 minutes ago, Joelinton7 said:

I assume the “crazy shit flying about” that Luke is talking about refers to the Gordon/Isak stuff. 

If not Minteh - it’s surely them, no?

 

think maybe the Elanga stuff was ‘crazy stuff’

[Groundhog63]

1 minute ago, STM said:

I keep thinking.... wouldn't it be mental if TCD and KaKa were actually the same person arguing with themselves. Would be some proper freaky psycho shit. 

[KaKa]

1 minute ago, The College Dropout said:

No you didn’t.  You spoke about PSR. 

 

We might need to sell Bruno next summer for PSR reasons. It won’t be because we don’t need him or think we can do better. 
 

Eddie Howe himself said he didn’t want to sell ASM for football reasons but cos of FFP we needed to sell. Thats easy enough for him, why can’t you say it? 
 

This back and forth is in bad faith from you. Enjoy your evening. 

 

Ah, okay. I see what you're getting at now.

 

So I'll put it this way then. If the player was more likely to go out on loan, rather than be a contributor to the first team next season, then would that not be a sale for footballing reasons? Compared to the other saleable assets he's last in the pecking order, as he is not currently a contributor to the first team.

 

These decisions are all being made with the back drop of PSR, and so don't think that can just be swept under the rug as if it is not a factor.

[Joelinton7]

2 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

If not Minteh - it’s surely them, no?

 

think maybe the Elanga stuff was ‘crazy stuff’

Possibly DCL also. Honestly it’s been one of the craziest 48 hours I can remember. We better not have to go through this every year. 

[SAK]

My take:

-It’s shit we have to sell a promising player to meet PSR rules but no guarantee he would come good in a stronger league.

- Selling Minteh (who I would have preferred to grow with us and see where he reached) is preferable to losing Gordon, Isak, or Bruno.

-If we were sailing so close why did we not bring in self sponsorship deals for the training ground which has been revamped and is to be expanded (perfect reason for such a deal) after the NFA moved out. Is it possible they want such sponsorship to fall into the next accounting period and need a sale to cover 2023-24? Not sure what the benefits of that are as I understand it looks at a rolling three year period.

-Couldn’t we get £15m each for Wilson and Almiron before selling a promising player? Other teams are selling youth prospects with no game time for £18m?

 

 

Edited Saturday at 21:02 by SAK

[KaKa]

6 minutes ago, STM said:

I keep thinking.... wouldn't it be mental if TCD and KaKa were actually the same person arguing with themselves. Would be some proper freaky psycho shit. 

 

I'm just trying to understand man 

 

Anyways, perhaps it's gone on too much for today.

 

Really looking forward to seeing how the team shapes up over the summer now and how it looks next season. 

 

Watching Minteh will also be incredibly fascinating.

[Checko]

6 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Eddie Howe himself said he didn’t want to sell ASM for football reasons but cos of FFP we needed to sell. Thats easy enough for him, why can’t you say it? 
 

This back and forth is in bad faith from you. Enjoy your evening. 

As we've seen though with any Eddie Howe injury statement ever, just becaue he says something doesn't make it true. Bear in mind every club says they need to sell because of FFP. It's convenient to tell the player, supporters and other clubs that.

 

'Do you want to buy this player? He's not really good enough for us and a bit injury prone, but go on, he could be great for you.'

 

Or 'Do you want to buy this player? He's fucking great. I wish we didn't have to sell him but, FFP you know?'

[RodneyCisse]

Lad didn’t even have a squad number man, and we’ve had their pants down for £33m

[simonsays]

Selling for more than Chelsea paid for Madueke - he may turn out to be be great, but I think it's good money for him

[Thumbheed]

Wonder how Feyenoord feel about all this 

 

[Scoot]

27 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Ultimately - I believe the tweet and the tweet quoted. 
 

We are reluctantly selling Minteh. Everything suggests he’s going to be a baller. But if not him we would need to sell a proven baller for us. We’ve done the best we can in a bad situation. 
 

We’ve left it too close for comfort and could’ve managed it better. 
 

BTW folks - unless we get a raft of new sponsors or suddenly find buyers for all the squad players. We’ll almost certainly need to sell next season to just comply. We better hope there’s a market for Joe Willock   

 

Probably waiting to see the outcome of the Man City arbitration on APT's before announcing anymore major sponsors. Ge a bit silly to announce a 10 million a year sponsor and then a week later Man City win their arbitration case and they realise that 10 million could have been 100 million. 

 

Plus the as each year goes by we'll have more saleable assets so selling squad players shouldn't be such an issue.

[M1tche]

Anyone stop to think that club and Minteh spoke, and he was told he'd either be loaned or that we were buying someone to play RW? Meaning he'd have either go on loan again or sit on the bench, which he didnt fancy, a bit like Palmer

[Danh1]

Makes you wonder why Liverpool weren't in for him when Slut worked close with him last season? Hopefully it’s because he isn’t all that 

[FLUMPO235]

12 minutes ago, Scoot said:

 

Probably waiting to see the outcome of the Man City arbitration on APT's before announcing anymore major sponsors. Ge a bit silly to announce a 10 million a year sponsor and then a week later Man City win their arbitration case and they realise that 10 million could have been 100 million. 

 

Plus the as each year goes by we'll have more saleable assets so selling squad players shouldn't be such an issue.

I’ve thought that about sponsorship but it doesn’t make any sense. We didn’t even know Man City were going to lodge that legal challenge on the fair market value.

 

So seems a bit odd we have waited for 2 full seasons of missed revenue off sponsorship deals. If we were hoping the fair market value was being removed, we could have just signed a 12 month deal to be renewed every year with renewed terms. That way we could have had this and last seasons £m from training gear sponsor, stadium and training ground. And then benefitted from any changes from the Man City challenge. 
 

however, it’s easy for me to criticise when I have fuck all idea what’s going on behind the scenes. But given genius Dan ashworth doesn’t know how emails work and tipped Garry Neville to be the next pep gaurdiola, it does make you wonder sometimes.

 

 

[Holloway]

intellect over intuition suck my hairy plums

[Whitley mag]

29 minutes ago, RodneyCisse said:

Lad didn’t even have a squad number man, and we’ve had their pants down for £33m

I’d love this to be true but the fact Brighton want him makes me think he ticks all the boxes as they’re big on analytics.

[Kid Icarus]

1 hour ago, gbandit said:

Of gin?

13.5% wine. Be kind

[simonsays]

2 minutes ago, Whitley mag said:

I’d love this to be true but the fact Brighton want him makes me think he ticks all the boxes as they’re big on analytics.

True enough, but it's more than they usually pay for potential.  Have any of their bigger purchases turned into world beaters?

[Sibierski]

£33m is jokes money. Never played for us ffs. 
 

Move forward now with a player that’s actually part of the club.

[relámpago blanco]

17 minutes ago, M1tche said:

Anyone stop to think that club and Minteh spoke, and he was told he'd either be loaned or that we were buying someone to play RW? Meaning he'd have either go on loan again or sit on the bench, which he didnt fancy, a bit like Palmer

No, it's that we are going to be docked points if we don't sell, he was promised a future here, we are peddling him around at the last minute.

 

He is 19, good luck to him.  I wish him all the success in the future and slightly disappointed not to see him for us.

[Sibierski]

Like, would you sign Mitoma now? No. 

[Whitley mag]

5 minutes ago, simonsays said:

True enough, but it's more than they usually pay for potential.  Have any of their bigger purchases turned into world beaters?

Nee idea to be fair just seems they’ve had a lot of success with younger players they’ve brought in.

[toontownman]

54 minutes ago, Thumbheed said:

Wonder how Feyenoord feel about all this