NUFC Transfer Rumours

[STM]

5 minutes ago, PopeandGlory said:

 

My first paragraph points out that Howe clearly can’t rate him highly if he is limited to 5 minutes every couple of games.

 

My second paragraph points out we received an offer for him in the summer and should have taken it, which would provide some incoming funds as well as removing his wage from the wagebill without any impact on our results due to how little he is featuring or achieving any impact.

 

I’m not sure what the other ramblings in your post refer to. You seem to have tied yourself in knots when you could have just acknowledged we received an offer and your original post was therefore inaccurate.

Ramblings? 

 

Your name looks new but I feel like your bullshit is familiar. Changed usernames? 

 

Anyway, I've pointed out why you are wrong, now fuck off back to football manager. 

[nufcjmc]

Think the rumoured fee was 6 or 7m assume we still have a psr value with him so would more likely break even but save his wages. 

 

Wanted 16m offered 9m dollars approx 7m 

 

https://www.themag.co.uk/2024/08/made-public-why-miguel-almiron-didnt-join-mls-club-despite-transfer-fee-agreed-verbally-newcastle-united/

 

Obviously all rumoured, if we then followed that up with the rumoured 40/45m for elanga the miggy fee doesn't touch the sides. 

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by nufcjmc

[Matt1892]

2 minutes ago, nufcjmc said:

Think the rumoured fee was 6 or 7m assume we still have a psr value with him so would more likely break even but save his wages. 

Break even would still be good business, as any planned amortisation figure would be removed.

 

The problem clubs can have is that with some players they are a depreciating asset, which is what Miggy is, so sometimes you are better off taking less to move them on, compared to having them take a wage when they are filling a space where an upgrade is needed.

[timeEd32]

Wasn't part of the problem that Miggy wanted higher wages and they were taking that out of the fee? 

 

When we didn't sell him I assumed he'd have more of a role than we've seen to date. I'm very surprised we didn't jump at the chance to get two years of wages out the door.

[Dr.Spaceman]

We shouldn't sell anyone below value as it may set a precedent and invite lower offers for other players. Other clubs are cunts with asking prices and some seemingly get their way, why can't we become that?

[nufcjmc]

27 minutes ago, Matt1892 said:

Break even would still be good business, as any planned amortisation figure would be removed.

 

The problem clubs can have is that with some players they are a depreciating asset, which is what Miggy is, so sometimes you are better off taking less to move them on, compared to having them take a wage when they are filling a space where an upgrade is needed.

Not going to disagree really letting an asset go for nothing is not good business in a PSR world. Issue is our finances in Jan or this accounting year in general it maybe didn't work for us if you believe the media as being 100% true then we would let him go for 16m we were offered half that which for a 40m player over 5 years would at best cover 1 year of amortisation which may have been a step too far. Your then saying well keep him for the squad as he's too expensive to replace. 

 

We have got ourselves in a little mess really with the older or players who have little value but as other have said you can't sell what your getting no offers on. 

[nufcjmc]

2 minutes ago, Dr.Spaceman said:

We shouldn't sell anyone below value as it may set a precedent and invite lower offers for other players. Other clubs are cunts with asking prices and some seemingly get their way, why can't we become that?

It's the whole debate about cut our losses on an asset to move forward even if it means having to sign a certain value of player because of it. Then keeping a player as its financially crippling to go back out in the market for a player than to hang onto them for now.