Guest johnson293 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 SSN said yesterday that Barton would sign for us depending on Parker's transfer to West Ham. Basically West Ham won't get Parker, unless we get Barton. Remember though - this 'interest' from West ham is coming from Bartons agent, Willie McKay. The bloke is probably just trying to hurry the deal up with us, by trying to pressure West Ham into completing the Parker signing. Probably also working on Man City's behalf, to ensure that they get the full £5.5m up front, instead of the alleged installements, by introducing West Ham as a possible destination. Probably! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
skryp2nit3 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Kinda odd that Man City are haggling over the full payment, when transfer fees are usually paid over the length of the player's contract nowadays. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shaun11177 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Are we that short of cash that we need to sell Parker 1st. Where exactly is the transfer fund going to be spent? We are looking at Viduka-nothing there. We make 2.5m on Parker/Barton. We sign Ben-Haim-nothing there. We sign the Czech lad-3-4m+Baines-5m. Thats a total net outlay of 6mish. So where is the rest,if there is a rest going to end up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Newbie Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Kinda odd that Man City are haggling over the full payment, when transfer fees are usually paid over the length of the player's contract nowadays. Apparently they need the money for a debt payment which is due soon, as their takeover seems to be never ending. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stozo Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Are we that short of cash that we need to sell Parker 1st. Where exactly is the transfer fund going to be spent? Right now we basically have very little money because of the takeover. Ashley won't put in his millions until he has control and Fred won't be spending his money when he knows in all likelihood he'll be ousted in a couple of weeks. Basically we have a deadlock and thus no money so to get Barton we have to sell Parker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leazes1986 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I would also imagine that Allardyce won't want to end up buying Barton and then something happens and he ends up stuck with Parker as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Are we that short of cash that we need to sell Parker 1st. Where exactly is the transfer fund going to be spent? Right now we basically have very little money because of the takeover. Ashley won't put in his millions until he has control and Fred won't be spending his money when he knows in all likelihood he'll be ousted in a couple of weeks. Basically we have a deadlock and thus no money so to get Barton we have to sell Parker. FF wouldn't be spending his money - it is our money & before MA came in with his offer FF had apparently said there was money to spend (he must have told Sam this for Sam to take the job). If Sam has said he wants Barton then we go and buy him & suffer any consequences. At the moment the Chairman is FF & he needs to ok the cash release. I can not understand why MA simply doesn't write a cheque, publisize this & make a PR killing over FF. If we then don't get Barton, a player Sam wants & a transfer MA would fund then FF would find himself in a more untenable position then he is already. The current position is ridiculous. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stozo Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Are we that short of cash that we need to sell Parker 1st. Where exactly is the transfer fund going to be spent? Right now we basically have very little money because of the takeover. Ashley won't put in his millions until he has control and Fred won't be spending his money when he knows in all likelihood he'll be ousted in a couple of weeks. Basically we have a deadlock and thus no money so to get Barton we have to sell Parker. FF wouldn't be spending his money - it is our money & before MA came in with his offer FF had apparently said there was money to spend (he must have told Sam this for Sam to take the job). If Sam has said he wants Barton then we go and buy him & suffer any consequences. At the moment the Chairman is FF & he needs to ok the cash release. I can not understand why MA simply doesn't write a cheque, publisize this & make a PR killing over FF. If we then don't get Barton, a player Sam wants & a transfer MA would fund then FF would find himself in a more untenable position then he is already. The current position is ridiculous. The club is currently making a loss so the only way to get transfer money is through raising funds by selling players or taking out a loan or something. The second option isn't possible I don't think due to takeover rules. So when the club is making a loss and has debt repayments to meet Fred or in the past the Halls had to put their hands in their pockets. I think the fact we are fast running out of money was apparent last year when we only spent £15m and in January where we spent nothing. Also you have to remember Fred is still in hospital so he won't actually be doing any club business. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Even if he wanted to as a 'good will' gesture or PR stunt, I dont think Ashley would be allowed to put money into the team yet. Also, when he met the board, he may have told them once he gets control he will put £40m (or however much) up as a transfer kitty - but ONLY when he gets control. Thus, they may be forced/more inclined to sell him their shares, and give him control for the good of the club/team, and quicker. If he just paid for this player or that one, while only a shareholder, it would/could weaken his position slightly. And over the last few years, when did any of the other (existing or previous) shareholders stump up for a player, when the pot was empty?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Even if he wanted to as a 'good will' gesture or PR stunt, I dont think Ashley would be allowed to put money into the team yet. Not necessarily the case - Lerner bought us Petrov before his takeover had gone through, although I guess it depends how far down the line things have gone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Even if he wanted to as a 'good will' gesture or PR stunt, I dont think Ashley would be allowed to put money into the team yet. Not necessarily the case - Lerner bought us Petrov before his takeover had gone through, although I guess it depends how far down the line things have gone. How's he done, btw? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 FF may well be very unwell but he can still carry out business. Mike Ashley is the new owner in waiting. It is just a matter of time. FF clearly told Sam he'd have money (I'd imagine without saying you'll have to sell first) so FF should put up as he is still in charge. If he can not/ will not he needs to move aside. MA can do what he wants with his money; there are ways & means of getting money into the club for transfers. I've said this somewhere before but we really are in danger of making a sows ear out of a silk purse. If Sam misses out on his reported "top transfer target" he will be seriously pissed off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stozo Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 FF may well be very unwell but he can still carry out business. Mike Ashley is the new owner in waiting. It is just a matter of time. FF clearly told Sam he'd have money (I'd imagine without saying you'll have to sell first) so FF should put up as he is still in charge. If he can not/ will not he needs to move aside. MA can do what he wants with his money; there are ways & means of getting money into the club for transfers. I've said this somewhere before but we really are in danger of making a sows ear out of a silk purse. If Sam misses out on his reported "top transfer target" he will be seriously pissed off. I think your missing the piont. Why should Fred put up his money when he is weeks away from being ousted all together, you have to remember this is a business and it makes no business sense for Fred to spend £5m when he is about to leave. It would be the equivalant of Branson buying a whole fleet of Boeing's for Virgin just before he is about to sell up. Fact is while he may have promised funds the situation has now changed and those funds are not available. We have to wait for the takeover to be completed before we can do any real spending. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 If it's true that Parker doesn't really want to move, I wouldn't be surprised if the news that we won't complete the Barton deal until he joins West Ham was put out to put pressure on him to agree terms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SLK Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 4-3-3 was used by Big Sam at Bolton. Butt, Emre and Barton could work. I am ambivalent whether Emre stays or goes . However if he stays please,please do not let him take corner kicks and don't let him near the ball at free kicks. So you don't want Emre scoring a free kick against the mackems Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 4-3-3 was used by Big Sam at Bolton. Butt, Emre and Barton could work. I am ambivalent whether Emre stays or goes . However if he stays please,please do not let him take corner kicks and don't let him near the ball at free kicks. So you don't want Emre scoring a free kick against the mackems Not a fantastic record is it? Would be ok if all his other free kicks were good but half the time they are absolutely woeful! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 FF may well be very unwell but he can still carry out business. Mike Ashley is the new owner in waiting. It is just a matter of time. FF clearly told Sam he'd have money (I'd imagine without saying you'll have to sell first) so FF should put up as he is still in charge. If he can not/ will not he needs to move aside. MA can do what he wants with his money; there are ways & means of getting money into the club for transfers. I've said this somewhere before but we really are in danger of making a sows ear out of a silk purse. If Sam misses out on his reported "top transfer target" he will be seriously pissed off. I think your missing the piont. Why should Fred put up his money when he is weeks away from being ousted all together, you have to remember this is a business and it makes no business sense for Fred to spend £5m when he is about to leave. It would be the equivalant of Branson buying a whole fleet of Boeing's for Virgin just before he is about to sell up. Fact is while he may have promised funds the situation has now changed and those funds are not available. We have to wait for the takeover to be completed before we can do any real spending. Excuse me? "His" money?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 4-3-3 was used by Big Sam at Bolton. Butt, Emre and Barton could work. I am ambivalent whether Emre stays or goes . However if he stays please,please do not let him take corner kicks and don't let him near the ball at free kicks. So you don't want Emre scoring a free kick against the mackems Not a fantastic record is it? Would be ok if all his other free kicks were good but half the time they are absolutely woeful! Agree, his set piece delivery has been terrible. That game against the Mackems is one of the only decent games he's had in terms of set pieces...and that was two years ago! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsunami Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 FF may well be very unwell but he can still carry out business. Mike Ashley is the new owner in waiting. It is just a matter of time. FF clearly told Sam he'd have money (I'd imagine without saying you'll have to sell first) so FF should put up as he is still in charge. If he can not/ will not he needs to move aside. MA can do what he wants with his money; there are ways & means of getting money into the club for transfers. I've said this somewhere before but we really are in danger of making a sows ear out of a silk purse. If Sam misses out on his reported "top transfer target" he will be seriously pissed off. I think your missing the piont. Why should Fred put up his money when he is weeks away from being ousted all together, you have to remember this is a business and it makes no business sense for Fred to spend £5m when he is about to leave. It would be the equivalant of Branson buying a whole fleet of Boeing's for Virgin just before he is about to sell up. Fact is while he may have promised funds the situation has now changed and those funds are not available. We have to wait for the takeover to be completed before we can do any real spending. Then FF will show that he really does not care for the club in the way that he purports, he doesn't own the club & it is not his money. MA will/ should secure the debts. This is a business struggle but it is the club that could suffer. That raises 2 issues; 1 is that FF always said the club would come first & clearly this is now untrue (?) & secondly, and more importantly, could raise questions of MA. He should be looking after his new acquisition; so what is going on? I hope this isn't a sign of things to come. Neither man is currently covering themselves in glory to my eyes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gav H Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Then again, mebbes not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 yeah, we've no idea at what stage the takeover is at, how much their is to spend or even who's money is there to be spent. So let's just blame everybody. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SLK Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 The funds FFS promised SA were not out of FFS's personal account...They were coming from NUFC's budget...At the end of the day FFS will be selling his shares to MA for the same price whether funds were released to SA or not...I don't see how releasing funds for SA can affect how much money FFS will get from selling his shares...It's not as if the share price will change and MA will offer less to FFS if the funds were given to SA... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordie jamie Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Is there any update on the Parker and Barton transfers? how long does it take for Parker to have a medical unless he failed as he is injury prone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nguyen Van Falk Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Is there any update on the Parker and Barton transfers? how long does it take for Parker to have a medical unless he failed as he is injury prone? Where can I buy this "Mike Ashley" from? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest johnson293 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 But if Shepherd suddenly stumped up a huge amount of money (out of his pocket, or the club) for another classic 'trophy' signing, would that not affect the share price/club value, since the team would then own a valuable asset? Not saying we are gonna make such a signing, but any signing could have a similar effect to the clubs value. Hence why it may not be allowed under takeover rules. Same thing could apply to Ashley - affecting the value of the club/company he is trying to take over by adding value to it? Though same thing would apply to sales, I suppose so if buying was suspended, surely selling would be as well? I'm really not sure, and not fully up on such matters. 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