Oh I see. Looking online, I can't see any Bishop transfer rumours other than the January ones. And West Brom are apparently close to agreeing a £6m figure for Mings. £6m for Mings plus another couple for Bishop with you getting him back on loan seems pretty reasonable to me then. All I heard from two different people (one of whom I don't know, so could not possibly say how reliable, but they were independent of each other) was that it was a tentative enquiry. No bid or anything. If it wasn't you boys, it would make perfect sense and I might believe it because (a) we need a left back/CB and (b) we have form for sending buying youngsters and loaning them back. As I said, it also makes sense to keep the PL money in East Anglia, but it may be too emotive for Evans to consider. I think he's more business minded than that though, tbh. McCarthy has a proven record of efficiency in the transfer window and a deal like that wouldn't weaken your squad much (other than the loss of Mings) while giving you a big sum for the transfer kitty. It doesn't have to be with Norwich - could be any of the teams you listed, though I'd be very surprised if Palace needed another left back as they have Pape Soure, Joel Ward and Zeki Fryers (unless it would be an exchange for Fryers - did you rate him?)
Fryers had a mare for us - however, may do well if he came back. Mings I'm not a massive fan of, however Bishop would certainly go for quite a large fee should he leave. The boys class. Mings/Bishop/McGoldrick/Murphy and for once if we wish we do have some very saleable assets.
Is Murphy saleable? If anything he's almost unsellable - he's too old for anyone to want him for the fee he's worth to you. Another season like his and you will definitely be in the play-offs at least IMO. Replacing him would be very difficult. Whereas you could sell Mings or Bishop and I think you'd have just as much chance of the play-offs, if not more so with money well spent. That's the difference between youngsters and his age - he's in the form of his life but from a purchase point of view, that is just money down the drain. The others I agree with you. A transfer policy where you sell high and buy low sounds like a pipe dream, but is a plausible model for success if you can get it right - look at Southampton.
reports of Cardiff willing to pay 4m for him, plus almost half the other championship clubs reported as interested? which to me sounds tempting for somebody with probably 2 reasonable seasons left in them. As for Mings, we have more than a capable LB in parr (Norway international) & if you think 2m for bishop then you really are in cloud cuckoo land!
Fair enough, I think you would be mad to take £4m for him from Cardiff personally because I honestly can't see you getting play-offs without him unless you invest all that £4m in a striker and that striker has a stellar season. Which is a high risk strategy because investing in strikers is probably the most difficult. That's what I thought on Mings - basically anything you get for him could legitimately be used to strengthen elsewhere and therefore boost the squad as a whole. Where would you spend it? Sorry to repeat, but I think you're misunderstanding about Bishop. The whole point is that he would be loaned back - that inevitably is more attractive (i.e. a lower price) and means the price paid would be less the transfer fee (i.e. even more lower price). When you factor in that any fee arrangement for Bishop is likely to be heavily performance based, I would be very surprised if you got more than £2m up front from any club for him. £2m with add-ons plus sell-on fee would be an exceptionally good deal, much as it might not sound like it in your head, because it basically guarantees you an income stream for several years, plus another lump if he's very successful, but removes all risk that he never meets his promise.
" £2m with add-ons plus sell-on fee would be an exceptionally good deal " No, it would be an absolutely dreadful deal - transfer fees for English players are going up, mainly to do with clubs having to have their quotas etc. He's young so has sell on, will get better. Also, with the new tv deal transfers should be a lot higher than in previous years as the prem sides will have more to spend. We'd be looking at a hell of a lot more than any £2 mill for Bishop that's for sure. The days of us giving players away for 50p are long gone - every player at Portman Road will have his price.
Sorry westy, I mean in the context of him also being loaned back for a season - my post above isn't clear on its own . It basically means you'd be getting a large lump of cash a full year in advance - in other words, laughing.
At last somebody mentioned the English player quota problem. This is already being looked at to be increased so homegrown players will have stupid price tags now because every prem team will need them. I also believe Marcus is more business than sentiment but reckon he wants to keep the majority of this team together to finally see some success after his spending since buying us. It does make sense to sell one player every summer for big PROFIT and strengthen though.
Who would be laughing? The buying club, I assume. £2m for Bishop, regardless of him being loaned back to us for a year, is not good business for us. Yes, you're right that we would get to have Bishop for another year, and receive a nice £2m to invest in the squad, but if he continues developing and improving, as performances have suggested, then we'd be kicking ourselves we didn't hold on for him longer. In my opinion, if all we can get for him this summer is a £2m bid, with a few clauses and a loan-back option for a year, then we may as well keep hold of Bishop and watch him improve at Portman Road on our terms. If needs be, we can sell him a year later for more money, assuming he continues to show improvement and consistency. Because at the end of the day, if he does well for us in his loan-back season, and then he moves to his parent club and all we've got for him was £2m, then we'd be rightly feeling priced out. Give him a year or two more here, and only sell if we get a silly offer.
Teddy will be crazy to leave us so early in his career and I am sure that Mick will give him all the game time next year that he needs in which develop his game even further.
I just love the way its all so black and white to Rob! Fact of the matter is we are a club that doesn't have to sell until we get an offer that suits us, so he can do all the equations he likes because they mean **** all!
You persist in making comments based on what you want me to have said rather than what I actually said. I have never said that you wouldn't get an offer that suits you, I was just merely pointing out that the reality of what suits Marcus Evans is almost certainly very different to what suits Guru. It's not a case of it being black and white, it's a case of if the right price comes along Evans will sell and rightly so. As San Diego alludes to, selling one player for big profit to invest elsewhere does less damage to the team, but gives you funds to collectively strengthen the squad.
Because player values don't hold - they are relative to contract length. Online it suggests that his contract expires 2017, so if you sell next summer he will only have a year left on the contract. Amortisation of player asset values happens quickest in the final two years of his contract (i.e. a player is most valuable with 2+ years left). Asset valuation is likely to fall by anywhere between half and two-thirds with two years left on the contract as compared to one. If Bishop wants to leave, that basically means you should definitely sell now. Otherwise there is a very good chance you would get less next summer than if you sold him now and took him back on loan. There's a ceiling to Championship midfielder valuations (what's the highest you've seen one bought for? - strikers are a different question) and it's not much higher than £2m with a player having only a year to run on his contract. Of course you could take a chance and hold on to him until his contract runs down, relying on the youth development arbitration, but that rarely gets you much. Essentially, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. You get to have your cake and eat it by taking the money in advance (admittedly less) but keeping the player for another year (if he's good enough). That gives you the impetus to push for promotion now, which would be far more valuable than waiting for next summer on a wing and a prayer that you might get more (notwithstanding the asset deterioration). Of course, if you are really intent on keeping him, and getting a high price, you need to get him to sign a new contract. Then all the above is moot, I agree. But that's somewhat tricky when a player finds out he can get a payrise, go to a PL club (and yet play first team football on loan) and indeed may not fit within the club's wage structure. I'm not denying that it's all entirely theoretical and may well not happen, but the one thing I would say is that if he does get sold (irrespective of where he goes) if it looks like a lot less than you were hoping for, it will probably be because it is a very good deal in a number of other ways. We might gently tease you lot about Evans wasting money and your big debts, but I don't think any objective Norwich fan looks at his selling policy and thinks he's been taken for a mug
Christ I pity the poor ****er who has a season ticket beside Rob! imagine his droning on all season about contract lengths and transfer market plus 30% or 20% if its under 18months, and then every month after that it goes down by 1.5% until 9 months left when it increases to 2%, but of course if the player is under 21 then that has to increase overall by roughly 23.33333333% on the total before 19 months are left of his contraczzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
well he must do, how else would his excel spreadsheet on player values get updated! plus I have heard he is doing a study on how legroom at football grounds has decreased by 12.3% over the last 2 seasons but of course i'm not saying he is a boring ****er at all.
Good to see your critical thinking abilities have shown marked improvement over the last few years Guru. Quite the moot champion! Having tried to have a swipe at me for "abusing" you, I note that you have resorted to petty insults... Who'd have guessed you'd be such a hypocrite! I had no idea... Binner mods please can you slap Guru on the bottom for being abusive. I think if you want to only be interested in the football, that's absolutely fine, but if you're going to discuss transfer fees or try to work out why your club is doing something then you need to understand that there is as much science and accountancy behind these deals as possible because football is a lucrative business. In other words, Guru, if you didn't care so much and you find it so boring why did you bother replying in the first place? So if you're not interested in the finances, fair enough, but when you're feeling annoyed or bewildered by a sale, just rest assured as I said above that: "if he [or any Ipswich player] does get sold (irrespective of where he goes) if it looks like a lot less than you were hoping for, it will probably be because it is a very good deal in a number of other ways"
bloody good job this thread wasn't on the Norwich board rob, you would have banned by now for flogging an argument to death! the science to a transfer fee is this buying club names a fee, selling club tells them to **** off unless it is this, buying club then increases bid, selling club says **** off try again, buying club then increases by a small amount plus add-ons, selling club thinks about it, comes down on their original price but still tells buying club no go. and repeat until a deal is done. no bloody transfer market value website **** involved! no jog on, because you are boring the tits off me and I might have to take a tip from the Spanish school of debating!
Er, I was responding to a post from nuggets. If you didn't want to continue to discuss this, why did you persist on this thread? We were having a perfectly civil conversation but as usual you resort to abusing people when you don't like that you're way out of your depth. Well sorry mate, but I can't help you not understanding these things, but if you don't want to try, don't engage. Your last post shows just how little you know about buying and selling players - they were doing this detailed analysis right back decades. There isn't a single transfer that happens in the professional leagues that hasn't involved a player value consultancy opinion and a whole raft of other advisers and assessments. I don't expect you to know, and I accept that you may not want to know, but it really is petty of you to go around abusing posters who are just trying to have a civil discussion simply because you are ignorant. As usual, you always have to have the last word because you simply can't stand it that someone has pulled your pants down. "Jog on" "boring the tits off me" charming! I really didn't expect the Ipswich board to be so intolerant, but then you are the biggest hypocrite around so what did I expect? It really does show how little you understood why you were banned from our board.
