Forest go for plan B

I dont know if its true but I think it might well be

I was told earlier that the reason Hull have loaned Jack Hobbs to Forest rather then selling him is because we have a sell on fee included as part of the deal that took Hobbs to Hull

Forest have loaned Hobbs for the season and will sign him on a free transfer in 12 months when his contract runs out so basically we lose out on part of the 500K as its a loan fee and not a "sell on" fee

 

That sounds pretty plausible tbh. I was wondering about the somewhat convoluted transfer.

 

Not sure if the loan deal is true or not but frankly the idea that Hull would prefer that to selling, just to do us out of a sell on is complete bollox ... from a purely economic standpoint ...

let's give it a women shopping analogy .. my missus comes back from thae sales and tells me that she has saved me £100 because the dress she has bought was reduced from £200 to £100 ... no you haven't I explain patiently - I'm now a £100 poorer than I was this morning ... so unless you are prepared to pay it off by playing naked twister every night for a week, take the bloody dress back ...

 

I dont think Hull would have done it to screw us over more then did it to save themselves a couple of quid

 

@SkySportsPeteO 23m
Nottingham Forest are lining up a move to re-sign former defender Kelvin Wilson from Celtic. #Celtic #NFFC

So they want Danny Collins, Jack Hobbs, Kelvin Wilson, Jamaal Lascelles (Academy player who they rate very highly) and Wes Morgan

I smell a rat, I dont think Forest do want Wes, more then likely they are trying to rock our boat or they have now given up on Wes and moved onto Wilson

Whats the odds they go back in for Luke Chambers from Ipswich

 

If Forest offered us £500k to buy him, and we said "no, loan him for £500k and then sign him on a free transfer" your analogy would be rendered irrelevent.

It's got to be rubbish though. No competent selling club would have allowed us to sign Hobbs with a sell on clause that didn't include loan fees. Players have been getting loaned out far too often in their final year of a contract for clubs not to have seen through the potential ploy and got them included. There are several more likely factors:

1) Hobbs is on PL wages due to our promotion. Forest may be prepared to pay them for one year but not for 3. By signing him on loan with 2 years precontracted for after it Hobbs keeps his wages and Forest get their player for 3 years.

2) It's not unusual for players to be entitled to a loyalty bonus on the completion of their contract, or when sold if they haven't asked for the move. By making it a loan move first it means Hobbs is entitled to any such payment, but we don't need to pay it until next summer.

3) For FFP rules it is in Forest's interests to have him on loan and pay the fee for that, it means that this time next season the entire cost has been accounted for, which means that for future seasons they're not already incurring costs associated to his signing. If they signed him on a permanent deal now then the cost of his fee would be split over the next 3 years in the accounts. Better to take a bigger loss now whilst it's not going to give them a penalty than to save it for later.

There's bound to be more advantages for each party as well, that's just off the top of my head.

 

It was common knowledge you was trying to shift Jack Hobbs, you offered him to us as part exchange for Kasper Schmeichel and tried to include him in the deal to sign Curtis Davies

Im not saying its true that you have loaned Hobbs to cut out sell on fees but its possible. Its what I got told so I put it on here, it would explain why you loaned Hobbs.

 

It's only possible if the people who agreed to sell him to us were a bunch of complete and utter morons who sought no advice from anybody with any knowledge of football.

Where did I say we weren't trying to offload him? I said there's several reasons why the loan has happened rather than a permanent deal and those reasons are more valid than the "avoid a sell on clause" matter.

Before we even go there, part exchange players are considered as part of a transfer fee btw, so that wouldn't have been a way to get out of paying a fee. When Charlton and Brentford complained about our sale of Michael Turner (they were both entitled to sell on fees and felt we were cheating them out of it because of how cheaply we said we sold him) one of the things they asked the FA was what value Paul McShane had placed on him as part of the deal. They were not amused to learn his move had been completed totally independently of the Turner deal and we had indeed sold him for a pittance.

 

IMO, the reason why they've loaned him is because it'll be Brucey's fall back option when they **** up next season.


Should they survive they'll sell him.

 

That summer our transfer dealings was completely crazy, so I wouldnt rule anything out. I said at the time I didnt understand why sell Hobbs and sign St. Ledger for about the same price when Hobbs is the better defender.

Sven very quickly discarded Hobbs and signed numerous centre halfs and played them ahead of him

 

Are you trying to make Proud's tax avoidance idea look sensible?

He's already signed the 2 year pre-contract so he will be a Forest player, and we'd have a job selling him next summer when he's out of contract with us.

 

I don't know/care about the ins and outs, why would I?


All I knew was that he was on a season loan at Forest.

 

Were have i said you tax avoiding with Hobbs. I heard you are avoiding the sell on fee so i posted it.

I dont know if its true or not but if it is it would explain why the Hobbs deal is set out like that instead of just selling him

 

Bloody hell you still dont get it. Our club dont want to do business with you after how you lot got your knickers in a twist before.

All I put is what I got told. I never claimed it was true

 

And Leicesters owners have told you they won't be doing business with Hull have they Proud?? Guessing aren't you, just for a change!!

 

Nope Rob Tanner said it. He gets very little wrong

Dont you find it funny anyway that everytime I say something I get proved right

 

How is that proof? If Rob Tanner told you the World is gonna end tonight would that be proof it was gonna happen.

 

Don't you find it funny how everytime you say something your made to look stupid!!

 

.