Sonko

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
What's so confusing about maximum 5 loan players in a match squad, and being too **** to be one of those 5 players? At least we were only paying him 20k p/w not 30k like people were saying
 
midlands_tiger said:
What's so confusing about maximum 5 loan players in a match squad, and being too **** to be one of those 5 players? At least we were only paying him 20k p/w not 30k like people were saying
Click to expand...

I think we wer payin him 28k a week (100% of his wages) but pompey were paying 14k (50%)
 
The article states we paid him £1,631-00 per minute that he played for us.

Also, interestingly when we tried to get rid, Stoke didn't want him back. Newcastle, then of the championship remember, did want him, but we asked for a fee of £500k, at which point they backed out. Financially astute move by Duffman I'd say.

Judging by Ashleys ability to throw away money, it appears that even he was 'out Ashleyed' by Duffman.

Thank God, Adam Pearson came back to steady the ship and correct the lash ups of the previous administration (pun intended)
 
Arnold_Lane said:
The article states we paid him £1,631-00 per minute that he played for us.

Also, interestingly when we tried to get rid, Stoke didn't want him back. Newcastle, then of the championship remember, did want him, but we asked for a fee of £500k, at which point they backed out. Financially astute move by Duffman I'd say.

Judging by Ashleys ability to throw away money, it appears that even he was 'out Ashleyed' by Duffman.

Thank God, Adam Pearson came back to steady the ship and correct the lash ups of the previous administration (pun intended)
Click to expand...

Maybe I read it wrong at the time but I thought it was Stoke who blocked his move from Hull to Newcastle by demanding a fee.
Don't see how we could demand a fee on a player who isn't ours.
 
John. Walkington. said:
Don't see how we could demand a fee on a player who isn't ours.
Click to expand...

Compensation for the termination of the season long loan with us. Possibly a demand that they repaid the loan fee we paid for having Sonko in the first place. If you paid me £100 to borrow my car for a week and I came round on Tuesday night and said I was having it back then to lend to my mum you'd want some of your money back wouldn't you.
 
So we got rid of Turner permanently (for £4m and on £25k/week) and brought in Sonko on loan (for £500k and £20k/week) and certain relegation from the Premier League?
 
midlands_tiger said:
and mcshane (cant remember if we paid or swapped) 26k p/w
Click to expand...

They were completely seperate deals, much to the annoyance of Charlton and Brentford. Given there was a £2.5M bid for McShane rejected it is rather bizarre that we then only got £4M for Turner and then Sunderland agreed we could have the ninja for £500k though. It's almost like the fee for Turner was really 50% more than the paperwork says.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back