Transfer Rumours Transfer Rumours thread

  • 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!
InBiscanWeTrust said:
I guess depends what they want. If they want to make a quick buck then yeah, but then question gets asked do we want a 17 yr old who isn't near the first team demanding that sort of money? If they have their head screwed on and decent agent / family advising them with some belief they will make it then wouldn't worry about money at that stage and be at club that offers them best footballing chance, with klopp here, they've got chance at one very good club with one of best managers.
Click to expand...

yeah but what about the city and the utd and the cheslea who will pay it. thats the point. If you say go try poach the next raheem sterling (and we did lets be fair pay qpr for him) can we do this again?

Your point is excellent. Nobody should be looking for the cash now they should be looking for the best football education and chance but often... well if you are looking at two clubs and one offers you a lot more money there is a natural inclination to say this club wants me more..

I hope it works but i can see many times we will just end up breaking this rule and it will be for the cameron brannigans and jon flanagans of this world not the ibe, ince, sterlings... and the reality is we've made quite a bit of money seeing young talent, buying them in and selling them on.

LFC need to back the policy with the very best footballing education. Our academy is **** compared to chelseas and citys, spurs seems better as does utds, but those elites like city and utd and cheslea never seen to give a home grown kid a chance at all. the issue we have is we are making this rule in isolation in a competitive market place.

it will take us 5/6 years to see if it works at least.
 
Jigsawklopp said:
Get Well Soon, Bev.
We're all rooting for you. Best wishes from everyone on L-Kop xx
You must log in or register to see images

13 Oct 2016
Anfield Alert: 79% of LFC fans reject Liverpool swap-deal for 'wonderful' €45m attacker[/paste:font]
10/13/2016 11:12:00 pm | Jaimie K
PSG are reportedly set to offer Lucas Moura in part-exchange for Liverpool's Philippe Coutinho, but what do Reds fans think about this potential deal?

Earlier this week, French newspaper Le10 Sport claimed that PSG are willing to offer Moura plus a 'mouth-watering fee' to temp the Reds into selling Coutinho, but Liverpool fans don't appear to be impressed by PSG's plan.

I conducted a poll this week asking fans whether Liverpool should accept the deal, and the result were emphatic: 79% of participating fans voted NO the swap deal, which represents a massive vote of confidence for Coutinho.

With Barcelona also allegedly interested, would Coutinho even be interested in a move to PSG? When asked in July about a move to Ligue One, he offered the following diplomatic response:

"As far as I know, there's no offer [from PSG]. I'm here with the national team, and this subject is for my representatives".

This is not a denial, and it's markedly different to Coutinho's prior unambiguous responses to questions about his future. For example, in April 2015, Coutinho told reporters:

"My mind is at Liverpool. I’m a Liverpool player and I don’t think about those things because I’m happy here and want to be here".

Historically, Barcelona is hugely attractive for South American attackers, but the competition for places is intense, and the reality is that Coutinho will probably have more chance of becoming a first-team regular at PSG.

Ehttp://www.liverpool-kop.com/2016/1...utinho-moura-swap-deal-lfc-transfer-news.htmlither way, in my view, it's just a matter of time before Coutinho leaves Anfield.
Click to expand...

no... in short they like to act the big boys and make out they offered 200mil for neymar so the price starts now at 70mil. utd paid 100 mil euros ofr pogba so... coutinho has to command the same.

simple as. he's signed til 2020 so we have the power.
 
Jigsawklopp said:
Liverpool transfer news and rumours: Inter Milan join race for €30million Jonas Hector
Click to expand...

He signed a new contract stupidly at cologne and now has his agent out rattling the cages.

Every time i see such a link i know its a pure agent play using the usual italian suspects

Hector has missed his chance at a move. i'm not going to bother with any other links to this guy anyway he aint worth the time.
 
InBiscanWeTrust said:
I guess depends what they want. If they want to make a quick buck then yeah, but then question gets asked do we want a 17 yr old who isn't near the first team demanding that sort of money? If they have their head screwed on and decent agent / family advising them with some belief they will make it then wouldn't worry about money at that stage and be at club that offers them best footballing chance, with klopp here, they've got chance at one very good club with one of best managers.
Click to expand...
What you're saying makes perfect sense, but since when did that matter to a 17 year old with delusions of grandeur and the glint of big money in his eyes?
 
  • Like
Reactions: moreinjuredthanowen
It makes me laugh when a club is offering one of their players plus cash.
PSG is offering Lucas Moura as part of the deal. If that good why do they want him out???.
 
See Chelsea are set to sign a huge kit deal with Nike and Madrid are in talks of a £100m year deal with Nike and adidas.
 
Red Hadron Collider said:
And........?
Click to expand...

good for them?

When our deal with NB runs out (pathetic deal really) we need nike or adidas. I know it sounded a lot at the time but it was actually within 6months already at best middling at best

unfortunatley there must be 3 years min left on it so we get shag all compared to rivals til then.... AS USUAL.
 
moreinjuredthanowen said:
good for them?

When our deal with NB runs out (pathetic deal really) we need nike or adidas. I know it sounded a lot at the time but it was actually within 6months already at best middling at best

unfortunatley there must be 3 years min left on it so we get shag all compared to rivals til then.... AS USUAL.
Click to expand...

It depends on detail as well though. Chelsea brought out of their adidas deal early and paid £30m because they were getting **** return on all shirts sold. We might be getting a really high % of that which could offset some of the initial loss in one off yearly payment.
 
InBiscanWeTrust said:
It depends on detail as well though. Chelsea brought out of their adidas deal early and paid £30m because they were getting **** return on all shirts sold. We might be getting a really high % of that which could offset some of the initial loss in one off yearly payment.
Click to expand...

If the Chelsea deal is like the Man Utd one, they'll lose half their sponsorship money when they fail to get CL anyway
 
Shirt deals aren't that simple. I read a piece by David Conn (I think), about how these deals are structured.
Basically you sign away all profits on the first x Million (x being a number) of shirts sold each year. Then if you sell over that number in a year you start to get a small percentage of the shirt profits. So if Chelsea get 60M a year, then they probably don't get any profit on the first 3, 5, 10 Million shirts they sell each year. I haven't a clue at the number of shirt, but reason dictates that the more money you get upfront, the less your going to get from shirt sales.
So all that guff you hear about player x selling a Million extra shirts doesn't mean the club are going to get any of the money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy Squarefoot and organic red
Redington said:
Shirt deals aren't that simple. I read a piece by David Conn (I think), about how these deals are structured.
Basically you sign away all profits on the first x Million (x being a number) of shirts sold each year. Then if you sell over that number in a year you start to get a small percentage of the shirt profits. So if Chelsea get 60M a year, then they probably don't get any profit on the first 3, 5, 10 Million shirts they sell each year. I haven't a clue at the number of shirt, but reason dictates that the more money you get upfront, the less your going to get from shirt sales.
So all that guff you hear about player x selling a Million extra shirts doesn't mean the club are going to get any of the money.
Click to expand...

You're saying Pogba didn't pay for himself in shirt sales <yikes>
 
  • Like
Reactions: saintanton
Redington said:
Shirt deals aren't that simple. I read a piece by David Conn (I think), about how these deals are structured.
Basically you sign away all profits on the first x Million (x being a number) of shirts sold each year. Then if you sell over that number in a year you start to get a small percentage of the shirt profits. So if Chelsea get 60M a year, then they probably don't get any profit on the first 3, 5, 10 Million shirts they sell each year. I haven't a clue at the number of shirt, but reason dictates that the more money you get upfront, the less your going to get from shirt sales.
So all that guff you hear about player x selling a Million extra shirts doesn't mean the club are going to get any of the money.
Click to expand...

Well chelsea paid to get out of current deal early because they weren't getting enough % of shirt sales so imagine they are getting more but yeah, generally a lot more into it than club getting all the money from shirts.
 
Who knows. In the end I feel as though we have to earn the deals too. I just think warrior and NB are opportunistic sponsors just as we are a club chasing big time.
astro said:
You're saying Pogba didn't pay for himself in shirt sales <yikes>
Click to expand...

in gorss revenue sure... thats the top line. o nthe bottom line.. no chuffing way. same as ibrahimovic. its all boasting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back