Franc Ergs 1,708 Posted September 3, 2019 Share Posted September 3, 2019 5 hours ago, compo said: Seen Mr Stewart yesterday in sainbury's was very tempted to rattle him with our trolley. I'd start questioning him about the items in his trolley "Why are buying that wine ? and how are you managing to fund it". before accidentally emptying the contents of a bottle of chilli sauce all over his stupid f***in face. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacK1950 2,399 Posted September 3, 2019 Share Posted September 3, 2019 1 hour ago, Franc Ergs said: I'd start questioning him about the items in his trolley "Why are buying that wine ? and how are you managing to fund it". before accidentally emptying the contents of a bottle of chilli sauce all over his stupid f***in face. He is employed by Auntie Beeb so there won't be less than5 zeros on his basic pay,and is probably on a bonus by them to keep destroying Rangers,so should be able to shop at Waitrose.? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMAA 3,658 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 Saw that a Leeds source had apparently said that they bid £7m for Kent earlier in the window but they walked away during negotations and moved onto other targets. That would maybe explain why the price was so high, if there hadn't been any offers I'd have expected the price do be a good bit lower. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 If the fee for Kent really is £7m and a 20% sell-on clause, I cannot see this a financially viable acquisition ... at least to the extent we might be able to turn a profit by selling him at some future date. I have to believe the money has been spend primarily to try to win the league this year. Not that that is necessarily a bad thing. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 32 minutes ago, Bill said: If the fee for Kent really is £7m and a 20% sell-on clause, I cannot see this a financially viable acquisition ... at least to the extent we might be able to turn a profit by selling him at some future date. I have to believe the money has been spend primarily to try to win the league this year. Not that that is necessarily a bad thing. I understand that it's £6.5m plus up to £1m of add-ons plus 20% sell-on clause of any profit made, but not on the full proceeds. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMAA 3,658 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 17 minutes ago, Bluedell said: I understand that it's £6.5m plus up to £1m of add-ons plus 20% sell-on clause of any profit made, but not on the full proceeds. I’ve never heard of this before, it is being reported and a standard sell on? If it is a standard sell on we’d only make a profit if sold for more than £9m. But like Bill I think this is very much about this season and signing a player who can hit the ground running and doesn’t need time to adjust to British football and settle in to Glasgow. And at his age you have to assume the business case was that it’s £7.5m for a player who could be here for 6-7 seasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 9 minutes ago, DMAA said: I’ve never heard of this before, it is being reported and a standard sell on? If it is a standard sell on we’d only make a profit if sold for more than £9m. But like Bill I think this is very much about this season and signing a player who can hit the ground running and doesn’t need time to adjust to British football and settle in to Glasgow. And at his age you have to assume the business case was that it’s £7.5m for a player who could be here for 6-7 seasons. Other than failing supporter expectation, I think the board faces a threat of losing financial momentum if Celtic reach ten in a row and still going. I suspect they believe we have to break through this season or next, otherwise supporters will lose heart and the business plan could stall. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMAA 3,658 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 1 minute ago, Bill said: I think the board faces a threat of losing financial momentum if Celtic reach ten in a row and still going. The biggest thing that affects this is Champions League Group qualification, the income from that is a game changer for Rangers and Celtic but we can't keep relying on them messing up. This is the biggest potential prize from winning our league at the moment. Player sales are big too and we continue to lag them in that department too. We're lucky that at the moment their expenditure is huge otherwise their advantage over us could be bigger. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,679 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 1 hour ago, DMAA said: I’ve never heard of this before, it is being reported and a standard sell on? If it is a standard sell on we’d only make a profit if sold for more than £9m. I'd have thought that standard sell-ons were based on profit? As for the source, it was David Edgar, who presumably got it from within the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted September 4, 2019 Share Posted September 4, 2019 I'd be very surprised if anyone signed up to a clause that passed on a percentage of the sell-on price if that price was less than the original transfer fee. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts