Summer Transfer Window 2021/2022

BaZ87 said:
You and Spurs can now fight it out for Origi and if Villa do come in for Ward Prowse as well, Shaqiri is available - he loves a set-piece.

They were putting on a show to make it seem like they were desperate for him to stay. Villa weren't spending this sort of money without a huge sale.
Click to expand...

Spurs would be better getting Bendtner out of retirement before taking either of those 2 donkeys............................ :cry:
 
Mark1989 said:
Ings is a good player tbf can see that figure for him
Click to expand...
If he had 2 or 3 years on his contract sure but he'd have been a freebie next season.

They've got to be expecting an awful lot of value from him this season to throw £30m at it, to have him now.
 
adam cool dude said:
We spend 70 odd million on him. Not 90. Plus we also have a sell on clause with inter if he is sold.
Click to expand...
All the reports said you spent £75m rising to £90m, plus you paid off Rooney so he could join Everton on a free. edit: and Everton also had a sell-on clause too, earning them another £5m when you sold him.

I'd be interested to know how much you actually received from Inter for him because all the reports were "up to £70-75m" but Utd's accounts showed very little money received from incoming transfers.

edit: as of the 2nd quarter of this year, Utd were still owed £60m in transfer fees and seeing as you've not sold a great deal other than Lukaku in recent years, it would appear that the bulk of that is linked to his transfer. Inter must be paying you over 20 years :p
 
Last edited:
Mark1989 said:
Ings is a good player tbf can see that figure for him
Click to expand...

Oh ai he's a handy striker for sure but as others have said...last year of his deal. Not the most reliable injury wise.

I wonder what this means for Watkins though as you have to assume Ings is first choice. Do Villa play two up top? Unsure.

BaZ87 said:
All the reports said you spent £75m rising to £90m, plus you paid off Rooney so he could join Everton on a free. edit: and Everton also had a sell-on clause too, earning them another £5m when you sold him.

I'd be interested to know how much you actually received from Inter for him because all the reports were "up to £70-75m" but Utd's accounts showed very little money received from incoming transfers.

edit: as of the 2nd quarter of this year, Utd were still owed £60m in transfer fees and seeing as you've not sold a great deal other than Lukaku in recent years, it would appear that the bulk of that is linked to his transfer. Inter must be paying you over 20 years :p
Click to expand...

Where do you get your info from? Not a dig just a genuine question as i find it hard to find reliable sources that go this deep into transfers etc.
 
omnomnom said:
Oh ai he's a handy striker for sure but as others have said...last year of his deal. Not the most reliable injury wise.

I wonder what this means for Watkins though as you have to assume Ings is first choice. Do Villa play two up top? Unsure.



Where do you get your info from? Not a dig just a genuine question as i find it hard to find reliable sources that go this deep into transfers etc.
Click to expand...

He's had terrible luck getting the same injury in both knees so close together but other than that I wouldn't say he was majorly injury prone. He played 2,800 minutes (22 Goals) in 19/20 and 2,179 (12 goals but 2 more assists) in 20/21. He will do well at Villa.
 
omnomnom said:
Where do you get your info from? Not a dig just a genuine question as i find it hard to find reliable sources that go this deep into transfers etc.
Click to expand...
Football club accounts. They break down what they've actually paid out each year*, what they received, how much they owe other clubs and what they're owed by other clubs. They won't break it down player by player of course but it gives you a decent understanding, particularly in Utd's case with Lukaku because they haven't sold many players for any meaningful fee.

*Not the total transfer fees but the actual cash they've paid out in installments on transfers from that seasons signings and previous seasons signings.

If you don't already then follow SwissRamble on twitter. Whenever a major club releases their accounts he does an analysis (not simply on transfers) of their finances and will break all these figures down.
 
As far as I know, inter have basically paid us very little of the Lukaku money. That’s nothing to do with the structuring of the deal either. They have just missed payments.
 
Shamikebab said:
I doubt that is true, don't think we'd be the sort of club to just ignore missed payments.
Click to expand...

There isn't much you can do about a missed payment. Its like when you owe money to the bank or a credit card. They won't just come and take your stuff, they will work out a repayment plan or something else. It has been widely reported they missed a payment. If Baz is correct and we have seen very little of the Lukaku money so far then either we have allowed them to pay over a very long period (unlikely) or they have missed some.
 
Has it been widely reported by anyone reliable? From a casual google it seems mostly the **** rags claiming it. I would have thought it would be more widely reported if it was actually true
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom