Everton Transfer Thread 2016

Goat · August 9, 2016

Callum_efc said:
Surely stones sale won't set a mass fenzy and buy 5/6 first team players.... Stones sale to buy 3 any more would need another sale?

Not unless we sign more than 9 players on 100k Friend.

Callum_efc · August 9, 2016

The Esk said:
No mate, we didn't need to sell to raise cash, just to allow future increases in total wages because of STCC

Surely stones sale can't fund 5/6 New players though. Even when it comes to wages....

VentureBrosEFC · August 9, 2016

suey_11 said:
Now that's just nuts.

Sorry it just is.

Erm. I alluded to as much in the post buddy.

Deco · August 9, 2016

Callum_efc said:
So we needed to sell before we could buy.... Will this mean that another player will need to go ie lukaku for more significant money to be spent?

It wasn't necessarily "sell to buy" at all. We needed incoming funds to be able to increase our wage bill as much as we want/need to - this was only by a big increase in commercial income (which can't happen overnight), or by selling a player i.e. Stones.

Stones leaving has meant that Lukaku doesn't have to leave at all, and we can buy quality players to build around him.

ijjysmith · August 9, 2016

Callum_efc said:
Surely stones sale won't set a mass fenzy and buy 5/6 first team players.... Stones sale to buy 3 any more would need another sale?

I didn't really understand it all to be honest.

VentureBrosEFC · August 9, 2016

Callum_efc said:
Surely stones sale can't fund 5/6 New players though. Even when it comes to wages....

Oh goodness. Read the Esk's article on STCC.

suey_11 · August 9, 2016

tadao said:
Seriously? There's been so many threads where this has been discussed about the need for the sale, wages...can't even be bothered really, click this -
https://www.grandoldteam.com/2016/0...ransfers-short-term-cost-control-regulations/

I'm not sure if the ins and outs but didn't we get rid of 4 or 5 first teamers.
Surely the wages offered to the three players we are being linked with would not push us that far over the edge all I'm saying is why wasn't this taken care of weeks ago everyone knew Stones was going to go eventually.
What I'd Stones would have gone on deadline day could we have not made any signings that sounds like bull to me.

Coffee and TV · August 9, 2016

Callum_efc said:
Surely stones sale can't fund 5/6 New players though. Even when it comes to wages....

We're not going to spend over £40m just on wages

Callum_efc · August 9, 2016

VentureBrosEFC said:
Oh goodness. Read the Esk's article on STCC.

I did. And I still don't get it! Probably because I'm a numpty.
Logic says ..... Stones gone for x.... Future wages saved x.....
Sign touch wood these three that media suggests. Cost. Maybe the price of stones transfer. Wages.... More than stones would have got. How does that work?

tadao · August 9, 2016

Deco said:
That's interesting. I assumed it was the other way around - has this always been the case Esk?

To be honest, I assumed we were still negotiating with utd re: sale price but, that we had already agreed Mata's terms. That's how I read this transfer but, I'm not itk so there you go.

everton2004 · August 9, 2016

suey_11 said:
I'm not sure if the ins and outs but didn't we get rid of 4 or 5 first teamers.
Surely the wages offered to the three players we are being linked with would not push us that far over the edge all I'm saying is why wasn't this taken care of weeks ago everyone knew Stones was going to go eventually.
What I'd Stones would have gone on deadline day could we have not made any signings that sounds like bull to me.

If we had taken the risk and splurged and the Stones deal fell through, we'd be in the crap. Simple.

Callum_efc · August 9, 2016

Coffee and TV said:
We're not going to spend over £40m just on wages

Right..... So that 40 million stones money goes to wages and the transfer money is something totally different from a different pot?

Coffee and TV · August 9, 2016

Callum_efc said:
I did. And I still don't get it! Probably because I'm a numpty.
Logic says ..... Stones gone for x.... Future wages saved x.....
Sign touch would these three that media suggests. Cost. Maybe the price of stones transfer. Wages.... More than stones would have got. How does that work?

We can't spend over £7m on wages unless we raise money through either commercial means or player sales. Selling Stones = all the profit from his sale can go on wages, not just his wages.