Confirmed Signing Tyler Dibling

Status
Not open for further replies.
raiseyoureyebrow4thewin! said:
risk is greater with higher up front, cuz he can fail and then u lose your pants.
hence the sell on percentage is less damaging when he has realized his potential and we sell him for 2-3x.

42.5m with 25% sell on last offer, I think we close there or walk away.
Click to expand...
25% sell on is an absolute none starter unless the fee is in the £20m's. For above £35m its an absolute joke.
 

Scrubs02 said:
You can bring any Everton player from the mid 90s onwards to me and I'll tell you what I think. Best player I've ever seen is kancheskis..probably followed by Cahill. And Distin and Howard were bang average. And jagielka was massively underrated
Click to expand...

Prime arteta for me … him and kanchelskis are head and shoulders above everyone else imo

Rooney was the best player but we didn’t have his best years
 
Black Panda said:
Not sure why people are surprised by us wanting a sell on clause. Pretty standard for young talent with a lot of potential isn't it?

I'm surprised we didn't accept the £40m though. 50m is too steep I reckon and means you'll be on the wrong end of the risk/reward ratio.
Click to expand...
25% is ridiculous given the risk we are taking on a 19 year old. To accept that the initial fee would need to be much much lower.
 

Kevsleftpeg said:
That's extremely naive. They are not going to commit to a massive wage increase without being in the premier league and including relegation clauses. Why would he sign a contract for less wages than he deserves and give up the opportunity for a signing fee/higher wages next year? Especially given how they are behaving now.
Click to expand...

He is on £5k a week.....some of his teammates are on £60k a week.

They culld easily give him a rise and.

Either way....he doesnt even need a new contract....the cheaper he becomes...the more clubs will be interested..

I know blues think we are the centre of the planet....but coming to us now, is not his only option....THATS naive thinking.
 
Pabbers said:
He is on £5k a week.....some of his teammates are on £60k a week.

They culld easily give him a rise and.

Either way....he doesnt even need a new contract....the cheaper he becomes...the more clubs will be interested..

I know blues think we are the centre of the planet....but coming to us now, is not his only option....THATS naive thinking.
Click to expand...
Why would they give him a pay rise without a new contract? How much do you think we are going to pay him? That's the bench mark. Who said we were his only option? We're seemingly Southampton's only option if they want a decent fee for him. You're all over the place on this.
 
Kevsleftpeg said:
Why would they give him a pay rise without a new contract? How much do you think we are going to pay him? That's the bench mark. Who said we were his only option? We're seemingly Southampton's only option if they want a decent fee for him. You're all over the place on this.
Click to expand...

I said they COULD easily give him a new contract.

BUT they dont NEED to give him a new deal.

Whats hard to understand ???

If we dont pay the fee, he stays.....and will be cheaper next season. At which point....other clubs COULD be more inetersted.

Nothing straight forward.
 

Kevsleftpeg said:
25% is ridiculous given the risk we are taking on a 19 year old. To accept that the initial fee would need to be much much lower.
Click to expand...

It's standard though mate. Any club in the country who has a 19 year old considered one of the best talents in the country would want the same. I agree though it's not worthwhile if the fee is £50m.

Presumably it'd only be on profit too as most of these clauses are? When you think that if he progresses as we expect that he'll likely go for over £100m then it's understandable that we'd want a piece of that.
 
Kevsleftpeg said:
25% sell on is an absolute none starter unless the fee is in the £20m's. For above £35m its an absolute joke.
Click to expand...

Kevsleftpeg said:
25% sell on is an absolute none starter unless the fee is in the £20m's. For above £35m its an absolute joke.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't do it too but feels like our top specialised leadership team has gone to the point of no return now
and need to bring this home
 
Black Panda said:
It's standard though mate. Any club in the country who has a 19 year old considered one of the best talents in the country would want the same. I agree though it's not worthwhile if the fee is £50m.

Presumably it'd only be on profit too as most of these clauses are? When you think that if he progresses as we expect that he'll likely go for over £100m then it's understandable that we'd want a piece of that.
Click to expand...
25% sell on would not be standard. They can have a huge sell on and a low fee, or £50m and a tiny sell on. Never ever both. The buying club has the upfront risk of the huge fee/amortisation, potential injury or failed development, whilst diluting any possible upside? Southamptons only risk is that he is better than Messi and we sell him for £250m, they then wish they’d held firm. They can avoid that risk by keeping him and giving making him their highest paid player, but all other risks back on them. They can’t avoid any and all possible risks by trying to make many millions of £ profit based on what happens 3 years after they sold him. Well they can ask, and that is their right, fair play to them.

The fee on its own is wince-inducing, but almost acceptable if we want to go a bit mad. A chunky sell on would be fine if we pay them £30m. £50m plus 25% of any future profit is a counter offer designed purely to be rejected. Be interesting to see why, and what we/they do next.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top