Luke Garbutt

Coffee and TV · May 28, 2015

Jozzy said:
12 for Ings is insane, to be paying that Tottenham must be expecting the tribunal fee to be really high, I'd be quite content if we got half that for Garbutt.

If Garbutt's tribunal fee is anywhere near that high the interest in him will disappear overnight, he's good but no one will risk that sort of money on an unproven LB. I think it probably reflects how important he is to the first team though and Ings is their star player while Garbutt is struggling for playing time here.

Having said that, I wouldn't think anyone would pay anywhere near that for Ings but apparently he's got something that I can't see.

Jozzy · May 28, 2015

Coffee and TV said:
If Garbutt's tribunal fee is anywhere near that high the interest in him will disappear overnight, he's good but no one will risk that sort of money on an unproven LB. I think it probably reflects how important he is to the first team though and Ings is their star player while Garbutt is struggling for playing time here.

Having said that, I wouldn't think anyone would pay anywhere near that for Ings but apparently he's got something that I can't see.

I'd still feel we deserve 3-4m for him, would be a bargin for any club after him.

LinekersLegs · May 28, 2015

Jozzy said:
12 for Ings is insane, to be paying that Tottenham must be expecting the tribunal fee to be really high, I'd be quite content if we got half that for Garbutt.

Think Spurs have overbid because the player himself is rumoured to prefer Liverpool. The bid alone will increase the tribunal fee and the risk that it might be ~10m when they were only wanting to pay ~6 might stop Liverpool even bidding for the player.

BlueIsTheColour · May 28, 2015

I don't think the tribunal amount would be set until after he has gone to his new club so no one will pull out due to the fee.
Spurs have bid £12m now cos Ings cant talk to clubs until his contract runs out on 30th June...UNLESS Burnley accept a bid for him. Therefore he can only talk to Spurs now and they are hoping to persuade him to sign b4 Liverpool even get a chance to say hello to him

marty mcfly · May 28, 2015

LinekersLegs said:
Think Spurs have overbid because the player himself is rumoured to prefer Liverpool. The bid alone will increase the tribunal fee and the risk that it might be ~10m when they were only wanting to pay ~6 might stop Liverpool even bidding for the player.

That Levy is a clever man. We definitely shouldn't go near Lennon. He will be walking away with Bill's house afterwards.

Dithering Dougie · May 28, 2015

Adversus said:
That Levy is a clever man. We definitely shouldn't go near Lennon. He will be walking away with Bill's house afterwards.

He's supposedly biding £12m for a player that's out of contract in 30 odd days and he could easily get for less than half that.

That's the polar opposite of clever.

LinekersLegs · May 28, 2015

Adversus said:
That Levy is a clever man. We definitely shouldn't go near Lennon. He will be walking away with Bill's house afterwards.

Levy certainly has a take no prisoners approach to negotiations.

Think it might cost him a bit in the long term as his stance might put off all but the most enthusiastic of buyers for the players he wants off the wagebill but in the short term he rakes it in.

LinekersLegs · May 28, 2015

Dithering Dougie said:
He's supposedly biding £12m for a player that's out of contract in 30 odd days and he could easily get for less than half that.

That's the polar opposite of clever.

It is at max a difference of 6m, possibly less, and if they get him they are also spiking the guns of our of their closest rivals. Given the money thrown around like 30m for Soldado not that much.

Also means they could avoid the lengthy delay of a tribunal and the risk of his value increasing by a good U21 Euro tournament.

Dithering Dougie · May 28, 2015

LinekersLegs said:
It is at max a difference of 6m, possibly less, and if they get him they are also spiking the guns of our of their closest rivals. Goven the money thrown around like 30 for Soldado not that much.

Also means they could avoid the lengthy delay of a tribunal and his value increasing by a good U21 Euro tournament.

£6m is still a lot of money.

Liverpool may be able to convince him their a better option but for £12m there are better options for Spurs than him out there.

I'd bet intrested to know what's the current record fee for one of these tribunals as well.

LinekersLegs · May 28, 2015

Dithering Dougie said:
£6m is still a lot of money.

Liverpool may be able to convince him their a better option but for £12m there are better options for Spurs than him out there.

I'd bet intrested to know what's the current record fee for one of these tribunals as well.

From what I've seen it was 6m paid by Chelsea to Man City for Sturridge (although the initial fee was 3.5m). Given that was a while ago and how prices have inflated not unreasonable to expect Ings would have been over 6m in tribunal fees even prior to the Spurs bid.

Think the Soldado and Lamela experiences have probably made Spurs appreciate the value of a player who is already settled in the country and played in the league.

Edit according to wiki the Sturridge deal was
"The Professional Football Compensation Committee decided on 14 January 2010 that Chelsea would pay an initial fee of £3.5 million, with additional payments of £500,000 after each of 10, 20, 30 and 40 first-team competitive appearances. There would also be a further payment of £1 million if Sturridge made a full international appearance, and Manchester City in addition would receive 15 percent of any sell-on fee if Sturridge was transferred."
Took 6 months after he had signed his Chelsea contract before that ruling came out, amkes it hard to plan your transfer spending when there is a unknown fee for a player.

Joey66 · May 28, 2015

LinekersLegs said:
The last left back we got from Wigan turned out pretty good.

After we let him go first history may repeat itself the Everton way!

Dithering Dougie · May 28, 2015

LinekersLegs said:
From what I've seen it was 6m paid by Chelsea to Man City for Sturridge (although the initial fee was 3.5m). Given that was a while ago and how prices have inflated not unreasonable to expect Ings would have been over 6m in tribunal fees even prior to the Spurs bid.

Think the Soldado and Lamela experiences have probably made Spurs appreciate the value of a player who is already settled in the country and played in the league.

Sturridge was about 4 years ago I'm not sure fees for young players with a few apperances have increased that much, these things never take into account the market much anyway. Be interesting though seeing how much he costs when compared to a young leftback with limited experience. Personally I'd imagine we'll be in for about £2.5m if we get lucky which will make some fuuuuuummmmme on here!

LinekersLegs · May 28, 2015

Dithering Dougie said:
Sturridge was about 4 years ago I'm not sure fees for young players with a few apperances have increased that much, these things never take into account the market much anyway. Be interesting though seeing how much he costs when compared to a young leftback with limited experience. Personally I'd imagine we'll be in for about £2.5m if we get lucky which will make some fuuuuuummmmme on here!

Yeah no idea how much it will be for Garbutt - hopefully him appearing for the England u21s in the Euros will be taken inti account!

Would think for Ings if there is a tribunal they would have to factor a solid bid for 12m into their calculations, it isn't a potential "market value" but an actual fee that Burnley will have missed out on if the player goes to Liverpool instead.

Joey66 · May 28, 2015

Dithering Dougie said:
Sturridge was about 4 years ago I'm not sure fees for young players with a few apperances have increased that much, these things never take into account the market much anyway. Be interesting though seeing how much he costs when compared to a young leftback with limited experience. Personally I'd imagine we'll be in for about £2.5m if we get lucky which will make some fuuuuuummmmme on here!

Doug we signed Garbutt from Leeds on a Tribunial fee with add on up to 1 million fee, at the Age of 16 years old he has rose to play for the England under 21s - we paid a million for Galloway - to sell a young promising left back for 3 a- r million will just cover our outlay in training wages etc - we had pursuaded Garbutt away for nothing until Ken Bates kicked off its cost us money, try looking at any under 21 player and see what any club would want to sell him for my guess is a lot more than 3-4 million!

Dithering Dougie · May 28, 2015

LinekersLegs said:
Yeah no idea how much it will be for Garbutt - hopefully him appearing for the England u21s in the Euros will be taken inti account!

Would think for Ings if there is a tribunal they would have to factor a solid bid for 12m into their calculations, it isn't a potential "market value" but an actual fee that Burnley will have missed out on if the player goes to Liverpool instead.

I'll be honest I still can't see Spurs currently bidding £12m for the player now, maybe they'd offer to equal the current record that Sturridge went for just to try and get the jump on Liverpool but to double it makes no sense and only weakens their hand if it does go to a tribunal.

I'm also not convinced the u21 tournament will have much sway regarding Garbutts fee, his new club will point out that the vast majority of players in that squad will never reach the top.