- Jul 25, 2005
- 1,442
- 6,112
You're jush dunk that's why! Shober up!Think Dunk would be an excellent buy.
You're jush dunk that's why! Shober up!Think Dunk would be an excellent buy.
Heard an advert saying that the Post Office would refund you all your cash if you had a legit reason for not using it within a month. Just saying ??Maybe because he's Italian or perhaps because we want paying in Euros to go into our Euro account out of which we pay for our replacements.
They think if they say 150 loud and Euros quietly it might fool Levy into accepting the bid and then they can say no backsies once he realises and tries to backtrack.Why are City bidding in Euros? Both clubs are in the UK!!
This. I seem to remember an ITK a couple of windows ago saying that we use a Euro bank account for the transactions (rather than converting and paying fees to a bank) so it would make sense that any deal would actually be in Euros - the replacements are all being touted from outside the UK.
It looks like we’re playing 3 in the middle this year, 2 holding and one more attacking (possibly that flips to two attacking and one holding at home vs weaker sides). That gives us Dele, PEH, Skipp, Lo Celso, Ndombele, Winks, Sissoko + youth (e.g: John) for three positions.
You would think that if we are going for one or two more midfielders as per the Nandez updates today, we’d need to be confident of shifting at least two of Sissoko/Winks/Ndombele. Odds on we get some news on outgoings there in the next few days IMO.
Why are City bidding in Euros? Both clubs are in the UK!!
Nope, by the time you're converting hundreds of millions the fees/spreads involved become tiny. We're talking a £10k fee for a £100m deal kind of thing.Euros are realistically more valuable to us then pounds, we'll be spending euros, so may as well receive euros. I'm no expect In currency exchange fees, but I'd assume it would be a laaaarge amount to convert the 100 mill euros were rumoured to spend from pounds.
Why are City bidding in Euros? Both clubs are in the UK!!
I started the week with such optimism regarding our transfer dealings. I'm now currently out on the window ledge staring down at the traffic.
Getting the feeling everything is linked to Harry.I started the week with such optimism regarding our transfer dealings. I'm now currently out on the window ledge staring down at the traffic.
Indeed. Its already been a long week.It’s Tuesday, the week started yesterday ?.
Hoping it's still funny in two weeks time.It’s Tuesday, the week started yesterday ?.
Getting the feeling everything is linked to Harry.
He stays and we have no money to spend, he goes early enough and we might see the first choices incoming. Possibly our unconfirmed source of funds never materialised.
Getting the feeling everything is linked to Harry.
He stays and we have no money to spend, he goes early enough and we might see the first choices incoming. Possibly our unconfirmed source of funds never materialised.
ITK suggests that you are incorrect. We've been told that we do have money to spend and ideally want four more in. But that if Harry is sold this means we can increase the quality of player we are looking at in some of these positions, in addition to needing an additional CF. So Harry's situation is key, and which is why you would imagine a deadline should (or has) been set. ITK not so clear on that though as far as I am aware.
The good thing is, if we were selling Kane you’d expect us to do what Vila did and get their deals done before the announcement (so that we didn’t pay a premium).Getting the feeling everything is linked to Harry.
He stays and we have no money to spend, he goes early enough and we might see the first choices incoming. Possibly our unconfirmed source of funds never materialised.
Players need to arrive regardless of Kane though. Not sure what’s holding up the Tomiyasu deal for example