The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 10th September

StanSpur · Sep 11, 2020

fishhhandaricecake said:
Would be ‘under the radar’ hell of a player, would be a gamechanger if we signed him. Can also play out wide in 4-2-3-1 so would be absolutely ideal in so many ways BUT not particularly a ‘Jose style’ striker but he’s the one id want. Great that we’ve finally had ITK on him. ??????

Not sure i agree. He's tricky and two footed and quick BUT he's also strong on the ball and drops deep to get possession so probably meets Jose's needs. Would be a good deal but if we shaft PSG twice in 2 years i'm not sure we'll get much out of them in the future. Not going to go there with Bale. Just cannot see anyone unpicking that lock unless City or Utd go in.

Stoof · Sep 11, 2020

Yid-ol said:
Was about to say the same thing, that isn't ownership issues. To me ownership issues is more like a 3rd party issue that owns the player or image rights (like Dybala)

I would suggest that is what he means though. It does make the most sense - and is the player that fits with all of the ITK musings.

But I mean that's solved by a simple number, right? As long as 60% of that number makes Celtic happy then we have a deal.

That or option B you structure it as a loan so we kick the can down the road with an option for us to buy at a certain price (and most likely they'll want to force us to purchase at that price, at which stage we'd probably make it unconditional if the team get CL or the player reaches milestones or some other thing I just pulled out of thick air). A lot of maybes in that.

I mean, it's got to be something like option B otherwise it would have just been done by now.

wrd · Sep 11, 2020

Stoof said:
I would suggest that is what he means though. It does make the most sense - and is the player that fits with all of the ITK musings.

But I mean that's solved by a simple number, right? As long as 60% of that number makes Celtic happy then we have a deal.

That or option B you structure it as a loan so we kick the can down the road with an option for us to buy at a certain price (and most likely they'll want to force us to purchase at that price, at which stage we'd probably make it unconditional if the team get CL or the player reaches milestones or some other thing I just pulled out of thick air). A lot of maybes in that.

I mean, it's got to be something like option B otherwise it would have just been done by now.

There was a lot of talks about loans and player swaps being the avenue we'd need to go down this summer including from ITK's.

WorthATry · Sep 11, 2020

Dragon has just all but confirmed that the player is Edouard and the "third party" is the sell on fee

SpartanSpur · Sep 11, 2020

WorthATry said:
Dragon has just all but confirmed that the player is Edouard and the "third party" is the sell on fee

Great to hear if so as :

1) I prefer the player to Leao

and

2) a sell on fee sounds a lot easier to work around than the mess going on with Leao's compensation owed to Sporting!

Yiddo100 · Sep 11, 2020

SpartanSpur said:
Great to hear if so as :

1) I prefer the player to Leao

and

2) a sell on fee sounds a lot easier to work around than the mess going on with Leao's compensation owed to Sporting!

Have I missed this leao ITK?

SpartanSpur · Sep 11, 2020

Yiddo100 said:
Have I missed this leao ITK?

No ITK on Leao, it was expected that the mystery striker was him or Eduoard before Ali Z added fuel to the fire by saying Edouard is his educated guess.

Wig · Sep 11, 2020

Stoof said:
I would suggest that is what he means though. It does make the most sense - and is the player that fits with all of the ITK musings.

But I mean that's solved by a simple number, right? As long as 60% of that number makes Celtic happy then we have a deal.

That or option B you structure it as a loan so we kick the can down the road with an option for us to buy at a certain price (and most likely they'll want to force us to purchase at that price, at which stage we'd probably make it unconditional if the team get CL or the player reaches milestones or some other thing I just pulled out of thick air). A lot of maybes in that.

I mean, it's got to be something like option B otherwise it would have just been done by now.

We could definitely do some creative accounting with an expensive initial loan followed by a smaller transfer fee to make permanent, thereby reducing the sell-on % to PSG. Which I believe is exactly what we did with Lo Celso for buying Betis, once again screwing over PSG. Not sure PSG are going to like us very much if we screw them over once again!

Beni · Sep 11, 2020

We are not getting Edouard, unless we are wanting to spend £40 million.

Deleted member 27995 · Sep 11, 2020

Beni said:
We are not getting Edouard, unless we are wanting to spend £40 million.

Is this ITK or opinion?

(sorry if it is ITK - I'll delete the post if it is)

Joely · Sep 11, 2020

Beni said:
We are not getting Edouard, unless we are wanting to spend £40 million.

Can't see us spending that this window. Maybe a case of us trying to lower the fee and if that it fails, we turn to Milik (provided he is still available).

Beni · Sep 11, 2020

Vinny_Sammways_left_peg said:
Is this ITK or opinion?

(sorry if it is ITK - I'll delete the post if it is)

I am not ITK, pure opinion. Brighton have bulked on their interest due to this figure. Plus, any creative numbers we try to do i.e. big loan fee other add-ons etc PSG are not gonna let it happen twice to them from us (Lo Celso), and sure would do everything from a legal point, to stop it

Deleted member 27995 · Sep 11, 2020

Beni said:
I am not ITK, pure opinion. Brighton have bulked on their interest due to this figure. Plus, any creative numbers we try to do i.e. big loan fee other add-ons etc PSG are gonna not let it happen twice to them from us ala Lo Celso, and sure would do everything from a legal point to stop it

Ah right. Okey dokey.

freeeki · Sep 11, 2020

WorthATry said:
Dragon has just all but confirmed that the player is Edouard and the "third party" is the sell on fee

Could you perhaps copy and paste what's been said?

Dillspur · Sep 11, 2020

Beni said:
I am not ITK, pure opinion. Brighton have bulked on their interest due to this figure. Plus, any creative numbers we try to do i.e. big loan fee other add-ons etc PSG are not gonna let it happen twice to them from us (Lo Celso), and sure would do everything from a legal point, to stop it

Unless there's something in the contract regarding loan fees, I wouldn't think there is anything they can do. I would imagine clubs will start adding clauses in the future

Danny B · Sep 11, 2020

Stoof said:
I would suggest that is what he means though. It does make the most sense - and is the player that fits with all of the ITK musings.

But I mean that's solved by a simple number, right? As long as 60% of that number makes Celtic happy then we have a deal.

That or option B you structure it as a loan so we kick the can down the road with an option for us to buy at a certain price (and most likely they'll want to force us to purchase at that price, at which stage we'd probably make it unconditional if the team get CL or the player reaches milestones or some other thing I just pulled out of thick air). A lot of maybes in that.

I mean, it's got to be something like option B otherwise it would have just been done by now.

More like option B but the main problem I would foresee is that Celtic will want a new sell-on clause written into his contract whomever he joins. They've done it with every 'export'. They got £8.5m when Van Dijk joined Liverpool and stand to make another hefty profit when Dembele finally leaves Lyon.

WorthATry · Sep 11, 2020

freeeki said:
Could you perhaps copy and paste what's been said?

A poster asked "Unless Dragon is talking about the fact that PSG apparently have a large sell on?", to which he simply replied confirming the sell on. This is being interpretated as confirmation, especially as he is usually dismisses wrong guesses.

SpartanSpur · Sep 11, 2020

Danny B said:
More like option B but the main problem I would foresee is that Celtic will want a new sell-on clause written into his contract whomever he joins. They've done it with every 'export'. They got £8.5m when Van Dijk joined Liverpool and stand to make another hefty profit when Dembele finally leaves Lyon.

I make that 10% on VVD which might be something we would entertain if it was the final stumbling block. We're at that size now where we'd do everything we could to keep him if he became a super star. You'd just make the 10-15% sell on the buying clubs problem in that situation, you'd be talking about one of the elite.

Usually sell-ons are only on deal profit too, so would have to be a really significant fee before it kicked in at any detrimental level, should the sell on percentage be in that region.

ExpatFan · Sep 11, 2020

Wig said:
We could definitely do some creative accounting with an expensive initial loan followed by a smaller transfer fee to make permanent, thereby reducing the sell-on % to PSG. Which I believe is exactly what we did with Lo Celso for buying Betis, once again screwing over PSG. Not sure PSG are going to like us very much if we screw them over once again!

PSG is owned, as you'll know, by Qatari slave traders who bribed their way to hosting the next World Cup... so they can go fuck themselves.

Bulletspur · Sep 11, 2020

Danny B said:
More like option B but the main problem I would foresee is that Celtic will want a new sell-on clause written into his contract whomever he joins. They've done it with every 'export'. They got £8.5m when Van Dijk joined Liverpool and stand to make another hefty profit when Dembele finally leaves Lyon.

No problem there. If we were then to sell on we would make sure it is enough to also cover what would be due to Celtic. Not an issue in my opinion.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

The Daily ITK Discussion Thread - 10th September

Ronny Rosenthal

THERE IS A PIGEON IN MY BANK ACCOUNT

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 27995

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Deleted member 27995

Arsehole.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Reasonable Advocate

Similar threads