- Dec 8, 2006
- 1,510
- 1,689
£8m for bassong according to ssn
£10 million for Bent according to SSN despite what it says on the OS.
They are probably guessing.
£8m for bassong according to ssn
£10 million for Bent according to SSN despite what it says on the OS.
They are probably guessing.
£10 million for Bent according to SSN despite what it says on the OS.
They are probably guessing.
Bent's transfer is also stated as £10 million on Sunderland's official website.
Yup and the stock exchange says up to £16.5m. So to sum up...not even Sunderland know what's going on.
Yup and the stock exchange says up to £16.5m. So to sum up...not even Sunderland know what's going on.
According to ValY, the fee for Bent was 10 million, but the extra 6.5m was his wages... Sneaky if so :shrug:
We should take Stock Exchange statement as gospel.( i think)
Logic suggests that it's £10m plus further potential add-ons of £6.5m. What I can't understand is why Sunderland say 10 and we say 16.5 - normally you'd expect the buying club to overstate the purchase (to appease the fans that they're spending big) and the selling club to understate it (to avoid giving the impression that they've got an excess of cash to spend, and that sellers can inflate their prices accordingly).
I believe the answer is that you need to report the truth to shareholders - and that's what we've done.
Yup and the stock exchange says up to £16.5m. So to sum up...not even Sunderland know what's going on.
According to ValY, the fee for Bent was 10 million, but the extra 6.5m was his wages... Sneaky if so :shrug:
Disagree mate. What it means is that the maximum consideration (i.e. payment to us) under the deal is £16.5m. What we don't know is how much is guaranteed, and what the rest is dependent upon."up to £16.5M" could mean anything, it's waffle
According to ValY, the fee for Bent was 10 million, but the extra 6.5m was his wages... Sneaky if so :shrug:
Rebrab...youve taken what i said out of context...i was actually ridiculing someone for believing thats how the deal was made up...there is no way that a sale price of any sort would be made up to include savings from future overheads of the asset...its ludicrous to think so...the deal was for a consideration of 16.5m...sunderland have paid 10m now and the residue I would suggest would be made up of a further 60-70% of fixed payments and maybe, just maybe the rest leveraged against goals, caps etc...
According to ValY, the fee for Bent was 10 million, but the extra 6.5m was his wages... Sneaky if so :shrug:
Val didn't say that, he was taking the piss out of somebody who suggested it.
So that could be 8m, rising to 12....13mil? who knows these days, I mean Bent's deal looks bad at 10m, but then we here this could rise to 16.5mil and we are all delirious! Same could be said about Crouch deal, we were all saying, not sure about Crouch, but then again we only paid 9mil for him, and will get about 14 for bent, so good deal!
BUT, maybe Crouch is really 9, rising to 15mil - I mean if Bent is 10m rising to 16.5mil, why is that so far fetched - so in essence there is really only a mil or so between the Crouch and Bent deals, still ok but not earth shattering. Guess we would need for ITK on Crouch deal to be sure.....