Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Micah Mbick - 20/1/2026 The Athletic reporting Brighton have had 2 bids for him rejected (p12)
Comments
-
He's still only 28, so I live in hope!Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!4 -
Wasn't arguing that sell-on clauses are pointless. Was just pointing out that Joe's continues to be worth nothing. Clearly an isolated case.Addick Addict said:
Gomez is a bit of an exception though. How many players these days stay more than a decade at the same club? More to the point, how many other players that we've sold in the last 30 or so years to a team above us and worth anything meaningful have done that? I'm struggling to think of any.Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Burstow, Konsa. Grant, Lookman, Aribo, Cousins, Pope, Poyet, Ajayi, Jenkinson, Elliot, Shelvey, Konchesky and Parker were all either moved on within a few years or didn't turn out to be as good as we thought they were going to be.
And I'm glad the board have decided to keep Mbick and that we're no longer studying at The Katrien Meire School of Player Valuations.5 -
You're making a completely unrelated point.PragueAddick said:
It is a - conservative- benchmark for his value if he stays with us next season and performs as well as Lookman did.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Lookman played for us in the Championship and then half a season in league one, so that's not really comparable to Mbick.PragueAddick said:
On the surface that’s a reasonable question, but IMO too crude a way to value a player. If you take Lookman, the one player for whom we got fair value at the time. Lookman basically had 12 months as a first team player here. In that time he scored 7 goals according to FotMob stats. Everton are said to have paid £7,5m up front with addons taking the fee to £11m. According to a detailed answer from Claude AI Everton’s revenues have risen 54% from that season to the 23/24 season. Everton of course are an under-achiever in the FAPL, and the bigger clubs have seen revenue rise by far more, due to big increases from European competitions. So that gives you a conservative benchmark of what Mbick might be worth if he stays with us a full season: £12m plus add-ons.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'd argue that 5m for a kid who's never scored above league two level is not 'giving him away'.PragueAddick said:
i’m talking about the business model as many fans think it is. Its not the model pursued by Sunderland (post Methven) or Ipswich to get them promoted from this division. People talk about “investing” the fee in supposedly more seasoned players. They forget that such players also come with seasoned salary demands. And then there is the Academy itself. M’bick is easily the most promising product through there since Lookman. If we give him away now for £5m -or probably less - you cant say the Academy earns its keep, if you then blow the money on afenaddick said:
Far too early to see with these owners if it is a business model or not. They’ve rejected offers for players before, it just doesn’t he spoken about. They aren’t selling at the first offer like TS. He might not even be gone. I’d save your anger until it’s confirmed and we have a vague idea of the feePragueAddick said:
And no apologies for it. I thought we finally had serious owners, and maybe we do but they are listening to Rodwell. This is not the “business model” you and others think it is. With the exception of Lookman, it is the dismal pattern of our post FAPL demise: Gomez, Konsa, Shelvey all sold at least a season too soon and for no positive “business” result. I’m so sick of it.WSS said:You seem unusually very emotional about this Prague…
modestly talented Championship player, which is all we’d get if you amortise the salary on top of say a £3m fee. And as for the line about no guarantees that he will fulfil his promise; there were no guarantees with Olaofe, Apter, or Kelman either. Yet very few minded that we were paying sizeable transfer fees to bring them in. Pity nobody insisted on a money-back guarantee for them!
Are there many other examples of fees that high for players who've only scored at that level?This of course will trigger people saying that Mbick isn’t as good as Lookman, etc. However they may first want to remind themselves what people on here wrote about Lookman at various stages during his 12 months in the squad.It’s conservative because the revenues of the Big 6 have moved up far more than the rest, and revenues of European clubs have also generally greatly improved, (France being an exception when you take Plastic Saint-Germain out of the analysis). All of this inflation filters down the English pyramid. However revenues in the Championship have not gone up to match this inflation, due to us surrendering control of TV money to FAPL club owners since 1991. That is why the Championship is rated by club finance directors as the biggest financial basket case of the lot. You have to pay £2m or more for strikers who cannot manage to score more than 3 goals by February. And that is why it does my head in that we are prepared to let young talent go at the first whiff of money.
All that said, he hasn’t gone. Maybe I have once again under-estimated Big Jim. I hope so. I also hope he doesnt read CL, since I would very much like to see Mbick scoring in front of the Covered End. Is that really such a big ask?
Every single one of us knows that if he stays with us and does well in the Championship then his value will skyrocket.
The debate is about whether the club cashes in BEFORE that happens. Because there is a chance it may not happen and then we never get a 5m bid ever again.
Pretty sure there were similar debates on here post-Burstow when Leaburn came onto the scene. What would we do if we got an offer? Keep him and he'll be worth 10m+ soon etc. Three seasons on from his debut season there haven't been any offers.1 -
Dykes has shown how much difference it makes having an experienced target man up front, and how much it's benefiting Leaburn. If we stay up I don't see why we wouldn't re-sign him, and why he wouldn't want to stay.MuttleyCAFC said:I think the Dykes deal made sense for both player and club. Dykes has the World Cup approaching and can't prepare for that rotting in Birmingham's reserves and I suspect they decided to do the right thing for him. We have quite a few striking options that could easily kick into place next season.
Mbick is still learning his game, he's only 19. If he had been a Colchester player, and we then signed him in the summer and stuck him in the first team instead of Dykes, I imagine the reaction here would be furious.
"How can you sign a 19 year old L2 striker to play in the Championship?" etc
The Brighton noise is in danger of affecting his development, I hope we don't fast forward him into the 1st team next season, just because of "agent pressure".
4 -
Where has this Brighton bid £5 million come from?
Does anyone know that for a fact or is it just supposition?0 -
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.10 -
5m is guesswork on our part i think.Fortune 82nd Minute said:Where has this Brighton bid £5 million come from?
Does anyone know that for a fact or is it just supposition?
David Ornstein (and then Cawley) reported Brighton had 2 bids rejected, second one for about 3.5m.1 -
Didn’t Gomez have a release clause? I don’t think there was much we could doCallumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.4 -
It could have been triggered by Gomez moving to a smaller, but still large, PL club though, if he had either a better injury record, or was more interested in being a regular starter. A £20m move to Spurs or Villa would have generated a nice bit of money.Callumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.5 -
People still going on about selling Micah Mbick contract to Brighton, why have we done so. Because nothing on the Charlton site or the BBC transfer news.0
-
Sponsored links:
-
Correct. Was £3m and once Liverpool bid that he was gone...Stu_of_Kunming said:
Didn’t Gomez have a release clause? I don’t think there was much we could doCallumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.1 -
It wasn't just a release clause, according to a Lifer whom I know personally and trust. There was, if you recall, absolutely no noise about any rival interest. Which was very odd. It was apparently because Meire had made a pre-agreement with Gomez agent to flog him to Liverpool.kinveachyaddick said:
Correct. Was £3m and once Liverpool bid that he was gone...Stu_of_Kunming said:
Didn’t Gomez have a release clause? I don’t think there was much we could doCallumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.1 -
Yeah, but only a minority of us want to see that happen. The rest are glass half-empty.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
You're making a completely unrelated point.PragueAddick said:
It is a - conservative- benchmark for his value if he stays with us next season and performs as well as Lookman did.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
Lookman played for us in the Championship and then half a season in league one, so that's not really comparable to Mbick.PragueAddick said:
On the surface that’s a reasonable question, but IMO too crude a way to value a player. If you take Lookman, the one player for whom we got fair value at the time. Lookman basically had 12 months as a first team player here. In that time he scored 7 goals according to FotMob stats. Everton are said to have paid £7,5m up front with addons taking the fee to £11m. According to a detailed answer from Claude AI Everton’s revenues have risen 54% from that season to the 23/24 season. Everton of course are an under-achiever in the FAPL, and the bigger clubs have seen revenue rise by far more, due to big increases from European competitions. So that gives you a conservative benchmark of what Mbick might be worth if he stays with us a full season: £12m plus add-ons.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
I'd argue that 5m for a kid who's never scored above league two level is not 'giving him away'.PragueAddick said:
i’m talking about the business model as many fans think it is. Its not the model pursued by Sunderland (post Methven) or Ipswich to get them promoted from this division. People talk about “investing” the fee in supposedly more seasoned players. They forget that such players also come with seasoned salary demands. And then there is the Academy itself. M’bick is easily the most promising product through there since Lookman. If we give him away now for £5m -or probably less - you cant say the Academy earns its keep, if you then blow the money on afenaddick said:
Far too early to see with these owners if it is a business model or not. They’ve rejected offers for players before, it just doesn’t he spoken about. They aren’t selling at the first offer like TS. He might not even be gone. I’d save your anger until it’s confirmed and we have a vague idea of the feePragueAddick said:
And no apologies for it. I thought we finally had serious owners, and maybe we do but they are listening to Rodwell. This is not the “business model” you and others think it is. With the exception of Lookman, it is the dismal pattern of our post FAPL demise: Gomez, Konsa, Shelvey all sold at least a season too soon and for no positive “business” result. I’m so sick of it.WSS said:You seem unusually very emotional about this Prague…
modestly talented Championship player, which is all we’d get if you amortise the salary on top of say a £3m fee. And as for the line about no guarantees that he will fulfil his promise; there were no guarantees with Olaofe, Apter, or Kelman either. Yet very few minded that we were paying sizeable transfer fees to bring them in. Pity nobody insisted on a money-back guarantee for them!
Are there many other examples of fees that high for players who've only scored at that level?This of course will trigger people saying that Mbick isn’t as good as Lookman, etc. However they may first want to remind themselves what people on here wrote about Lookman at various stages during his 12 months in the squad.It’s conservative because the revenues of the Big 6 have moved up far more than the rest, and revenues of European clubs have also generally greatly improved, (France being an exception when you take Plastic Saint-Germain out of the analysis). All of this inflation filters down the English pyramid. However revenues in the Championship have not gone up to match this inflation, due to us surrendering control of TV money to FAPL club owners since 1991. That is why the Championship is rated by club finance directors as the biggest financial basket case of the lot. You have to pay £2m or more for strikers who cannot manage to score more than 3 goals by February. And that is why it does my head in that we are prepared to let young talent go at the first whiff of money.
All that said, he hasn’t gone. Maybe I have once again under-estimated Big Jim. I hope so. I also hope he doesnt read CL, since I would very much like to see Mbick scoring in front of the Covered End. Is that really such a big ask?
Every single one of us knows that if he stays with us and does well in the Championship then his value will skyrocket.
The debate is about whether the club cashes in BEFORE that happens. Because there is a chance it may not happen and then we never get a 5m bid ever again.
Pretty sure there were similar debates on here post-Burstow when Leaburn came onto the scene. What would we do if we got an offer? Keep him and he'll be worth 10m+ soon etc. Three seasons on from his debut season there haven't been any offers.
Turn it on its head. We get £5m (well, probably less, £3.5m is what is alleged we turned down). We stick that in the transfer budget and hand it over to the Rodwell/Jones combo. So, tell me, how much do you reckon we paid for Oloafe and Apter, including amortised salary for first year? Bang, gone on duff recruitment. I could have used the example of Kelman instead but I am hoping - hoping- that he fulfils our reasonable expectations.
We have very rarely followed the business model of sell to build. There are only two occasions I can think of, the most recent being Carl Jenkinson. Parker is not an example because we fought tooth and nail to keep him. So then you go back to Danny Mills, and that was partly "tactical" too. And then Lee Bowyer but the money went into rebuilding the Valley rather than the team. Not a great record is it? Hence my extreme frustration.
Anyway, it hasn't happened. Maybe, just maybe we are getting serious.2 -
Surprised it went completely quiet in the end, the last thing of note was that Mbick followed Brighton on Twitter.I wonder if it's been agreed to wait for the summer, but everything is finalised.There were some people in the know about this, on our side and someone who knew Brighton's recruitment team. Any updates from those posters?0
-
I think I am right that you can buy a player outside the window, they just can't play for you until the opening of the next one.
If Brighton bought him now, I assume they could do so and leave him on loan at Colchester? In which case the window is somewhat irrelevant as they would have left him there anyway most likely.4 -
That's why I thought it was odd they were supposedly pushing yesterday, only makes sense if they want him to play for thier U21's which seems silly. Only other thing is they'd be able to rehab him from any injuries but that shouldn't be an issue eitherAthletico Charlton said:I think I am right that you can buy a player outside the window, they just can't play for you until the opening of the next one.
If Brighton bought him now, I assume they could do so and leave him on loan at Colchester? In which case the window is somewhat irrelevant as they would have left him there anyway most likely.1 -
This interest from Brighton will put quite a lot of pressure on Mbick now. Hope he copes with that, all part of his learning process I suppose.2
-
they would have to register the loan to Colchester, and the purchase of the contract with the EFL, and have not done so.Athletico Charlton said:I think I am right that you can buy a player outside the window, they just can't play for you until the opening of the next one.
If Brighton bought him now, I assume they could do so and leave him on loan at Colchester? In which case the window is somewhat irrelevant as they would have left him there anyway most likely.0 -
Fair enough. I guess Google AI is wrong as it said it was possible and the new parent club just takes over the loan contract as it is already registered with the FA and the club loaned to is not changing.msomerton said:
they would have to register the loan to Colchester, and the purchase of the contract with the EFL, and have not done so.Athletico Charlton said:I think I am right that you can buy a player outside the window, they just can't play for you until the opening of the next one.
If Brighton bought him now, I assume they could do so and leave him on loan at Colchester? In which case the window is somewhat irrelevant as they would have left him there anyway most likely.1 -
There's still time. He's got 1 more year left on his contract so maybe this is the summer they decide to move him on and get some money. Knowing our luck they'll pay up his contract and release him.killerandflash said:
It could have been triggered by Gomez moving to a smaller, but still large, PL club though, if he had either a better injury record, or was more interested in being a regular starter. A £20m move to Spurs or Villa would have generated a nice bit of money.Callumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
They'll sell for £3,000,100, and we'll get a sell on payment of £20.Chris_from_Sidcup said:
There's still time. He's got 1 more year left on his contract so maybe this is the summer they decide to move him on and get some money. Knowing our luck they'll pay up his contract and release him.killerandflash said:
It could have been triggered by Gomez moving to a smaller, but still large, PL club though, if he had either a better injury record, or was more interested in being a regular starter. A £20m move to Spurs or Villa would have generated a nice bit of money.Callumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.0 -
With speculation on Mbick, can I throw out some values for our squad of fairly proven Championship players or latent talent.
Kaminsky £1m
Pre-injury Ramsay £3m+
Coventry £1m+
Kanu £2m+
Mbick £5m+
Leaburn £2-3m+
Apter £2m+
Kelman £2m+
TC £2-3m+
Fullah £1m+ (will get minutes)
Carey £2m+
Zach £1m (will get minutes)
Fit Edwards £2m
Jury out on Knibbs/JRC
Most of the above are on longish contracts, hence my pricing. Also assumes we stay up. I think only Ramsay and Mbick have the quality to launch us to the Prem, but Miles and Fullah have the potential, with Collins an unknown.
Possibly six-eight upgrades to get us up, given Jones and Bell are approaching their sell by dates.
But next season we could do it with four upgrades. Our defensive set up means we need to set up as counter-attackers. Replace WBs with similar if not quicker, quality, and in central midfield big powerful and quick guys to drive forwards. Doc, Coady, Coventry and Berry need not apply.2 -
I think Carey might actually fetch the biggest fee at the moment. On track for a 10 goal season as an attacking midfielder in his first championship season. Those kind of numbers will attract interestGisappointed said:With speculation on Mbick, can I throw out some values for our squad of fairly proven Championship players or latent talent.
Kaminsky £1m
Pre-injury Ramsay £3m+
Coventry £1m+
Kanu £2m+
Mbick £5m+
Leaburn £2-3m+
Apter £2m+
Kelman £2m+
TC £2-3m+
Fullah £1m+ (will get minutes)
Carey £2m+
Zach £1m (will get minutes)
Fit Edwards £2m
Jury out on Knibbs/JRC
I think only Ramsay and Mbick have the quality to launch us to the Prem, but Miles and Fullah have the potential, with Collins an unknown.
Possibly six-eight upgrades to get us up, given Jones and Bell are approaching their sell by dates.12 -
As will the deliberate flick over the defender and volley. Sublime skill all the way4
-
Fact - if you include sell-ons etc.Fortune 82nd Minute said:Where has this Brighton bid £5 million come from?
Does anyone know that for a fact or is it just supposition?
The weekly wage agreed was about 20 times what he is on with us, rising every 5 apps for them.Credit to our owners for taking a longer term view.0 -
£1m for Zac😂Gisappointed said:With speculation on Mbick, can I throw out some values for our squad of fairly proven Championship players or latent talent.
Kaminsky £1m
Pre-injury Ramsay £3m+
Coventry £1m+
Kanu £2m+
Mbick £5m+
Leaburn £2-3m+
Apter £2m+
Kelman £2m+
TC £2-3m+
Fullah £1m+ (will get minutes)
Carey £2m+
Zach £1m (will get minutes)
Fit Edwards £2m
Jury out on Knibbs/JRC
Most of the above are on longish contracts, hence my pricing. Also assumes we stay up. I think only Ramsay and Mbick have the quality to launch us to the Prem, but Miles and Fullah have the potential, with Collins an unknown.
Possibly six-eight upgrades to get us up, given Jones and Bell are approaching their sell by dates.
But next season we could do it with four upgrades. Our defensive set up means we need to set up as counter-attackers. Replace WBs with similar if not quicker, quality, and in central midfield big powerful and quick guys to drive forwards. Doc, Coady, Coventry and Berry need not apply.1 -
A better solution would be something like a 25% sell-on clause with the added agreement that the buying club pays us X number of pounds for every 50 appearances, up to a maximum of 250, but for every 50 appearances 5% also gets knocked off the sell clause. That way if the player goes on to be an established regular at the new club for a long period, we still get a payout that better reflects the player reaching their potential but the buying club doesn't get disincentivised to sell the player later.Callumcafc said:
In hindsight, a sell on clause to Liverpool was smart by them and a bit stupid from us (no surprises there).Chunes said:The sell-on clause for Joe Gomez hasn't done us much good!
Liverpool one of the half a dozen clubs in the world that aren’t a selling club. Gomez would’ve had to turn out to be a Real Madrid level star for that to be triggered in the way you imagine sell ons to be.0 -
It’s all good putting a price tag on a player but doesn’t mean anything if a club doesn’t want them.Gisappointed said:With speculation on Mbick, can I throw out some values for our squad of fairly proven Championship players or latent talent.
Kaminsky £1m
Pre-injury Ramsay £3m+
Coventry £1m+
Kanu £2m+
Mbick £5m+
Leaburn £2-3m+
Apter £2m+
Kelman £2m+
TC £2-3m+
Fullah £1m+ (will get minutes)
Carey £2m+
Zach £1m (will get minutes)
Fit Edwards £2m
Jury out on Knibbs/JRC
Most of the above are on longish contracts, hence my pricing. Also assumes we stay up. I think only Ramsay and Mbick have the quality to launch us to the Prem, but Miles and Fullah have the potential, with Collins an unknown.
Possibly six-eight upgrades to get us up, given Jones and Bell are approaching their sell by dates.
But next season we could do it with four upgrades. Our defensive set up means we need to set up as counter-attackers. Replace WBs with similar if not quicker, quality, and in central midfield big powerful and quick guys to drive forwards. Doc, Coady, Coventry and Berry need not apply.0 -
If everyone is finalised should have announced it now. No point him bagging 20 goal getting us all excited and then suddenly it’s announced he has already gone. Would literally be looking out for a player which isn’t even oursstoneroses19 said:Surprised it went completely quiet in the end, the last thing of note was that Mbick followed Brighton on Twitter.I wonder if it's been agreed to wait for the summer, but everything is finalised.There were some people in the know about this, on our side and someone who knew Brighton's recruitment team. Any updates from those posters?0 -
Its the 20 times salary (if remotely close to correct) thats the issue). No matter how thankful he is to us for his development thats hard to turn down, or have turned down for you.2
