Everton agree fee for Lookman (ed. Gone)
Comments
-
A whole month and still won't be replaced...killerandflash said:
It's irrelevant, as if future transfer payments of £6m were due to go elsewhere, then the value of the club when sold would be reduced accordingly. Due diligence would reveal these little tricksse9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
It is possible that Katrien turned down Palace as she knew that selling our best player to them would cause riots! And it was at the end of the window, so no chance of getting a replacement in. At least we have a whole month now...AFKABartram said:
I doubt it's too far away from what they turned down from Palace in the summer. That was turned down as Roland's advisers were convinced his valuation was only going in one direction over the next 12-18 months. Perhaps that has been reassessed? Perhaps Lookman is not particularly happy here? Perhaps it's a sign of Roland getting some dividend back out the club?
Who knows0 -
Hasn't celebrated for a while when he scores.AFKABartram said:Perhaps Lookman is not particularly happy here?
0 -
I do get where you are coming from. It can be frustrating watching talented players, of any age, as they tend to try to do things that others, less talented, won't or can't do. I find watching Cristiano Ronaldo incredibly frustrating and he's possibly the best player in the world!Missed It said:superclive98 said:
They're prepared to pay it because they can see the potential, unlike you.Missed It said:
I'm not saying he isn't skilled or quick or talented. I'm saying he still plays like he did as a kid when he was the best player in the team by miles. He won't get away with that any more. He needs to develop still, physically and tactically. I find it amazing that Everton would be prepared to pay so much money for a player they will still need to put a lot of work into. Roland is patting himself on the back for making a pile of cash, but Charlton are selling a half-finished player.dickplumb said:
What a load of rubbish. Everton's Chief Scout is Steve Walsh who identified most of Leicester's players. They didn't do too badly. Lookman is quick, got good ball control and can shoot hard off either foot. He can also beat a man. I can't believe that you have looked at that YouTube clip and not been impressed.Missed It said:That video highlights some of the issues with Lookman's game. He is so 'head-down', he runs himself into trouble and the crowd are impressed when he tricks his way out of it. At the moment he is a park footballer. He is all dribble, tricks and heading straight for goal which is great with your mates and jumpers for goalposts but an organised team can effectively remove him from a game. We've seen it quite a few times already this season, either bullied by hard-faced League One pros or marked out of sight. I feel he'd be better off playing up front with Maginnes at the moment where his direct sort of play can do some damage and leave the midfield to keep its shape instead of running round (slowly!) filling the Lookman shaped holes.
Everton will not be getting the finished product by a very long way. I find it shocking that they are prepared to lash that much money on a player who is tactically naive and easily bullied out of a game. He looks like a child against men out there sometimes.
With better players around him he will not need to hold onto the ball for so long. In the video there are plenty examples of him off-loading the ball or playing one-twos.
No player at 19 is the finished article.
Whether we will see any of the cash invested in the team is highly doubtful IMO.
Don't get me wrong. I'm not down on the kid at all, he's a talent. I find him entertaining to watch and frustrating at the same time. He's still got a long way to go though.
It's a fault of mine, seeing the 'areas for improvement' over the good things. I was on a course for instructors a while back, we all debrief and critic each others lessons and presentations, you know the usual sort of thing, one good point, two things to improve. I gave one bloke an absolute dismantling, didn't even realise I was doing it until everyone was falling about laughing!
It just saddens me that top flight teams hoover up any talent they see, regardless of whether the players are ready or not. It's a speculative punt on Everton's part. Charlton need a player like Lookman if they are going to get anywhere, Everton are just another team stockpiling young players, playing a numbers game that some will come good.
With regard to the Premier League hoovering players up, I totally agree. Charlton do need good players to progress but they are just not going to hang around under this regime. If a profit on a player, any player, can be made then they are likely to take it, irrespective of the consequences.0 -
Good luck lookie but remember a move and money isnt everything its cracked to be
Wheres poyet now??
But i think evertons a good club with youngsters and he will do well
0 -
If people can't see that changing the players around you from Crofts, Ulvsted and Ajose to potentially Coleman, Barkley and Lukaku will improve a player then I'd like to hear what they think would.superclive98 said:
They're prepared to pay it because they can see the potential, unlike you.Missed It said:
I'm not saying he isn't skilled or quick or talented. I'm saying he still plays like he did as a kid when he was the best player in the team by miles. He won't get away with that any more. He needs to develop still, physically and tactically. I find it amazing that Everton would be prepared to pay so much money for a player they will still need to put a lot of work into. Roland is patting himself on the back for making a pile of cash, but Charlton are selling a half-finished player.dickplumb said:
What a load of rubbish. Everton's Chief Scout is Steve Walsh who identified most of Leicester's players. They didn't do too badly. Lookman is quick, got good ball control and can shoot hard off either foot. He can also beat a man. I can't believe that you have looked at that YouTube clip and not been impressed.Missed It said:That video highlights some of the issues with Lookman's game. He is so 'head-down', he runs himself into trouble and the crowd are impressed when he tricks his way out of it. At the moment he is a park footballer. He is all dribble, tricks and heading straight for goal which is great with your mates and jumpers for goalposts but an organised team can effectively remove him from a game. We've seen it quite a few times already this season, either bullied by hard-faced League One pros or marked out of sight. I feel he'd be better off playing up front with Maginnes at the moment where his direct sort of play can do some damage and leave the midfield to keep its shape instead of running round (slowly!) filling the Lookman shaped holes.
Everton will not be getting the finished product by a very long way. I find it shocking that they are prepared to lash that much money on a player who is tactically naive and easily bullied out of a game. He looks like a child against men out there sometimes.
With better players around him he will not need to hold onto the ball for so long. In the video there are plenty examples of him off-loading the ball or playing one-twos.
No player at 19 is the finished article.
Whether we will see any of the cash invested in the team is highly doubtful IMO.0 -
He owns the club. He can structure the payments in any way he likes. All we do know it is unlikely that much of the income will be reinvested in the team,although I am sure that Katrien will tell the press otherwise.se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
1 -
Are actually suggesting that Latrine had a say on what goes on?killerandflash said:
It's irrelevant, as if future transfer payments of £6m were due to go elsewhere, then the value of the club when sold would be reduced accordingly. Due diligence would reveal these little tricksse9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
It is possible that Katrien turned down Palace as she knew that selling our best player to them would cause riots! And it was at the end of the window, so no chance of getting a replacement in. At least we have a whole month now...AFKABartram said:
I doubt it's too far away from what they turned down from Palace in the summer. That was turned down as Roland's advisers were convinced his valuation was only going in one direction over the next 12-18 months. Perhaps that has been reassessed? Perhaps Lookman is not particularly happy here? Perhaps it's a sign of Roland getting some dividend back out the club?
Who knows
0 -
Everton aren't paying 10m for a finished player. They're paying that for what he can become, and most people agree he's got more potential than most other English players his age.Missed It said:
I'm not saying he isn't skilled or quick or talented. I'm saying he still plays like he did as a kid when he was the best player in the team by miles. He won't get away with that any more. He needs to develop still, physically and tactically. I find it amazing that Everton would be prepared to pay so much money for a player they will still need to put a lot of work into. Roland is patting himself on the back for making a pile of cash, but Charlton are selling a half-finished player.dickplumb said:
What a load of rubbish. Everton's Chief Scout is Steve Walsh who identified most of Leicester's players. They didn't do too badly. Lookman is quick, got good ball control and can shoot hard off either foot. He can also beat a man. I can't believe that you have looked at that YouTube clip and not been impressed.Missed It said:That video highlights some of the issues with Lookman's game. He is so 'head-down', he runs himself into trouble and the crowd are impressed when he tricks his way out of it. At the moment he is a park footballer. He is all dribble, tricks and heading straight for goal which is great with your mates and jumpers for goalposts but an organised team can effectively remove him from a game. We've seen it quite a few times already this season, either bullied by hard-faced League One pros or marked out of sight. I feel he'd be better off playing up front with Maginnes at the moment where his direct sort of play can do some damage and leave the midfield to keep its shape instead of running round (slowly!) filling the Lookman shaped holes.
Everton will not be getting the finished product by a very long way. I find it shocking that they are prepared to lash that much money on a player who is tactically naive and easily bullied out of a game. He looks like a child against men out there sometimes.
If he was the finished article, with the recent valuation of English players by cash rich premier league clubs, he'd go for two or three times that.
The real surprise is that Meire and Roland have managed to negotiate a decent fee. I can only assume that 10m was the starting offer.
5 -
I think what is more unbelievable is the thought that Meire would give a sh*t about upsetting fans by selling our best player to the nigels.kafka said:
Are actually suggesting that Latrine had a say on what goes on?killerandflash said:
It's irrelevant, as if future transfer payments of £6m were due to go elsewhere, then the value of the club when sold would be reduced accordingly. Due diligence would reveal these little tricksse9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
It is possible that Katrien turned down Palace as she knew that selling our best player to them would cause riots! And it was at the end of the window, so no chance of getting a replacement in. At least we have a whole month now...AFKABartram said:
I doubt it's too far away from what they turned down from Palace in the summer. That was turned down as Roland's advisers were convinced his valuation was only going in one direction over the next 12-18 months. Perhaps that has been reassessed? Perhaps Lookman is not particularly happy here? Perhaps it's a sign of Roland getting some dividend back out the club?
Who knows7 -
i think it suits RD/KM because they can use it as an excuse for NOT signing playersAFKABartram said:The only thing you can be sure of it will be 'undisclosed'
Banding a figure like 10m around in the press suits both clubs in this instance. For Everton it shows they are investing seriously in young talent and for Charlton it shows they are getting high value for their players.
I'm told the real figure is much lower (I don't know the actual figures). It's interesting though on a couple of points:
I doubt it's too far away from what they turned down from Palace in the summer. That was turned down as Roland's advisers were convinced his valuation was only going in one direction over the next 12-18 months. Perhaps that has been reassessed? Perhaps Lookman is not particularly happy here? Perhaps it's a sign of Roland getting some dividend back out the club?
Who knows
"After the press made everyone aware of what a brilliant price we got for Lookman, the price of every player we were looking at trebled. The customer should be pleased with the great deals we are achieving and that we are not to be bullied into over paying, not that it's any of their fucking business what the President does with his club and his money the fucking weirdos!"0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Isn't it a bit pointless discussing the fine details of a possible payment scheme on the potential transfer of a player which at this point of time is purely Everton's interest in Lookman? I appreciate there are some who claim to be "in the know" but given that there will be ongoing negotiations (which presumably will include what's upfront, sell-on clauses etc) nothing can be certain until the deal is signed and sealed? And at the moment the transfer window is shut, there is no deal and one may not actually come to fruition.
0 -
killerandflash said:
Yeah, I'm not suggesting he's at the level of those players yet. Without getting too heavily into our internal issues and politics (which I'm sure no-one is that interested in), Koeman has given each of those players numerous chances to play the way he wants to (pressing without the ball) and none of them have demonstrated the ability or desire to play like that.RoyalBlue said:
Lookman is nowhere near the level of Deulofeu, Mirallas and Lennon at the moment!
So while Lookman might have a way to go before he develops into the player he could become in the future, I would imagine Koeman would much rather work with a younger player who he can mould into the kind of player he wants, rather than be continually disappointed and letdown by supposed 'senior' players who frankly can't be arsed to change/develop their own games to make themselves better players.0 -
I'm not crushed by this as it's not like he came through the Academy for years like Gomez or Shelvey. What does frustrate me though is we know this won't take us anywhere. We've sold a young talent at essentially the first opportunity, the fee will be much lower than what another team could negotiate, and the money won't be spent in any useful manner. Like most things Charlton at the moment I just find myself shrugging.5
-
Koeman says "Transfer rumours are rubbish".
Let's wait to see if he actually goes.
This could all be a ruse to get more than £10m from someone else.0 -
The scenario you paint seems Tevez /Macherado (?spelling) like to me and thus theoretically not allowed.se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
That said West Ham appeared to get away with it as they do everything seemingly.
0 -
Err, I think there could be enough proof, to win a court case.1
-
I know I'm very annoying, but you're basically saying that refusing to tug the forelock of a PL fan who's only come to sniff around our player (until my rough rejoinder provoked a much more rounded well-wishing, at which, dear reader, forelock was addressed) is tantamount to relinquishing the sympathy of the wider football world (rather than provoking it, which is what happened here)? Is the wider footballing world a thin-skinned moral bore that can't take a haze, or are we projecting a little?limeygent said:
Not a very nice response to a friendly inquiry from a supporter of another club. I thought that we needed support for our cause from ALL of the football world. This isn't the way to get it, is it?Leuth said:"Oh hi! Hi, worms! I remember you lot. Was a right laugh when McFadden scored that goal in your relegation season wasn't it? Anyway, we're Big News now and you're tinpot nothings, but it seems we're signing one of your players! Always lovely when we get to pick and choose our feeder clubs. Dog eat dog world! We had it done to us with Rooney. Ah, but that's another level, another level entirely. This player of yours - he'll be no Rooney I'm sure, but dear old Romelu is in need of some attacking support right now and a little birdie tells me that he's the most talented player in League One? Well, maybe that'll do, maybe it won't. For every Dele Alli there are ten...well of course, nobody remembers their names! But yeah, if you wouldn't mind, give us the lowdown? Then I'll leave you lowly fellas in peace, head back to Premierland. Ta-ra!"
0 -
I know I've said it before @Leuth - but are you sure you're not Russell Brand mate?2
-
Fair0
-
He's done it before with Batshuayi.NornIrishAddick said:
Not that I know, but would that not be third party ownership?se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
I'm fairly sure that the eagle-eyed football authorities would look askance at such a thing, and act decisively....0 -
Sponsored links:
-
SoundAsa£ said:
I have to say I am totally confused.
There are so many different amounts and payment alternatives being banded around by different posters in this thread (all of whom are either speculating or
claiming to be "in the know"), regarding the fee it's mind boggling.
It's at the point where surely no one can make head or tail of it.......shall we all be honest and just say "undisclosed fee" payment terms "unknown".
Wasn't the problem with Tevez and Mascherano that a third party agent still held the "economic rights" to the players which is slightly different to additional payments if the payer plays for England ?LenGlover said:
The scenario you paint seems Tevez /Macherado (?spelling) like to me and thus theoretically not allowed.se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
That said West Ham appeared to get away with it as they do everything seemingly.
I guess it is one business transferring an asset to another and I can't think it would give Duchatelet any influence over Lookman or Everton if he (or his company) was due £Xm if Lookman should achieve some future success therefore it would probably be allowed.0 -
Interesting - what happened there ?The Red Robin said:
He's done it before with Batshuayi.NornIrishAddick said:
Not that I know, but would that not be third party ownership?se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
I'm fairly sure that the eagle-eyed football authorities would look askance at such a thing, and act decisively....0 -
This is a perfectly serious question.
Not denying the "facts" as stated in various national press organs. But isn't signing someone outside the transfer window called "tapping up", and supposedly frowned on by the governing bodies of football?0 -
not if you have permission from the selling ClubEast_Stand_Loopy said:This is a perfectly serious question.
Not denying the "facts" as stated in various national press organs. But isn't signing someone outside the transfer window called "tapping up", and supposedly frowned on by the governing bodies of football?0 -
I'm pretty sure that the club will have given permission.......we probably asked permission to speak to Everton.3
-
I have a sneaking suspicion that the rules have been tightened up a bit since he/Standard sold Batshuayi (UEFA, rather than FA).The Red Robin said:
He's done it before with Batshuayi.NornIrishAddick said:
Not that I know, but would that not be third party ownership?se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
I'm fairly sure that the eagle-eyed football authorities would look askance at such a thing, and act decisively....
However, I also have an absolute certainty that the footballing authorities are at best incompetent (I might lean more towards institutionally corrupt) and care not a jot for the health of the game, being solely interested in maximising TV revenue for their "product".
With the exception of getting rid of the back pass, there's almost nothing that they've done in the last 30 years that has benefitted the game as a whole. They have sold their souls to Sky/BT, and the elite clubs, without the slightest concern for the footballing family that they supposedly represent...
Naturally, therefore, I am hugely confident that they would deal firmly with any dodgy dealings by "The President" (the Belgian flavour one).0 -
Ffs oohaah I put you down to have more sense than that.oohaahmortimer said:I actually thought we'd hold on to him for some bizarre reason
I thought we'd b knocking on the play off door and would resist all offers till the end of the season .......wrong1 -
I'm watching the Villa v's Leeds match at the moment, not great, BUT, during the commentary it was mentioned that the Villa left back Jordan Amavi was the subject of a £25m bid from an unnamed Prem Club yesterday, but it was immediately turned down as they want to keep their best players and achieve promotion.
The new owners, from China, who bought the club (despite the then owner Randy Learner valuing the club at £200m and that was his asking price), paid in the end £76M.
Why mention this on this thread? They have a Chinese owner who is not cashing in on his assets but using them to help get promotion back to the Prem. Our deluded owner is cashing in on Ademola, so reports say, for £10m or undisclosed as it will be reported, and that is the main difference between an owner that has ambition (Tony Xia) and one that doesn't (RD).
I've been very quiet recently on this forum, due to my mums death, but I've sat and watched developments, however hearing this tonight and reading the 'deluded ones' interview in Belgium today has made my blood boil.
Charlton are not a bloody social club experiment you idiot, it is the life blood of the neighbourhood and we demand ambition not a fucking tea dance social club.
We want an owner with ambition that can say to others we are NOT selling our best players, apparently according to KM, earlier in the season, we don't need to sell as RD has the wealth to help us get back "at the earliest opportunity"!! Yet another falsehood as we see our assets being flogged off.
Good luck Ademola, how I wish you could have remained with us.
12 -
Meire: Sept 2015 In Ireland...
the fans will .."...........see the next stars of the Premier League which we will have play for Charlton in the first team and then hopefully sell on to the Premier League."
So anything she said subsequently which contradicts that statement can presumably be added to the lies column.
Had to look at the Ireland interview again to find the quote (at about 21.10 minutes in) but sitting though it now is perhaps more painful than it was then.
Her total devotion to the Duchatelet 'vision' is quite frightening and she argues much as one might hear in another context from a Scientology devotee. Interestingly, RD is never named but always referred to as the major shareholder and it is clear that he is to be followed to the letter whilst the interests of fans are dismissed out of hand as they are considered to have no financial investment and their views are therefore discounted.0 -
Lincsaddick said:
it'll be an undisclosed fee .. let's hope that A) it's a good few quid .. and
the dough is spent on new players
He can't.mogodon said:
He owns the club. He can structure the payments in any way he likes. All we do know it is unlikely that much of the income will be reinvested in the team,although I am sure that Katrien will tell the press otherwise.se9addick said:If it's, say, £4m upfront with a potential £6m in additional payments based on achievements - can Duchatelet contractually oblige Everton to make those additional payments directly to Starpix rather than Charlton ? I.e if he no longer owned Charlton he would still be entitled to the bonus payments ? Is it allowed ?
A company owns the player registration and therefore in any sale they are enetitled to all payments in relation to it.
Now it is possible that the uk entity can transfer the right up to the parent company but only for its fair value at the time, which could be argued to be zero in some cases (20 premiership starts for lookman).
However this is structured, it will be in next years published accounts.0
