Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Everton agree fee for Lookman (ed. Gone)
Comments
-
lol it's exactly the same kinda deal. We will get 2 mil upfront and the rest will get scrapped like it did with jonjo when he is sold to another team.Its_Hamer_Time said:
I'll be pleased because we won't be having our pants pulled down like the Shelvey or Jenkinson deal and only get a few mill. Obviously I'd rather keep him but that's not an option is it?PassItToLeaburn said:
Why would you be pleased? It's just another a Staprix transaction, not money to be invested back into playing staff or overall club improvements. As a fan, you have lost the chance to watch a young talent which is likely to make little difference to our transfer kitty. There's little to be pleased about whether we believe this to be a good price or not. It also adds some creedence to Roly's stated player farm model. Another bad thing for anyone who would rather Charlton were primarily concentrated on winning football matches.Its_Hamer_Time said:If we get £10m for him then I'll be pleased.......let's hope we can invest some of that cash.
1 -
I assume this is a record fee for a league one player?
0 -
Indeed.NornIrishAddick said:
Except that, instead of another club every once in a while, now it's the owner/Shareholder/President all the feckin time...Its_Hamer_Time said:
I'll be pleased because we won't be having our pants pulled down like the Shelvey or Jenkinson deal and only get a few mill. Obviously I'd rather keep him but that's not an option is it?PassItToLeaburn said:
Why would you be pleased? It's just another a Staprix transaction, not money to be invested back into playing staff or overall club improvements. As a fan, you have lost the chance to watch a young talent which is likely to make little difference to our transfer kitty. There's little to be pleased about whether we believe this to be a good price or not. It also adds some creedence to Roly's stated player farm model. Another bad thing for anyone who would rather Charlton were primarily concentrated on winning football matches.Its_Hamer_Time said:If we get £10m for him then I'll be pleased.......let's hope we can invest some of that cash.
We'll be lucky to see even 1 million of any transfer fees received.
The Jenkinson money may not have been in the same ballpark as the Lookman cash, but you can't exactly complain about the results of its investment; it helped us have a record breaking season under a young club legend manager.
The best we can hope for here is that a decent proportion goes to squad investment, and the rest gets rid of some of the Staprix debt allowing Roland to lower his asking price.. Not sure whether either of those things will happen sadly.
4 -
Why are Everton the only club in for him?1
-
I was wondering about that as well. You'd have thought a few other PL clubs would be interestedguinnessaddick said:Why are Everton the only club in for him?
0 -
Only Prem club willing to give him first team football?guinnessaddick said:Why are Everton the only club in for him?
0 -
I thought Oxlade Chamberlain was moreChris_from_Sidcup said:I assume this is a record fee for a league one player?
2 -
Jenkinson has been listed by Gooners. Wonder if we still have a sell-on? Stevens may attract bids also, and Rob Elliot.1
-
ForeverAddickted said:
Its the same type of car that every other player gets when they join us... Because of that you should mainly worry about the wheels coming off rather than the hubcaps as they usually do around March / April timecolthe3rd said:
Christ how bad is his contract with us if he has a car with hubcaps?Macronate said:If he's travelling up by car, I hope he hasn't become too attached to his hub caps.
0 -
harveys gardener said:
Jenkinson has been listed by Gooners. Wonder if we still have a sell-on? Stevens may attract bids also, and Rob Elliot.
Think that got weighed in a while ago
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
He was, £12 million I seem to remember. Walcott went for the same amount before him also.Ben18 said:
I thought Oxlade Chamberlain was moreChris_from_Sidcup said:I assume this is a record fee for a league one player?
0 -
Both whilst in the championship. Delph went for £6mill to Villa from dirty Leeds.GreenhitheRed said:
He was, £12 million I seem to remember. Walcott went for the same amount before him also.Ben18 said:
I thought Oxlade Chamberlain was moreChris_from_Sidcup said:I assume this is a record fee for a league one player?
1 -
I don't think it looks like Lookman myself3
-
Sorry, its a pic of Idrissa Gueye from a while ago24
-
Walcott was sold when they were in the championship.GreenhitheRed said:
He was, £12 million I seem to remember. Walcott went for the same amount before him also.Ben18 said:
I thought Oxlade Chamberlain was moreChris_from_Sidcup said:I assume this is a record fee for a league one player?
Ox was sold in August just as Southampton were about to start their championship season after promotion so technically he wasn't a league one player1 -
If will be interesting to find out if the fee is published or undisclosed.
Fingers crossed that it is around the £10m upfront and it then makes the club an attractive proposition for Roland to sell.
Getting rid of the Belgians will do more for our chances this season than anyone coming in on a transfer could, methinks.2 -
As for the comparisons in price with previous deals, I think where we are no longer involved we've lost sight of prem money.
When Shelvey went the TV deal was £1.7bn, before that when we sold Parker for £10m and Bent for £16.5m it was £1.0bn
Iit's now £5.2bn.
There is obscene money in the game.18 -
I agree with AFKA, we should have held out for at least three quarters of a billion.46
-
(5.2/1.7)*16.5 = £50.4m for Bent in 'todays money'.AFKABartram said:As for the comparisons in price with previous deals, I think where we are no longer involved we've lost sight of prem money.
When Shelvey went the TV deal was £1.7bn, before that when we sold Parker for £10m and Bent for £16.5m it was £1.0bn
Iit's now £5.2bn.
There is obscene money in the game.3 -
Sponsored links:
-
Thank fuck you aren't in charge of calculating RPI.Leeds_Addick said:
(5.2/1.7)*16.5 = £50.4m for Bent in 'todays money'.AFKABartram said:As for the comparisons in price with previous deals, I think where we are no longer involved we've lost sight of prem money.
When Shelvey went the TV deal was £1.7bn, before that when we sold Parker for £10m and Bent for £16.5m it was £1.0bn
Iit's now £5.2bn.
There is obscene money in the game.18 -
Indeed there is an obscene amount of money at the top level, sadly it does not cascade down to grassroots level, at least around SE London and North Kent.
Until very recently local clubs have found it almost impossible to get decent training pitches, such as 3g.or above. I understand it has improved of late with Meridian and a few others. For a time in mid winter one of the teams I was involved with had to share a single pitch with the first team at Long lane, and that was an established Kent premier league side, and that was for adult football. Junior football gets relegated to school and scout huts, mainly for fitness and circuit training. Goals has, or had a scheme but a lot of the kids\parents have difficulty with the financial side of that. Which is why Lookman's former club 'Waterloo' do such a good job in this field, as do others often out of the pockets of local's. A percentage of these deals needs to be allocated to chartered fc clubs. It is long overdue.......9 -
Maybe if we changed his name to Luckman and hawked him around the Chinese clubs.LouisMend said:I agree with AFKA, we should have held out for at least three quarters of a billion.
0 -
-
That's not Lookman000__Jaaaaay__000 said:looks like it's pretty much a done deal now.
0 -
Oops couldn't enlarge pic at first on phone - hides head in shame!PeakieRocket said:
2 -
Whoever it is/was, they're being greeted by Prince William no less!Leeds_Addick said:15 -
You must be joking........it's RD that's gonna pull our pants down!Its_Hamer_Time said:
I'll be pleased because we won't be having our pants pulled down like the Shelvey or Jenkinson deal and only get a few mill. Obviously I'd rather keep him but that's not an option is it?PassItToLeaburn said:
Why would you be pleased? It's just another a Staprix transaction, not money to be invested back into playing staff or overall club improvements. As a fan, you have lost the chance to watch a young talent which is likely to make little difference to our transfer kitty. There's little to be pleased about whether we believe this to be a good price or not. It also adds some creedence to Roly's stated player farm model. Another bad thing for anyone who would rather Charlton were primarily concentrated on winning football matches.Its_Hamer_Time said:If we get £10m for him then I'll be pleased.......let's hope we can invest some of that cash.
1 -
Can you lot please stop messing about saying lookman has gone when he hasnt.
Thanks2 -
Should've beencolthe3rd said:
Thank fuck you aren't in charge of calculating RPI.Leeds_Addick said:
(5.2/1.7)*16.5 = £50.4m for Bent in 'todays money'.AFKABartram said:As for the comparisons in price with previous deals, I think where we are no longer involved we've lost sight of prem money.
When Shelvey went the TV deal was £1.7bn, before that when we sold Parker for £10m and Bent for £16.5m it was £1.0bn
Iit's now £5.2bn.
There is obscene money in the game.
(5.2/1.0)*16.5 = £85.8m2
