petehinton Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 In talks with Swansea following an agreement of £3.5mil between Swans and Watford. Less injury-prone and top-scorer last season with 24 goals. He's a bit older than Maynard, but maybe this is a bit of a reality strike that wanting around £6mil for Maynard is a bit optimistic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 More that Watford haven't got a pot to ahem in, and £3.5 Million is a steal for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 More that Watford haven't got a pot to ahem in, and £3.5 Million is a steal for him. agree with this, watford have been up the creek for a while money wise, they also didn't pay 2.25 million for him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 On the other hand, Reading chairman John Madejski recently valued Shane Long at £20m so maybe our valuation of Maynard isn't so unrealistic! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 There is no fixed scale of what a given player is "worth" otherwise every player would move for the same price. Somebody has already mentioned Shane Long who will probably go for more than Graham for instance (£5m has been floated). The difference between us and Watford is that we can afford to turn down £3.5m and they can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 There is no fixed scale of what a given player is "worth" otherwise every player would move for the same price. Somebody has already mentioned Shane Long who will probably go for more than Graham for instance (£5m has been floated). The difference between us and Watford is that we can afford to turn down £3.5m and they can't. Agree completely with what you say, but what worries me is that, for example, QPR offer £3.5m and NM wants to go........then no one thinks that he's worth that much. That leaves us with an unhappy player who could be earning 2x, 3x what he currently does and knowing one injury could f@ck it all up for him Don't think for one minute that NM is the kind of player who would feign injury to keep himself fit for a cut price move in January - but I hope you get my point The longer the contract stays unsigned, he can verbally agree whilst he's on holiday, that's what he pays someone 10% of what he earns to do for him, the more I worry about whether we've seen the last of him in a City shirt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garland-sweden Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 In talks with Swansea following an agreement of £3.5mil between Swans and Watford. Less injury-prone and top-scorer last season with 24 goals. He's a bit older than Maynard, but maybe this is a bit of a reality strike that wanting around £6mil for Maynard is a bit optimistic? Good price for Swansea. 6mil for NM is not unrealistic price I think. An average pl player is 8- 10mil. However hope NM signs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 Agree with the above post, Value is not determined simply by how good a player is. The length of his contract, the financial position of the potential selling club are probably more important in terms of value than "ability" We don't need to cash in on Maynard whereas Watford seriously do. They couldn't afford to hike the price up as they are so in the doo doo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 On the other hand, Reading chairman John Madejski recently valued Shane Long at £20m so maybe our valuation of Maynard isn't so unrealistic! Yeah well Mr. John Madekski would be parading as a fruit cake then assuming those remarks are, in fact, true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Batman Posted June 6, 2011 Report Share Posted June 6, 2011 i have said on this forum for a number of years that he was a quality player. good luck to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted June 7, 2011 Report Share Posted June 7, 2011 Yeah well Mr. John Madekski would be parading as a fruit cake then assuming those remarks are, in fact, true. I think he was more stating his belief that Long has the potential to go all the way, and reiterating the fact that Reading do not need to sell. I don't think he seriously believes Reading will receive bids worth £20m for him. The same holds true for Maynard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.