Adam Webster - Update - Sold to Brighton

[Rapax]

Clubs don't make formal bids for players without encouragement. The agent will have been spoken to and the response would have been favourable.

If it does anything it turns heads of players.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

It isn’t embarrassing at all. The 30m statement is just so clubs know they need serious offers. I am sure Webster is a good lad and won’t fuss too much but guaranteed he’d be a bit livid if we turned down say 22m for him. 

There is a number, closer to 12 than 30, that the club probably have to accept. I personally think the Harry Maguire deal to Leicester is a good comparison. Not an exact comparison as Maguire had prem experience but similar age and style. Think it was an initial 17m for him.

Think if we were to get a serious bid of 16-17m plus add ons and sell ons we’d have to discuss it with AW. No we don’t HAVE to sell finacially but just don’t think the club is interested in holding players back. 

But we don't want to sell so I don't see the point in accepting a fair price. I expect Johnson has said to Webster that he will be sold after say 2 seasons or even 1 and a half if we look out of the race for the playoffs in January, and for more of a fair price that teams will pay. But at the moment we don't want to sell, so I don't think Ashton should go too much lower than what he has asked for. Or even go at all lower if they are desperate to keep him.

[JoeAman08]

2 minutes ago, chinapig said:

If you are going to use £17m for Maguire back then as a benchmark you have to add on an amount for the constant inflation in fees, which would certainly take us over the £20m mark as a minimum.

Add also the strength of our negotiating position and the fact that we have shown we are no pushover these days and the price goes up further.

Yea but Maguire also had prem experience. And agree we are no pushovers but imo there is a more reasonable price than 30m.

The record champ sale is 22.5m for Maddison an attacker. 

The record defender is Ben Gibson just last summer who was similar age(prem exp too) and a club that also did not need to sell was just over 15m. 

So no way is 30m a number we can sell to AW and his agent imo. I get honouring a contract and all that but do not think that is realistic with the wage difference. 

With Gibson in mind, imo, the 17-18m plus add ons would set precedent for championship defenders. If we are selling for record fees I think everyone has to accept that

[JoeAman08]

8 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

But we don't want to sell so I don't see the point in accepting a fair price. I expect Johnson has said to Webster that he will be sold after say 2 seasons or even 1 and a half if we look out of the race for the playoffs in January, and for more of a fair price that teams will pay. But at the moment we don't want to sell, so I don't think Ashton should go too much lower than what he has asked for. Or even go at all lower if they are desperate to keep him.

Fair was the wrong word on my part. Hell 12m realistically would be fair. 17m would be a champ record. When you get to record fees I think it is inevitable plans go out the window. 

[Rudolf Hucker]

I'd tell Villa to fck themselves regardless of whether or not they want Webster. 

[Dolman_Stand]

5 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea but Maguire also had prem experience. And agree we are no pushovers but imo there is a more reasonable price than 30m.

The record champ sale is 22.5m for Maddison an attacker. 

The record defender is Ben Gibson just last summer who was similar age(prem exp too) and a club that also did not need to sell was just over 15m. 

So no way is 30m a number we can sell to AW and his agent imo. I get honouring a contract and all that but do not think that is realistic with the wage difference. 

With Gibson in mind, imo, the 17-18m plus add ons would set precedent for championship defenders. If we are selling for record fees I think everyone has to accept that

How many years were left on his contract at the time?

[Lrrr]

2 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea but Maguire also had prem experience. And agree we are no pushovers but imo there is a more reasonable price than 30m.

The record champ sale is 22.5m for Maddison an attacker. 

The record defender is Ben Gibson just last summer who was similar age(prem exp too) and a club that also did not need to sell was just over 15m. 

So no way is 30m a number we can sell to AW and his agent imo. I get honouring a contract and all that but do not think that is realistic with the wage difference. 

With Gibson in mind, imo, the 17-18m plus add ons would set precedent for championship defenders. If we are selling for record fees I think everyone has to accept that

Thing is we don't know how much the sell on % for Webster is, or how many of his clauses have been hit to increase the fee already, say we've already hit his clauses and we've paid £8.5m already then £17m would be a profit of £8.5m which Ipswich could be entitled to a good 20%  which then means another £1.7m off and takes our profit down to £6.8m meaning we'd recoup £15.3m ish, same amount if its still £3.5m (hard to believe, I reckon we've already hit an appearances clause) then it would be £13.5m profit and Ipswich could get £2.7m. Would that be enough to convince us? We'd be doubling our money yes but with Kodjia say where we sold after a season we'd have made a good 4x what we paid for him. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Fair was the wrong word on my part. Hell 12m realistically would be fair. 17m would be a champ record. When you get to record fees I think it is inevitable plans go out the window. 

But Villa would not sell Grealish and put some crazy price on him and Spurs lost interest. It certainly worked in getting Villa promoted. We will only likely get another record offer in the next window anyway.

[Red Army 75]

**** villa and there *** fans 

[chinapig]

11 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea but Maguire also had prem experience. And agree we are no pushovers but imo there is a more reasonable price than 30m.

The record champ sale is 22.5m for Maddison an attacker. 

The record defender is Ben Gibson just last summer who was similar age(prem exp too) and a club that also did not need to sell was just over 15m. 

So no way is 30m a number we can sell to AW and his agent imo. I get honouring a contract and all that but do not think that is realistic with the wage difference. 

With Gibson in mind, imo, the 17-18m plus add ons would set precedent for championship defenders. If we are selling for record fees I think everyone has to accept that

The £30m is clearly quoted as a deterrent but I question the relevance of past or even recent transfers as a guide. Every case is unique and determined by the relative strength of the negotiating positions of the parties. Otherwise there wouldn't be talk of Maguire at £80m, which is a reflection of the strengths of Leicester's position.

The other two you mention involved clubs that needed to sell so held a weaker hand.

[JoeAman08]

4 minutes ago, Dolman_Stand said:

How many years were left on his contract at the time?

Not sure tbf on either. Though not sure would make a difference valuation wise in this scenario. Meaning if they had 1 year left then those fees would look even higher. 

 

5 minutes ago, hodge said:

Thing is we don't know how much the sell on % for Webster is, or how many of his clauses have been hit to increase the fee already, say we've already hit his clauses and we've paid £8.5m already then £17m would be a profit of £8.5m which Ipswich could be entitled to a good 20%  which then means another £1.7m off and takes our profit down to £6.8m meaning we'd recoup £15.3m ish, same amount if its still £3.5m (hard to believe, I reckon we've already hit an appearances clause) then it would be £13.5m profit and Ipswich could get £2.7m. Would that be enough to convince us? We'd be doubling our money yes but with Kodjia say where we sold after a season we'd have made a good 4x what we paid for him. 

Not sure it works like that though as there is a player element. Would AW be happy if we told him someone needs to pay 32m for you to leave? No and would sour relationship enough to where even if he stays professional we need to sell him in the next 12-24 months. 

Also we won’t have paid the full 8m for him as of yet. 5 sounds fair to me and that would mean 12m profit at 17m and 20% of that is 2.4m so a 9.6m profit which is still stellar. 

Look I don’t want him to go so I will just leave it at if we turn down 17-18m upfront plus add ons I’d be extremely shocked. Trust the club to make the right decision and I only wanted to add context

[JoeAman08]

3 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

But Villa would not sell Grealish and put some crazy price on him and Spurs lost interest. It certainly worked in getting Villa promoted. We will only likely get another record offer in the next window anyway.

Grealish is also a Villa boy and Villa realistically had a chance of promotion each year in the champ. They also never cared about FFP and such. It is a valid argument but think Villa were just so different to any other champ teams recently outside Newcastle

[Loco Rojo]

21 minutes ago, Rapax said:

Clubs don't make formal bids for players without encouragement. The agent will have been spoken to and the response would have been favourable.

If it does anything it turns heads of players.

Yeah I can see this happening. As I've said before, the agent will be seeing money bags they can make from the deal so I'm sure will be influencing Webster.  Plus to be fair to him, the attraction of a bump up in salary and playing in the PL will add to that. There's no loyalty in football so I think this will be the start of him being off. Knock on impact though; would this change Kalas's mind about coming back (if that's even a true rumour as well).

People on hear saying we should refuse because we dont need to sell or hold out for £30m are going to be disappointed IMO. I'm sure the club will want an unhappy player and agent hanging around.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, chinapig said:

The £30m is clearly quoted as a deterrent but I question the relevance of past or even recent transfers as a guide. Every case is unique and determined by the relative strength of the negotiating positions of the parties. Otherwise there wouldn't be talk of Maguire at £80m, which is a reflection of the strengths of Leicester's position.

The other two you mention involved clubs that needed to sell so held a weaker hand.

Yep. And this is what makes it so much harder for teams like United to restructure. Prem teams are all so well off they don't need to sell. And even though we are only championship, we don't need to sell.

If Webster had one or even two years left on contract then we'd be thinking we kind of have to be accepting something. But as it is we really do not have to accept anything.

The most important thing is if we sell Webster who do we bring in? That is the most important thing when considering whether to sell Webster.

[WarksRobin]

If Villa only have £12m they can’t afford Webster, but that amount would get them Baker

[BCFCGav]

Well done City for rejecting 12 mil. 22 or **** off imo.

[Red Army 75]

Reading on Twitter Villa fans can’t understand why we turned their offer down. Horrible fans 

[downendcity]

1 hour ago, ScottishRed said:

And that is the issue that we now look to have. IF Villa have made a bid at £12m and we have said no thanks then it begs the question from any other interested clubs - OK, so how much? The £30m has been put out there to discourage bids but that is not to say we would not look seriously at say £20m with add-on's.

The real danger is that the players head is turned.........I suspect he will be offered an improved contract with an agreement to let him go next summer for the right price unless we get promoted.

The real danger is that Webster's agent's head has been turned.

Once the agent works out how much he makes from Webster making a big money move to the prem, he then convinces Webster why it is in the player's career and financial interest to push for the move.

If this is the way the scenario plays out there is very little the club can do. Yes they can dig their heels in, point to his 3 year contract and that they don't have to sell, but they then risk having an unhappy and disillusioned player on their hands ( and he will be once the agent gets to work on him!)

Call me cynical..........  

 

P.S. This sounds like he will be going this summer, but I suspect that the big issue - apart from us getting the fee we want - is whether we can bring in the right replacement, and also whether Kalas is staying. It's not impossible, but think it unlikely, that we would just take a big profit but leave the defence threadbare, e.g. last summer didn't LJ say that it was OK to sell Flint as long as he got Webster as replacement?

 

[Bar BS3]

As others have said, what we hold out for is largely down to how Webster conducts himself. 

If he’s intent on forcing a transfer, we’ll have to cash in while his stock is high. If he’s not fussed about leaving, then we can sit tight and bat away any bids under £30million. 

[RUSSEL85]

However much we get for him, il be gutted to see him go. financially it will be good for the club to get around 18-20m but it's the way it is these days. Agents and money rule. It does also make me a little proud were turning down 12 plus million from premier league clubs for our player, we have come a long way in a short time.

[Vil1]

Dont sell. Were not skint we dont need the money. No one out there like him at the moment. A class act if injury free. No kelly. Dasilva. Kalos. We cannot sell. Villa scabs

[downendcity]

12 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Reading on Twitter Villa fans can’t understand why we turned their offer down. Horrible fans 

Im surprised that they don't expect us to pay them to take Webster off our hands.

[Red Army 75]

1 minute ago, downendcity said:

Im surprised that they don't expect us to pay them to take Webster off our hands.

Exactly. Horrible club 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, downendcity said:

The real danger is that Webster's agent's head has been turned.

Once the agent works out how much he makes from Webster making a big money move to the prem, he then convinces Webster why it is in the player's career and financial interest to push for the move.

If this is the way the scenario plays out there is very little the club can do. Yes they can dig their heels in, point to his 3 year contract and that they don't have to sell, but they then risk having an unhappy and disillusioned player on their hands ( and he will be once the agent gets to work on him!)

Call me cynical..........  

 

 

Yes he will, but if we don't accept a bid then he is staying here until we do. To be honest I was thinking 20m but seems like we might not even accept that, and if so then fair play to City.

[chinapig]

4 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Reading on Twitter Villa fans can’t understand why we turned their offer down. Horrible fans 

Aside from the usual arrogance it's because they don't understand how the market works.

Even though they have the example of their own club last year quoting £40m for Grealish, when Spurs wanted to pay £20m, they still don't get it.

Instead you get the simple minded belief that Mepham cost £12m so that's what Webster is worth.

This both ignores the fact that we sold the inexperienced Kelly to the same club for more than Mepham and fails to lead them to the obvious conclusion from their own logic that they should have sold Grealish for the same money Norwich got for Maddison.

They are really not helping to overcome the stereotype of Brummies as thick are they?

[Tipps69]

1 hour ago, stevep38 said:

I really  have to question  the  bold in transfers piece that li said after the Hull game  last season,  if this does go through.  Perhaps they meant bold as in outgoings?  And top 6/ promotion side is a far off bet. Havnt even got any incoming to soften the blow, would  Kalas or da Silva even want to come being we seem to sell our top players. 

Really? One report of an offer being made & suddenly the football club has fallen apart?

It has been mentioned many times on here but last summer we lost 3 mainstays of the first team but we still improved our league position.

Even if we do lose Webster, it isn’t going to be for £3m or something stupid like that & if it is for around £20m or so, that could have a massive influence on the club & in theory allow us to bring in up to 6 players at around our transfer record fee (paid out), that could improve the team massively!

Webster has been here for one season, it’s not like he’s part of the furniture.

[Isawjonshaw]

18 minutes ago, Red Army 75 said:

Reading on Twitter Villa fans can’t understand why we turned their offer down. Horrible fans 

I recently did some work on a site in Cheltenham.  You'd think it was 1981 the way they rate themselves!  The £un7s!

[Wolf Island]

Only a matter of time. Just hope we have a good replacement lined up. Maybe LJ’s Portuguese connections will pay off.

[JoeAman08]

23 minutes ago, chinapig said:

The £30m is clearly quoted as a deterrent but I question the relevance of past or even recent transfers as a guide. Every case is unique and determined by the relative strength of the negotiating positions of the parties. Otherwise there wouldn't be talk of Maguire at £80m, which is a reflection of the strengths of Leicester's position.

The other two you mention involved clubs that needed to sell so held a weaker hand.

Maguire you could compare to our situation though. Both clubs do not need to sell. Both clubs will be negotiating with higher clubs in the food chain. Both players probably won’t kick up too much fuss at not moving if a certain valuation is not met.

Us and Leicester are saying we won’t let the player go unless a record fee is put down. Anything over 15.5m is a record for a defender from the champ. Anything over 75m is a record for a defender. If anything Leicester asking 80m is more realistic than City asking for 30m. 

We will always be at a disadvantage as a championship club because champ clubs do not operate at a profit. Leicester can hold out because of the tv money. We just can’t hold out for as long. 

But of course previous sales have relevance. It helps guide clubs to whether they think they are getting a good deal or not. Example is Bournemouth. They had just bought Mepham for 12m in a sellers market in January. That let them and us know the going rate for young central defenders. Go through the Kelly threads and you can see where I had mentioned Brentford and their asking price for him. Then place a valuation based on that and our financial situation. In those same threads you have others saying 5-6m. There is a pattern to sales and sometimes they jump because someone panics in the market but they do relatively fall in line if you look deeper. Maybe we can benefit from a panic buy but imo there are enough defenders out there where teams will look at alternatives. 

[Lrrr]

7 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Even though they have the example of their own club last year quoting £40m for Grealish, when Spurs wanted to pay £20m, they still don't get it

Yeah but they actually believe Grealish is worth that