Alex Scott - £25m to Bournemouth- Confirmed

[JoeAman08]

56 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

Good thing we've got a.good academy,,

And to think people wanted to scrap it.....

But seriously, we are moving in the right direction, we get 25 mil, I reckon  nige will get 8 mil of that,

Idk it is a weird one now. When we sold webster we brought in big fees and wages. Think we all agree the wages won’t be happening. I just don’t think they’d say here is 8m.

I just think we’d keep building the squad in a similar manner. We’d maybe just be able to get our top targets a bit more often over the next 5-6 windows. Or we could move a few targets forward. 

The right way to go about it I think which is why I think our asking fee is 25m. 25m this summer or 15m next summer. We are healthier now financially and will remain so. So we won’t really be using those funds anyway imo. I don’t think we will be running close to ffp maximum anymore. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Just for clarity, Conor Coady will always have some residual asset value by nature of every contract extension will re calculate the amortisation profile based on current value divided by remaining term.  It is likely to be pretty small, but it’s not quite “pure” profit.

Thanks.

I assumed he was an academy product I guess.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Idk it is a weird one now. When we sold webster we brought in big fees and wages. Think we all agree the wages won’t be happening. I just don’t think they’d say here is 8m.

I just think we’d keep building the squad in a similar manner. We’d maybe just be able to get our top targets a bit more often over the next 5-6 windows. Or we could move a few targets forward. 

The right way to go about it I think which is why I think our asking fee is 25m. 25m this summer or 15m next summer. We are healthier now financially and will remain so. So we won’t really be using those funds anyway imo. I don’t think we will be running close to ffp maximum anymore. 

I actually think we're abour £36-37m or thereabouts due to the overhang from 2021-22 but moving forward I can't disagree..this is before sales. Once that £19m FFP loss from 2021-22 is gone clearer waters still lie ahead plus the TV deal rises form 2024-25 which means more revenue for all

[CiderJar]

6 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

Surely you fill a hole you don’t replace it? 

Need you be reminded of the Mark Ashton philosophy?

[JoeAman08]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I actually think we're abour £36-37m or thereabouts due to the overhang from 2021-22 but moving forward I can't disagree..this is before sales. Once that £19m FFP loss from 2021-22 is gone clearer waters still lie ahead plus the TV deal rises form 2024-25 which means more revenue for all

Yes what I am saying but I don’t think we’ll want to push that 36m over 3 seasons anymore. We could sign 5 two mil players on 15k a week comfortably if we sell Scott(for example just throwing something random out). What would the pressures of that be the last year of that Scott money?
 

I think Ashton may have been a wakeup call to SL. He knows he’ll post losses but does he want to post the max losses on minimum return? I think he has seen the likes of Luton, Coventry and Millwall(growing budget I know) be more successful on smaller losses. Just my opinion anyway. If Scott adds a 7m a year plus to our accounts I don’t think it means we’ll spend that. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

18 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yes what I am saying but I don’t think we’ll want to push that 36m over 3 seasons anymore. We could sign 5 two mil players on 15k a week comfortably if we sell Scott(for example just throwing something random out). What would the pressures of that be the last year of that Scott money?
 

I think Ashton may have been a wakeup call to SL. He knows he’ll post losses but does he want to post the max losses on minimum return? I think he has seen the likes of Luton, Coventry and Millwall(growing budget I know) be more successful on smaller losses. Just my opinion anyway. If Scott adds a 7m a year plus to our accounts I don’t think it means we’ll spend that. 

If Scott goes then game changer, don't need to worry for years if it's for £25m or so. Even close to £20m and we'd be very much secure.

I do see what you're saying though, even if Scott goes for big money we'll only reinvest a portion to keep clear..in theory we could replicate clubs like that hut better albeit Millwall wage bill 2021-22 £23.3m so that is on the rise. Depends how close we want to push the adjusted £39m tbh.

Edited June 29, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[James54De]

https://twitter.com/westham_central/status/1674449250506137600?s=46&t=_e24k7xy2QDlaZ61tNJkAw

[JoeAman08]

5 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

If Scott goes then game changer, don't need to worry for years if it's for £25m or so. Even close to £20m and we'd be very much secure.

I do see what you're saying though, even if Scott goes for big money we'll only reinvest a portion to keep clear..in theory we could replicate clubs like that hut better albeit Millwall wage bill 2021-22 £23.3m so that is on the rise. Depends how close we want to push the adjusted £39m tbh.

Yea just my opinion we won’t really push that 39m going forward. I think still one bad year on the books still for the 3 year period so a Scott sale helps take the pressure off there. I wonder though whether we think we are fine as is and maybe with one more(Knight?). So we can keep Scott and just not be able to add in January. 
 

Then if we must sell him next summer for 12-15m. Worse for accounts but with the last awful year dropping off we’d be fine anyway. If we say 13m a season, how close to that do you think we are getting this season? Are we still right up on it? Or have we shed the wage bill enough that we looking at more like 8-10m? 

[Monkeh]

18 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea just my opinion we won’t really push that 39m going forward. I think still one bad year on the books still for the 3 year period so a Scott sale helps take the pressure off there. I wonder though whether we think we are fine as is and maybe with one more(Knight?). So we can keep Scott and just not be able to add in January. 
 

Then if we must sell him next summer for 12-15m. Worse for accounts but with the last awful year dropping off we’d be fine anyway. If we say 13m a season, how close to that do you think we are getting this season? Are we still right up on it? Or have we shed the wage bill enough that we looking at more like 8-10m? 

The most important thing with Scott for me, is to get a sizable sell on clause, 

[JoeAman08]

15 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

The most important thing with Scott for me, is to get a sizable sell on clause, 

Agreed and why a west ham, Brighton or Wolves would be best. 

[Davefevs]

56 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea just my opinion we won’t really push that 39m going forward.

Agree, think Steve is happy to support sensible losses…but not push £39m / 3 years.  Would not be surprised if he’s thinking - why am I pumping in £x million a year for someone else to invest.

37 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

The most important thing with Scott for me, is to get a sizable sell on clause, 

God, I’m disagreeing with you a lot today….what does Webster, Kelly, Brownhill tell you?  Get as much as you can upfront…it’s guaranteed.  You can’t plan with ifs and buts.

The only one that’s really done well for us is Bolassie…that was a freak sell-on though.

[Monkeh]

Just now, Davefevs said:

Agree, think Steve is happy to support sensible losses…but not push £39m / 3 years.  Would not be surprised if he’s thinking - why am I pumping in £x million a year for someone else to invest.

God, I’m disagreeing with you a lot today….what does Webster, Kelly, Brownhill tell you?  Get as much as you can upfront…it’s guaranteed.  You can’t plan with ifs and buts.

The only one that’s really done well for us is Bolassie…that was a freak sell-on though.

I'm talking about when he has 1 year left on his contract, as apposed to 2, 

[REDOXO]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree, think Steve is happy to support sensible losses…but not push £39m / 3 years.  Would not be surprised if he’s thinking - why am I pumping in £x million a year for someone else to invest.

God, I’m disagreeing with you a lot today….what does Webster, Kelly, Brownhill tell you?  Get as much as you can upfront…it’s guaranteed.  You can’t plan with ifs and buts.

The only one that’s really done well for us is Bolassie…that was a freak sell-on though.

Yes Bolaise was a happy freak. Sell ons are always there now. But the fee and the sell on clauses will be negotiated simultaneously. The biggest issue is a clause over a new contract. Ala the ones you mentioned. 

[AshtonRobin21]

West Ham are making their move according to sources at their end. (ExWHUemployee - via West Ham (C)entral - TWITTER) 

Interesting dynamic now, as we know they have money to spend. Meet the asking price, or no deal. 

I’ll be sad to see Scott go, as he’s a brilliant young player, who will only get better and better.

But, If he is to leave, at least we will have the majority of the window to strengthen the squad, instead of last minute panic buys. 

[Davefevs]

10 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

I'm talking about when he has 1 year left on his contract, as apposed to 2, 

But we all know (generally) the closer he gets to contract expiry the harder it is for us to call the shots.

Hypothetically now - £25m + add-ons + 15% sell-on

could become £15m + less add-ons + 10% sell-on next summer

Who know??

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree, think Steve is happy to support sensible losses…but not push £39m / 3 years.  Would not be surprised if he’s thinking - why am I pumping in £x million a year for someone else to invest.

God, I’m disagreeing with you a lot today….what does Webster, Kelly, Brownhill tell you?  Get as much as you can upfront…it’s guaranteed.  You can’t plan with ifs and buts.

The only one that’s really done well for us is Bolassie…that was a freak sell-on though.

I'm with you on this Dave. I can understand why sell-on clauses are inserted but how much have we actually made from them? Not much of significance that I can recall. 

 

 

[Monkeh]

9 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

But we all know (generally) the closer he gets to contract expiry the harder it is for us to call the shots.

Hypothetically now - £25m + add-ons + 15% sell-on

could become £15m + less add-ons + 10% sell-on next summer

Who know??

Roy da alien   hehe, but yea you're right,

[The Journalist]

20 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree, think Steve is happy to support sensible losses…but not push £39m / 3 years.  Would not be surprised if he’s thinking - why am I pumping in £x million a year for someone else to invest.

God, I’m disagreeing with you a lot today….what does Webster, Kelly, Brownhill tell you?  Get as much as you can upfront…it’s guaranteed.  You can’t plan with ifs and buts.

The only one that’s really done well for us is Bolassie…that was a freak sell-on though.

The only thing I would say with Alex Scott is... he's different, isn't he? He's a generational talent for a club like ours.

Brownhill's never looked close to being international quality. Kelly had huge potential but still had flaws with us, there were still parts to his game that were lacking. Webster was truly exceptional but was 24 when he left us and, really, had only had one mega year at Championship level.

Scott's 19 and is ready right now. I keep reading that West Ham/Tottenham/Wolves fans are saying it's a lot of money for potential. I don't think they're buying potential - they're buying a player who'll be a regular for them by Christmas.

All opinions, obviously, but with Scott more than any other player we've sold the sell-on clause will be a huge money maker.

[Gazred]

We should do exactly what West Ham have done with Rice and maximise the transfer. Not too often they get to sell a player on for big money, much like ourselves.

Seeing two of the best English midfielders go for around £100m this summer helps our valuation...i think.

[Grey Fox]

I’ve got a bright idea , why don’t we keep Alex Scott, win promotion to the Premier League, and make loads of money that way ? Just saying

[Mr Popodopolous]

Ben Jacobs and Chris Cowlin mentioned, suggested that they are the frontrunners.

[Hxj]

Ah but if we get promoted next season the drop in Scott's value is a drop in the ocean ...

[Lew-T]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ben Jacobs and Chris Cowlin mentioned, suggested that they are the frontrunners.

Didn’t Adam Webster go for around that fee? 4 years ago?

We got to be asking for £30m as a starting point.

[Finley_Smith10]

 

[Jimbo123]

2 minutes ago, Finley_Smith10 said:

 

Seems inevitable when Rice goes.

I really thought he’d end up at Wolves.

[GrahamC]

2 hours ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

I'm with you on this Dave. I can understand why sell-on clauses are inserted but how much have we actually made from them? Not much of significance that I can recall. 

 

 

Bolasie, we paid just £20k for him.

Sold him to Palace for £350k, the sell on then netted us £5m, at the time one of the biggest fees we’d received for someone, who was no longer even our player.

Edited June 29, 2023 by GrahamC

[CyderInACan]

4 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Bolasie, we paid just £20k for him.

Sold him to Palace for £350k, the sell on then netted us £5m, at the time one of the biggest fees we’d received for someone who was no longer our player.

I don’t think anyone saw that coming. Absolutely staggering. 

[Lew-T]

30 minutes ago, Finley_Smith10 said:

 

Sounds like they are talking to Scott’s representatives without bidding first?

[jambodinho]

Brozovic is off to the Saudi league so maybe we could see Inter Milan come in for Alex. 

[brad blit]

1 minute ago, Lew-T said:

Sounds like they are talking to Scott’s representatives without bidding first?

That’s pretty much the norm now, a bid could be as simple as a chat between a chairman, CEO, director or even manager between 2 clubs