Alex Scott - £25m to Bournemouth- Confirmed

[Davefevs]

8 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

AS has little reason to sign a new deal. Yes financially he could get a bit more from us but it also means we can again put a valuation on him so teams are less keen. If he were to sign a deal, imo, it would have to contain a fairly low release clause(10-12m) after this season. 
 

Also, he wouldn’t leave for free. We would be due compensation. Idk what it would be if he went abroad but if he moved to the prem, after two more seasons of football mind you, we would get a hefty fee from compensation. 25m is a nice sounding number but we won’t be using it imo. It’ll give us the room to maybe sign more of our top targets. They will however be in the same bracket as McRorie and Knight. Maybe up to 5m on an attacker in the future. We won’t be selling AS and going after 8m cbs on 25k a week again. We’ll add smart fees and clever frees. So the compensation of 5m or more will suffice and we also get the two years of play in that unlikely scenario. 

As it stands, we can only assume that Alex is happy that we’ve put a £25m “bounty” on his head.  These things don’t generally get banded about so publicly without the player knowing about it and being happy with it.  If that’s the case, then I don’t see why a contract on new terms would set such a low release clause as your suggesting.

[1960maaan]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Wolves the size of their FFP hole remains unknown but I do agree with the bulk of your post. I suspect they made a pretty major loss last season to go with their £46m in 2021-22. How much of their summer activity to date is about clawing back to parity will be interesting to see.

TBH I didn't think about FFP as the teams in the Prem seem to ignore it unless until it gets to ridiculous levels. 
Quick look on Transfermarkt and they spent about £100M net last year, but little the two previous years. I know that's not everything , but with all considered you would think they would be ok, close maybe. Not sure how accurate Transfermarkt is though .
The number of different links would suggest the interest is genuine and AlwaysWolves site seems to think they will be offloading more players, so who knows.

 

[JoeAman08]

12 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

As it stands, we can only assume that Alex is happy that we’ve put a £25m “bounty” on his head.  These things don’t generally get banded about so publicly without the player knowing about it and being happy with it.  If that’s the case, then I don’t see why a contract on new terms would set such a low release clause as your suggesting.

Because naturally his price tag will go down with the length of his deal. If he signed a new 4 year deal today we could out price him again for another 3 seasons. Alex has his head switched on but I imagine he’d rather a prem move at some point sooner rather than later. 
 

I think another season in a better team and more settled role makes sense for him to stay another season. If we aren’t promoted though, I think he’ll want to move on. Signing a new deal makes it unlikely he can move. It takes all his leverage away. Imo, only makes sense to sign with a low release clause in that case. With a value similar to what we’d accept next summer for him. That protects him financially for the upcoming season and also protects his future in terms of moving. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

19 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

TBH I didn't think about FFP as the teams in the Prem seem to ignore it unless until it gets to ridiculous levels. 
Quick look on Transfermarkt and they spent about £100M net last year, but little the two previous years. I know that's not everything , but with all considered you would think they would be ok, close maybe. Not sure how accurate Transfermarkt is though .
The number of different links would suggest the interest is genuine and AlwaysWolves site seems to think they will be offloading more players, so who knows.

 

No they definitely could have been moving into issues. Percy is reliable and said sales were important to avoid future breaches so that's quite bad. How even the monitoring of the 20 clubs is, well that's a different debate. Perhaps it's tightening up there a bit too.

They're interested for sure but most recently it was suggested they would be targeting additions in the £8-15m bracket. That can change.

The problem with net spend with FFP is that though the profit banked the year of disposal the new amortisation and wages are a longer term lag on the cost base.

I estimate that they had a £25m baseline loss last year (based on their stated profit on disposal in post year events) even including profit on disposal that's before the cost of new additions, change of manager etc. Finishing bottom half maybe reduced prize money too. Maybe interest payments fell which would help of course. Maybe I'm double counting some bits too.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[Davefevs]

28 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Because naturally his price tag will go down with the length of his deal. If he signed a new 4 year deal today we could out price him again for another 3 seasons. Alex has his head switched on but I imagine he’d rather a prem move at some point sooner rather than later. 
 

I think another season in a better team and more settled role makes sense for him to stay another season. If we aren’t promoted though, I think he’ll want to move on. Signing a new deal makes it unlikely he can move. It takes all his leverage away. Imo, only makes sense to sign with a low release clause in that case. With a value similar to what we’d accept next summer for him. That protects him financially for the upcoming season and also protects his future in terms of moving. 

I don’t think we give him a £0.5m p.a wage increase in a new contract to forego £10-15m in a release clause.

Thats just my thinking.

[soultrader]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

West Ham need permission from City to talk to Alex or his Agents, whether they’ve bid or not.  Whether they follow protocol or not is unknown.

So IF they have talked to him.  They presumably had Citys permission?

IF not you would imagine City would be furious ?

Unless City were thinking a deal is close and happy to turn a blind eye for this deal.

 

 

Im actually getting to saturation point I think .... not sure I care either way 

[soultrader]

2 hours ago, Steve Watts said:

They paid their £8 for a blue tick, so they must be legit.

I too follow pages purely for the lols it gives

There's both recent and aged precedents of this with the club.  I think I read that Ross McCrorie did this at Aberdeen to ensure that the club got fair value, something we will have been aware of.  And further back, Darren Barnard did the same for us when Danny Wilson was coming in for him at Barnsley after their promotion to the prem.

Not sure I'm gonna believe it until it is confirmed by Roy D'Alien (or whatever he was called)

[Super]

2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

West Ham need permission from City to talk to Alex or his Agents, whether they’ve bid or not.  Whether they follow protocol or not is unknown.

Not sure that happens much anymore. 

[KegCity]

1 minute ago, Super said:

Not sure that happens much anymore. 

Clubs will talk to agents to make sure the player is actually open to a move, and potential personal terms, before starting negotiations with a club. 

[W-S-M Seagull]

18 minutes ago, soultrader said:

So IF they have talked to him.  They presumably had Citys permission?

IF not you would imagine City would be furious ?

Unless City were thinking a deal is close and happy to turn a blind eye for this deal.

 

 

Im actually getting to saturation point I think .... not sure I care either way 

I've used the Jason Knight deal as an example before. 

We probably spoke to him when he came here on the Ireland training camp. The bids then came after that. 

It's just what happens these days. Clubs turn a blind eye because we all do it. 

Another example is Kane has held talks with Bayern already. 

Rumours are West Ham have come in at 22 million so as that isn't very far from what we want, I'd imagine us having no issues with him holding talks with them. In fact, we've probably encouraged it.

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 minutes ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I've used the Jason Knight deal as an example before. 

We probably spoke to him when he came here on the Ireland training camp. The bids then came after that. 

It's just what happens these days. Clubs turn a blind eye because we all do it. 

Another example is Kane has held talks with Bayern already. 

Rumours are West Ham have come in at 22 million so as that isn't very far from what we want, I'd imagine us having no issues with him holding talks with them. In fact, we've probably encouraged it.

Read that Levy will be seething about that and perhaps will play very hardball with Bayern over Kane. Wouldn't surprise me if he makes them pay £100m or no deal this summer.

https://www.bavarianfootballworks.com/2023/7/7/23786834/tottenham-hotspur-daniel-levy-over-bayern-munich-transfer-rumors-osimhen-vlahovic-tuchel-harry-kane

Suggestion he may even report Bayern to UEFA over it.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[KegCity]

Just now, Mr Popodopolous said:

Read that Levy will be seething about that and perhaps will play very hardball with Bayern over Kane. Wouldn't surprise me if he makes them pay £100m or no deal this summer.

The Levy/Kane situation is, to my understanding, an interesting exception to the rule about clubs needing to sell players. Spurs have tied him down to a long term contract and that's forced him to stay at the club. He had a tantrum and tried to force a move to Man City, Spurs held firm. He's pushing for a move to Bayern with one year on his deal, it looks like Spurs will hold firm and risk him walking away next summer. Spurs could do with that money to rejuvenate their squad and Kane isn't getting any younger yet Levy appears to be sticking to his guns.

Obviously we're not as big as Spurs but they're not at the top of the food chain and have been able to keep one of the best strikers of the last decade at their club for far longer than most would have been able to. Think it shows that if the club hold the cards in terms of contract length they can keep a player if they desperately want to.

[Davefevs]

1 hour ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

We probably spoke to him when he came here on the Ireland training camp. The bids then came after that. 

I suspect we spoke with his agent (and him) well before before that and I suspect Derby were aware and grudgingly happy about that also….Ireland camp was just a nice opportunity to show off the HPC and get Sykes and Max into him!

[JoeAman08]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t think we give him a £0.5m p.a wage increase in a new contract to forego £10-15m in a release clause.

Thats just my thinking.

Yea is just my opinion he’d lose his leverage over 500k per annum say. When that would maybe limit his ability to be in the 50-60k range sooner. Who knows? From my view, if he stays we should up his terms but have the lower release clause out of good faith. 
 

Caicedo for example rumoured to have a gentleman's agreement to leave. Seems, however, Brighton are almost pricing him out of a move. Mind you, like Scott, he could still end up moving but seems like Brighton are driving a hard bargain. 

[chinapig]

4 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea is just my opinion he’d lose his leverage over 500k per annum say. When that would maybe limit his ability to be in the 50-60k range sooner. Who knows? From my view, if he stays we should up his terms but have the lower release clause out of good faith. 
 

Caicedo for example rumoured to have a gentleman's agreement to leave. Seems, however, Brighton are almost pricing him out of a move. Mind you, like Scott, he could still end up moving but seems like Brighton are driving a hard bargain. 

After Arsenal tried to buy him Caicedo chose to sign a new contract, giving Brighton the whip hand in response to bids. There may have been a gentleman's agreement to the extent they will sell if their valuation is met but there doesn't seem to have been a release clause.

Mac Allister in contrast would only sign a contract that had a £35m release clause.

Alex might conceivably follow Mac Allister's example but probably not Caicedo's.

[Monkeh]

6 minutes ago, chinapig said:

After Arsenal tried to buy him Caicedo chose to sign a new contract, giving Brighton the whip hand in response to bids. There may have been a gentleman's agreement to the extent they will sell if their valuation is met but there doesn't seem to have been a release clause.

Mac Allister in contrast would only sign a contract that had a £35m release clause.

Alex might conceivably follow Mac Allister's example but probably not Caicedo's.

Scott and his agent generally seem to be good, Scott wants to play football and his agent doesn't appear to be forcing a move,

I think he will be with us until Jan at least, 

[chinapig]

Just now, Monkeh said:

Scott and his agent generally seem to be good, Scott wants to play football and his agent doesn't appear to be forcing a move,

I think he will be with us until Jan at least, 

You may well be right but I was referring to whether he might sign a new contract and on what terms.

[Ska Junkie]

Are the Prem sides trying to bully 'little' Bristol city again? Now Wolves want him but we 'have to budge on price'. If you want him £25M IS the price, either pay up or do one! 

[Mr Popodopolous]

25 minutes ago, Ska Junkie said:

Are the Prem sides trying to bully 'little' Bristol city again? Now Wolves want him but we 'have to budge on price'. If you want him £25M IS the price, either pay up or do one! 

Not just us tbh, they will look to lowball especially Levy..but they'll look to use the carrot of PL football and a higher wage, profile etc to push down the price of a selling club calculating that the player may become unhappy and the contract clock ticking post final 2 years can be quite quick value wise.

Wolves basically maybe in FFP difficulties but that's a problem for them to resolve.

Edited July 10, 2023 by Mr Popodopolous

[The Dolman Pragmatist]

3 hours ago, W-S-M Seagull said:

I've used the Jason Knight deal as an example before. 

We probably spoke to him when he came here on the Ireland training camp. The bids then came after that. 

It's just what happens these days. Clubs turn a blind eye because we all do it. 

Another example is Kane has held talks with Bayern already. 

Rumours are West Ham have come in at 22 million so as that isn't very far from what we want, I'd imagine us having no issues with him holding talks with them. In fact, we've probably encouraged it.

Thought you were talking about Wilson there for a moment …

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

52 minutes ago, chinapig said:

After Arsenal tried to buy him Caicedo chose to sign a new contract, giving Brighton the whip hand in response to bids. There may have been a gentleman's agreement to the extent they will sell if their valuation is met but there doesn't seem to have been a release clause.

Mac Allister in contrast would only sign a contract that had a £35m release clause.

Alex might conceivably follow Mac Allister's example but probably not Caicedo's.

The Caicedo example is how players and clubs should behave, it is the dignified approach. Personally I dislike release clauses and question who they protect. If they are set at a reasonable level they don't protect the club because truly interested suitors will readily trigger it but if set at an outrageous level you risk pi**ing off the player leaving a disgruntled man on the dressing room. Behave like a man and release clauses are unnecessary. 

[Monkeh]

53 minutes ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

The Caicedo example is how players and clubs should behave, it is the dignified approach. Personally I dislike release clauses and question who they protect. If they are set at a reasonable level they don't protect the club because truly interested suitors will readily trigger it but if set at an outrageous level you risk pi**ing off the player leaving a disgruntled man on the dressing room. Behave like a man and release clauses are unnecessary. 

The player has to agree to the release clause, therefore has no right to be pissed off

[JoeAman08]

2 hours ago, chinapig said:

After Arsenal tried to buy him Caicedo chose to sign a new contract, giving Brighton the whip hand in response to bids. There may have been a gentleman's agreement to the extent they will sell if their valuation is met but there doesn't seem to have been a release clause.

Mac Allister in contrast would only sign a contract that had a £35m release clause.

Alex might conceivably follow Mac Allister's example but probably not Caicedo's.

Yea but surely you talk about valuations? I am sure Caicedo would love to be an 80-100m player. Also, you don’t see that kind of fee everyday. I find it hard to fathom he’d agree to a fee of 100m which has been rumoured. Even the 75-80 I have seen recently seems a bit OTT.
 

The gentleman’s agreement would be, in my mind, stay and help us get Europe. We’ll give you a pay rise and if a bigger club comes in(bigger in terms of wages offered or competition) we will let you go for a reasonable fee. Surely then it is asked what that fee would be? 
 

Idk if I would as a player sign something with a “gentleman’s” agreement. Get it on paper. 

[Simon bristol]

5 hours ago, KegCity said:

Clubs will talk to agents to make sure the player is actually open to a move, and potential personal terms, before starting negotiations with a club. 

I think that’s exactly what weve done with knight?

[chinapig]

8 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Yea but surely you talk about valuations? I am sure Caicedo would love to be an 80-100m player. Also, you don’t see that kind of fee everyday. I find it hard to fathom he’d agree to a fee of 100m which has been rumoured. Even the 75-80 I have seen recently seems a bit OTT.
 

The gentleman’s agreement would be, in my mind, stay and help us get Europe. We’ll give you a pay rise and if a bigger club comes in(bigger in terms of wages offered or competition) we will let you go for a reasonable fee. Surely then it is asked what that fee would be? 
 

Idk if I would as a player sign something with a “gentleman’s” agreement. Get it on paper. 

It's curious that Caicedo went from agitating for a move to Arsenal in January and being told to stay away from training to signing a new contract despite knowing how much Brighton wanted for him. Perhaps he was confident that some club would meet the valuation.

There again Harry Kane thought he had a gentleman's agreement with Levy when he signed his contract. Just goes to show that a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

46 minutes ago, Monkeh said:

The player has to agree to the release clause, therefore has no right to be pissed off

Fair point until ofcourse things change at the club and the players thoughts are now It seemed like a good idea at the time

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

6 minutes ago, chinapig said:

It's curious that Caicedo went from agitating for a move to Arsenal in January and being told to stay away from training to signing a new contract despite knowing how much Brighton wanted for him. Perhaps he was confident that some club would meet the valuation.

There again Harry Kane thought he had a gentleman's agreement with Levy when he signed his contract. Just goes to show that a verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.

A gentleman's agreement with Levy, now that's a contradiction in terms. 

[chinapig]

1 minute ago, RoystonFoote'snephew said:

A gentleman's agreement with Levy, now that's a contradiction in terms. 

And astonishing that Kane fell for it given Levy's reputation.

[ScottishRed]

5 hours ago, KegCity said:

The Levy/Kane situation is, to my understanding, an interesting exception to the rule about clubs needing to sell players. Spurs have tied him down to a long term contract and that's forced him to stay at the club. He had a tantrum and tried to force a move to Man City, Spurs held firm. He's pushing for a move to Bayern with one year on his deal, it looks like Spurs will hold firm and risk him walking away next summer. Spurs could do with that money to rejuvenate their squad and Kane isn't getting any younger yet Levy appears to be sticking to his guns.

Obviously we're not as big as Spurs but they're not at the top of the food chain and have been able to keep one of the best strikers of the last decade at their club for far longer than most would have been able to. Think it shows that if the club hold the cards in terms of contract length they can keep a player if they desperately want to.

You can if there is a contract in place but I think in Kane’s case, which is very different to Scott, this could be a negotiation move. He has one year left, if he really wants to go then he could force a move through, I think it’s all part of a ploy to maximize what Spurs offer him regarding a new deal. If he decides to stay, and I suspect he will, he is after the goals record and not trophies. I think he might regret that in later years.

In Alex’s case he is a very young lad at the start of his career.As things stand he will possibly have to make a decision whether to move on this summer or wait 12 months. He is most certainly not running out of time for money or trophies for a while.

I would imagine he and his advisors will be looking at what is best for his development rather than either of the above.

[Super]

Reports that West Ham are in for Ward Prowse.